The motivational spectrum of doctoral education and scientific supervision practices: a qualitative study

Abstract

Motivation is a crucial component of successfully completing doctoral studies. Previous research has established the internal and external factors of motivation for enrolling in a doctoral program and has identified PhD students’ motivational profiles. However, the practices of scientific supervision for PhD students with different types of motivation remain understudied.

The goal of the present study is to find an answer to the following research question: How do scientific supervisors describe their experience of supervising PhD students with differing motivation?

This qualitative study utilized a case study approach and thematic analysis for interpreting interview data. The study involved 10 Kazakhstani scientific supervisors and 5 international supervisors, comprising 6 men and 9 women.

The results allowed for the identification of five themes reflecting the experience of supervising PhD students with different types of motivation within the range of control-autonomy. The main challenges of modern scientific supervision of PhD students were established. The first is the mismatch between the PhD students’ goals and the research focus of the educational program. The second is the gap between scientific supervisors’ expectations and the PhD students’ actual capacity to conduct research. The third is the PhD students’ behavioral dysregulation. The fourth is the discrepancy between the declared high standards of doctoral studies and the actual admission practices. The fifth is the academic consultants’ emotional exhaustion due to the long-term passivity of the PhD students. Following the logic of Self-Determination Theory, three strategies for supervising Kazakhstani PhD students with different types of motivation were identified: the research autonomy strategy, the structured progression strategy, and the structural-remediation strategy.

The practical significance of this research lies in providing a foundation for developing educational policies and tools that would shift the identified problems from the level of individual narratives into manageable processes, thereby improving the productivity, quality, and sustainability of doctoral training.