In interviews with experienced supervisors at the ANU there was agreement on the need for significant effort and time from the supervisor at the beginning of a candidature to assist the candidate establish their topic/problem/question. This was so across all disciplinary areas. These supervisors recognised that a key to a successful candidature was the formulation of the problem/topic/question because it was that which ensured focus and engagement. This view was also seen to apply to candidates who began with a project for which they had been selected and funded, or given initially by their supervisor. The problems that can arise if this process is not successful are evident in poor/failing theses or unnecessarily lengthy candidature.

Furthermore, current pressures for timely completions can make the need for both focus and ownership more problematic. For this reason, of equal importance, is the selection of a topic and a project plan that sets some boundaries on the program of study. Such a plan can reduce risk of failure and ensure in advance that the necessary resources will be forthcoming. It can also assist in ensuring that there is sufficient scope/challenge for a research education program. There is a continuum as some scientists say from high risk 'death or glory' projects to 'stamp collecting' which at its worst can be replication of techniques. Ensuring that the candidate has many opportunities to talk with peers and to present their 'thinking' informally prior to the Research Proposal Review (TPR), due 6 months FTE after commencement, can be very helpful for many candidates in clarifying their topic. Phillida Salmon (1992) identified from her research what she called 'product' students and 'process' students. (Salmon herself holds "a view of research as a process, rather than merely a product.") We can imagine a continuum with at one end the 'product' student, often young, straight from Honours who needs the 'product' i.e. the PhD, for a job and career. It is not unusual for this student to select a topic that is 'doable' and 'topical' or even accept a topic from a supervisor. At the other end of the continuum is the 'process' student who is often mature-age and who is undertaking the PhD for more personal, intrinsic reasons. This student is often the one who 'wants to make a difference' and so their topic is often a very personal one. These candidates are also very aware of the transformation which they are undergoing and like to discuss this. While these two examples are stereotyping, it is useful to consider where your students might fall on the continuum and so where you sit with regard to supervision - I had one supervisor once tell me that 'There is no way I could ever supervise one of those process students!'

Research proposal

Many experienced supervisors, and successful candidates, suggest that preparing a research proposal for presentation at a seminar within six months of commencement helps with focusing on the topic. While many universities provide candidates with a template for their proposal, the main components are usually:

• What is it that you are researching?
• Why is it important that this be researched? (The perennial 'So What?' question!)
• How will you go about researching this

References

Cullen, D. J., Pearson, M., Saha, L. J. & Spear, R. H. (1994) Establishing Effective PhD Supervision, DEST, 94/23.

Salmon, P. (1992). Achieving a PhD: Ten students' experiences. Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham.