Abstract:

Internationalisation is changing the doctoral program, raising questions about what doctoral life is like for all of those involved, and what pedagogies are appropriate for supporting doctoal candidates.Typically, attention falls on the insider-outsider dynamics that can strike a discordant key in the lived student experience of Bologna’s Third Cycle ‘harmonisation.’ With the potentials and challenges for students in mind, we focus on the multiple dimensions of international doctoral experience, factoring supervisors and examiners into our analysis. Our case study is a large research-intensive university in Australasia where international doctoral students, many of whom will have English as an Additional Language (EAL), comprise about 50% of recent doctoral registrations. Our university’s experience is probably typical of western institutions with a research focus. We describe the support our institution provides for our international students, which we believe to be strong given the ubiquitous fiscal limitations. We argue that what is missing in studies of doctoral internationalisation are the layers supporting academics whose cultures are also various.

Language and cultural difference, then, have the potential to require care of supervisors as well as doctoral students. A survey of supervisors [n226] in our institution highlights their perspectives of the cross-cultural dimensions in our doctoral program. Our survey did not ask specifically for their views on EAL students, but 66 of them included specific mention, making us aware that the challenges that international doctoral students face are interwoven into the experiences of supervisors. Again, we describe the support currently provided for supervisors, a relatively new growth area at our institution, making the case for increased support for supervisors as internationalisation becomes the context for supervision. We also note the limitations: academics, who are busy, and who often regard themselves as already expert, take up support less readily than doctoral students.

Another complexity is the growing number of international academics at our institution who are also adjusting to teaching and supervising in an English-language, western university. These supervisors work with both domestic and international students, so that the supervision of international students no longer entails local academics who welcome and then sustain international students within territory that has a homogenous home culture. We all must learn the etiquette of cross-cultural exchange. Finally, we include that many of the examiners of our doctoral candidates are not part of and may not have experienced an English-language or western education. We suggest that the dynamics of all parties are worth investigation to enable an ethics of care.

Keywords:

Internationalisation, doctoral pedagogy, supervision.