can u do phd while working full time

Is it possible to earn a PhD while working? The brutal truth

Working alongside your PhD seems like an attractive proposal until you look at all of the different commitments you need to make to actually get a PhD and submit your dissertation. Working part-time may help PhD students financially but it often comes at an academic cost.

It is possible to earn a PhD while working. However, it requires strict time management and can be very complicated. You have to balance any other significant commitments inside and outside of your PhD.

A PhD is typically the equivalent time commitment as a full-time job. The majority of the PhD students I know work at least 40 hours a week. So, trying to get a PhD while working is very time intensive – 80-hour + weeks.

Some students drop down to a part-time PhD in order to balance all of the particular commitments of a PhD program and working hours.

Whether or not you are a part-time PhD student or you are studying your PhD full-time, here are all of the aspects you should consider if you are considering working alongside your PhD research. This is what you need to know if you are considering getting your doctorate while working.

Can you work during a PhD?

Some institutions full-out ban their PhD students from working full-time alongside a full-time research commitment. They want to make sure that you’re working 100% on your PhD because balancing work isn’t easy.

Although it may not be banned in some institutions it is generally expected that students focus on their research and coursework full-time during a PhD and are therefore not typically able to hold down a full-time job.

Some programs may allow for part-time work, but it is generally not recommended as it can interfere with academic progress.

Additionally, many PhD programs offer funding in the form of stipends or fellowships which can help support students financially during their studies.

There are a few things to consider if you are thinking of working during your PhD.

The first is whether or not you will have enough time to dedicate to both your work and your studies. You don’t want your work to suffer because you are spending too much time on your PhD, or vice versa.

Another thing to consider is how working will affect your funding.

If you are receiving PhD funding or a scholarship from an external source, they may have stipulations on whether or not you can work while receiving their funding. Be sure to check with them before taking on any paid work.

Lastly, you will want to make sure that the work you are doing is related to your field of study. Working in a related field can help you with your research by giving you real-world experience that you can apply to your studies.

Even though some institutions allow you to work, should you?

Should you work during your PhD?

Some students feel that they need to work in order to support themselves during their PhD, while others feel that they can focus solely on their studies.

There are pros and cons to both approaches.

Working during your PhD can help you to cover your living expenses and may even allow you to save some money. However, it can also be a distraction from your studies and may make it more difficult to find time to do research.

I know that I wouldn’t be able to balance the pressures of a full-time job with my PhD studies and, therefore, decided to not have any jobs during my first year – this included jobs inside the University such as demonstrating in undergraduate laboratories.

Therefore, it is possible to do a PhD whilst working full-time but you really have to consider the impact of the extra pressures and commitments

. It is much easier to work alongside your PhD if you have a strong research-based masters degree and your job outside of your degree is flexible enough to allow you to attend different academic commitments such as attending seminars, meeting with advisers, and travelling to conferences.

Ultimately, the decision of whether or not to work during your PhD is up to you.

Consider your financial situation and how working would impact your studies before making a decision.

It can be difficult to juggle work and study commitments, and you may find yourself feeling overwhelmed and stressed. You may also have less time to socialize and enjoy your student life.

So, it’s important to think carefully about whether working during your PhD is right for you.

What type of work can you do during a PhD? Part time or Full time?

During your PhD there are a number of different options that you could consider if you want to (and you are allowed to) get a job.

I do not recommend working full-time alongside your PhD but, there are some options for part-time work to earn a little bit of money alongside your studies.

Full time work

My recommendation is that you do not try to fit a PhD alongside full-time work. Trying to work full time is asking for trouble.

There will be so many more pressures on you that it will not be a very enjoyable experience.

A PhD requires you to be creative.

Creativity comes from having enough mental space to allow your mind to connect new and interesting ideas together. If you are busy with work you will not have the mental capacity to be able to do this effectively.

Therefore, I recommend that you consider at least dropping down to part-time work if you are insistent on pursuing a PhD alongside employment.

I have seen PhD students complete a PhD part-time supported and partly funded by their current place of employment.

Part time work

If you want to know more about the best PhD student part-time jobs check out my full guide – click here for the full article.

There are a variety of part-time jobs that can easily supplement your income during a PhD.

The best PhD student part-time jobs will have flexible hours, provide you with a reasonable hourly rate, and not distract you from your primary goal of completing your PhD.

I have highlighted in my YouTube video, below, all of the different side hustles that PhD students can try if they need to earn a little bit more money.

The common part-time jobs for PhD students include:

• Hospitality
• Customer service
• University-based jobs – such as tutoring, marking exams, student services and working in laboratories
• Online jobs such as user testing, notetaker, and translating.
• Freelancing. Selling a skill that you have two people on services such as Upwork .

Why Should You Worry About Working During Your PhD

There are a number of reasons why you should worry about working during your PhD.

The most important is balancing workload, the fact that you were extending your time in academia by a significant amount, the increased risk of burnout, and ensuring you have enough resources to keep you going for multiple years.

A PhD is just like a full time job.

Therefore, getting a PhD while working full-time will be incredibly difficult. Both commitments will require at least 40 hours per week each.

Nonetheless, if you are able to have full flexibility on your work schedule and you are capable of distance learning for some part of your PhD it may be much more possible.

Many PhD students struggle with just the commitments of earning a doctorate. Consider working alongside your PhD very carefully.

Time it takes

A PhD will typically take between three and seven years. During this time it is extremely stressful and you need to make sure you’re capable of researching at your best for the entire time.

I have always said that a PhD is a marathon and not a sprint. Adding extra years to your PhD if you need to can be worth it. However, you must consider the amount of time it will take you to get your PhD and the potential return on that investment.

Unless you have a particular career secured or in mind for after your PhD the extra years it takes to complete a doctoral degree part-time are generally not worth it.

