The aim of the survey was to collect feedback on topics related to the organisation of doctoral studies at the university for mapping both the best practices and bottlenecks, and for planning activities for providing better support for doctoral studies on the basis of the results

Results of the survey show that undertaking doctoral studies has been carefully thought out and doctoral students are generally content with doctoral studies at TU.

The data collection tool constituted a web form containing questions on the doctoral study programme, doctoral thesis, supervising, emotions and experiences related to doctoral studies, various aspects of the completion of the study programme and its evaluation, activity of doctoral schools, opportunities for mobility, university’s support to doctoral students, services of the library and career opportunities.

In the academic year 2016/2017, 340 doctoral students studied at Tallinn University (incl. two external students). A total of 86 responses were received. The general response activity was 25%. The response activity by study programmes has been demonstrated on the figure below:

phd survey 1.png

In summary, the results of the survey show that undertaking doctoral studies has been carefully thought out and doctoral students are generally content with doctoral studies at TU. In particular, this is reflected in great satisfaction with the topic of the doctoral thesis chosen upon admission (average 4.1 points on a five-point scale). Average satisfaction assessments regarding different general aspects of doctoral studies remain within 3.4-4.1 points: satisfaction with opportunities for mobility (a=3.8), supervising (a=3.7), organisation of evaluation (a=3.6), chosen doctoral study programme (a=3.6) and the flow of information concerning the study arrangements (a=3.5). In comparison with the results of the survey conducted in the academic year 2013/2014, general satisfaction has remained on the same level.

phd survey 2.png

We have set the goal of the internationalisation of doctoral studies at the university and expect the doctoral students  to actively use the opportunities for short-term and long-term mobility. The results indicate that the respondents are rather satisfied with the opportunities for mobility (64% of the doctoral students who responded). Awareness of scholarship programmes is quite good  (a=3.5; 54% of respondents assessed their awareness as good or very good). 67% of respondents have applied for grants and scholarships. Doctoral students take an active part in national and international conferences; 69% of respondents have made a presentation at a national conference and 64% of respondents have made a presentation at an international conference. A somewhat lower share of respondents have participated in international courses or summer schools (55%). 22% of respondents have participated in researcher exchange during their doctoral studies (i.e. at least one-month period of studies and/or research abroad) and 29% of respondents have written scientific articles in international cooperation.

Just over half of the respondents (52%) were satisfied with the doctoral studies programme. 65% of the respondents felt the need for additional courses and for the development of necessary competences, e.g. for general and practical courses for developing competences that are necessary in the academia. The majority of doctoral students who responded (79%, a=4.1) were satisfied with the topic of their doctoral thesis and this has remained stable in comparison with the results of the previous survey. 58% of respondents were satisfied with the annual progress review (2013/2014 65%).

The respondents are rather satisfied with the supervision of doctoral theses (a total of 60% of respondents; 2013/2014 65%). Approximately half of doctoral students (52%) have two or more supervisors and 22% of the respondents also have a consultant in addition to the supervisor(s).

Just over half of the respondents (52%) were satisfied with the doctoral studies programme.

Doctoral students provided thorough answers to the question „What is good supervision?”, demonstrating the versatile role of the supervisor and changes in this role during the doctoral studies. It was considered that supervisors should follow the students and their needs in the choice of their supervision style. The main thing that the doctoral students brought out in terms of good supervision was quick and relevant feedback and advice from the supervisor.

The availability of the supervisor and keeping in touch on a regular basis, i.e. showing interest in the thesis and timely replies to the e-mails of the student were also considered important. Substantive feedback and discussion requiring substantive knowledge of the student’s topic were seen as important as the knowledge of theory, methodology, publication and formal requirements related to the completion of doctoral studies. The supervisor is also the main guide in the academia – they should be able to recommend specialised conferences, scientific journals, and help to create contacts with other researchers. Personal qualities of the supervisor and the ability to create good work relationships with the supervisees are also meaninfgul.

59% of the respondents participate in doctoral schools. The community that develops within the framework of the activity of doctoral schools and contacts with other researchers and reputable scientists were among the most frequently cited added values that the doctoral schools offer. Furthermore, it was mentioned that students have the opportunity to participate in exciting specialist events and also find means to organise such events themselves thanks to doctoral schools. Support received via doctoral schools for internal and external mobility was also important for the respondents.

Doctoral students’ responses reflect the versatile role of a supervisor and the understanding that good subject-specific knowledge does not turn a researcher automatically into a good superviso. 

More than half of the respondents (59%) (2013/2014 62%) were satisfied with the flow of information concerning the study arrangements. Doctoral students’ answers regarding the helpfulness of the university staff reveal that lecturers and the contact person of the doctoral school are easiest to reach (average 4.0). 60% of doctoral students who responded agree that doctoral studies-related advice and help are available, if needed, and 66% know what to do and where to turn in the case of problems with doctoral studies.

85% of doctoral students who responded are working either full-time or part-time in addition to studies, and 63% of the respondents are working full-time (in 2013/2014, 94% of doctoral students were working, and 63% of them were working full-time). 20% of people who work in addition to studies have two or more jobs. Only 13% of respondents are working in a position that is directly linked to their doctoral thesis (in 2013/14, 19% of respondents).

Doctoral students proposed numerous ideas for the further development of doctoral studies. Recommendations were mainly given regarding the courses of the doctoral study programme and supervising. The respondents stated that general and subject-specific courses should be critically re-examined, and the restrictions of working students should be taken into account in the compilation process of timetables. Another important subject raised by the doctoral students were the supervisors’ teaching and supervising skills which need more attention.

Doctoral students’ responses reflect the versatile role of a supervisor and the understanding that good subject-specific knowledge does not turn a researcher automatically into a good supervisor. It was recommended to enhance cooperation between the lecturers and provide the supervisors with a thorough training on supervising. It was also considered that doctoral students should be offered more possibilities for working at the university. The need to support the induction into the doctoral studies was also highlighted.