Assessment area: Doctoral student perspective

Doctoral students are given the opportunity to take an active role in the work to improve the content and implementation of the programme.

The PhD candidates are well represented at various fora at WMU, all the way up to the Board of Governors and the Executive Board. Most notably, the Doctoral Studies Committee, which oversees the whole doctoral programme, includes two PhD representatives. It acts as a bridge between PhD candidates and WMU; any problem or concern can be voiced, and the committee brings this to the attention of WMU. One example of a student initiative that resulted in a change was a request for a course in English academic writing, which was met by WMU.

There are several steps which safeguard a satisfactorily progression of each PhD candidate. The candidates are continuously monitored by their supervisor(s). In addition, regular progression seminars with faculty members and student peers serve as "checks" during the education. However, these checks are not only a matter of allowing students to proceed or not. Each seminar provides an opportunity for the candidate to receive feedback on their work and by including other faculty members and student peers, each candidate is provided with a much wider array of feedback compared to if only the supervisors were to comment on the work of their own candidates. In addition,

annual external reviews provide additional feedback on the progression of individual students as well as the education as a whole. All taken together, the system at WMU appears to guarantee ample academic feedback and support.

During the interview with the PhD candidates, the candidates expressed that they viewed the role of the supervisor as that of a guide with a dual purpose of both overseeing the academic rigor and introducing the candidates into the academic community at WMU. Both supervisors and PhD candidates mentioned their informal relationship, which stems from WMU having a relatively small group of faculty and PhD candidates. Since the supervisor have a central role for the candidate, it is vital that their relationship is satisfactorily. One interviewee reported having had to change supervisors, a process that had been easy. Finally, in addition to the individual study plan (ISP) being revised yearly,

there is an additional safety net for the PhD candidates. One of the Committees under the Academic Council monitors the progression of the candidates and takes action if the candidate would not receive proper supervision.

The PhD candidates are provided with opportunities to evaluate individual courses, as well as the PhD programme at large at the end of the programme. The handling of the evaluation guarantees anonymity, and the results are

presented to the President as well as the Quality Assurance Committee, which propose suitable changes. Changes or responses are reported back to the candidates in written form.

In conclusion, satisfactory measures have been taken by WMU to provide PhD candidates with the opportunity to take an active role in the work to improve the content and implementation of the programme.

T