Burnout is a real consequence of doing a PhD.

By working alongside your PhD you’ll increase your chances of burnout significantly. This is true even if you like to study.

If you are prone to feelings of being overwhelmed I would stay away from earning a PhD whilst working full or part-time.

Slowly introduce part-time work if you need to once you have settled into the general routine of your PhD.

Tips for Earning Your PhD While Working

Here are a few general tips that may help you if you find yourself having to work alongside your PhD:

Talk to everyone involved

Everyone involved in this process needs to be on board. There will be times when you need to ask favours from your supervisor, colleagues, work supervisor or others.

Don’t be afraid to ask for help: Whether it’s from your supervisor, colleagues, or friends and family, don’t hesitate to ask for help when you need it.

This is not a sign of weakness, but simply a recognition that we all need assistance from time to time.

Stay Organized and on Track

Find a routine: Try establishing a set schedule for at least most days of the week and stick to it as much as possible. This will help you to stay focused and make the most of your limited time.

Get Involved in the Research Community

Remember to stay in touch with your research community.

Working part-time or full-time can mean that you miss out on the exciting recent advancements and collaboration with people in your field. Make an extra special effort to attend seminars, talks, and networking events to help progress your research and your academic career.

Don’t squirrel yourself away!

Work with your strengths

Know yourself: Be honest about how well you work under pressure and how much free time you realistically have.

If you know that you work better with a tight deadline, then try to structure your work schedule accordingly.

Personally, I need as much free mental space is possible to perform at my best. Just do what is best for you.

Wrapping up

This article has been through everything you need to consider if you are tempted by earning a PhD while working.

Your PhD programme may dictate whether it is possible to work alongside your PhD. Whether or not it is a good idea will be down to you and if you are able to balance an insane amount of commitments and work.

My general recommendation is that you should focus 100% on your PhD journey and although it is definitely possible you’re going to be at risk of burnout.

Combining part-time PhD’s, part-time jobs, and finding a flexible job that will help keep you focused on the primary goal of finishing your dissertation is the most sensible way of working alongside your PhD.

Dr Andrew Stapleton has a Masters and PhD in Chemistry from the UK and Australia. He has many years of research experience and has worked as a Postdoctoral Fellow and Associate at a number of Universities. Although having secured funding for his own research, he left academia to help others with his YouTube channel all about the inner workings of academia and how to make it work for you.

Thank you for visiting Academia Insider.

We are here to help you navigate Academia as painlessly as possible. We are supported by our readers and by visiting you are helping us earn a small amount through ads and affiliate revenue - Thank you!

2024 © Academia Insider

Masters Compare - Find your perfect masters course.

• Living as a Postgraduate student

Working and studying for a PhD at the same time

Share this article.

• Facebook Sharer
• Twitter Sharer
• LinkedIn Sharer

Explore other topics

• Funding a Postgraduate course
• Popular masters degree subjects
• Student Wellbeing
• Studying a Postgraduate degree
• Finding a PhD or Masters Course

Think Postgrad

Frequently asked questions.

In short, yes, you can work while studying for your PhD.

The hard part to juggle is finding the time to do both. You may find that part-time study is more flexible for you but it takes longer to complete. An excellent way to combine work and study is to get a job within the university you are studying at.

Check out other sources of support for PhD Students .

There are several benefits to both full time and part time PhD study. It can be extremely difficult to juggle a full time postgraduate position alongside working. It’s not called full-time for nothing! This is intensive but you can complete a full time PhD faster than it’s part-time equivalent.

Studying for a PhD is a big commitment, either full time for 3-4 years or part-time for generally 6-7 years. If you want, or need, to be working and studying for PhD this could have an impact on your study: here are some of the things you may find it helpful to think about before starting your PhD.

Is funding for a PhD in the UK enough to live on?

If you are fortunate enough to have full funding for your PhD, your studentship should cover both fees and living expenses and be tax-free. The stipend levels for students studying for a PhD in the UK is set by UK research councils for their own studentships, and this is followed by Universities for their own studentships. These will provide enough to live on and not to have to be working and studying for a PhD.

If you are looking for PhD Funding, you can search for your ideal studentship from the many opportunities we have listed on Postgraduate Studentships. We have a section for Charities and Trusts who are set up to support students looking to get additional financial help with their studies.

How much work is included in a Graduate Teaching Assistantship?

Some PhD studentships are called Graduate Teaching Assistantships – this means that you will be teaching for a certain number of hours in each academic year and this is part of the conditions of the studentship. It is advisable to find out exactly how this works with the University advertising the opportunity. Will you receive separate payments or is this part of the studentship? How many hours will it involve and how will that relate to your PhD? Will you receive training?

If you are considering an academic career, there may be some advantage in getting some initial experience. However you may also struggle with working and studying for a PhD at the same time.

Should I study my PhD full-time or part-time if I need to work?

If you need to work and study, it’s important to think about how you will manage that. Can you study full-time and work at the same time and if so how much work can you do? A full-time PhD is regarded as a full-time commitment. So anything other than a supplementary job for a few hours per week is challenging. Some students start with a full-time PhD and then move to studying the PhD part-time. So you would need to discuss this with your university first.

Planning to study a part-time PhD takes longer overall but it may also give you the time to do your PhD and to make the money you need. If you do decide to study part-time you may already have a job that will allow you to have flexible hours. Think also about part time work in a field that relates to your study. If you need to look for a job that will help you do your PhD, your University is likely to have temporary or part-time jobs that students can apply for on campus – most universities have a database of these jobs for students so you can find out in advance what the pay rates are and if that would be enough.

Universities also have a range of part-time jobs which may be administrative or involve working in labs. If you apply for one of these jobs, especially in your own department, it’s important to make sure you work out how you will manage this. This way, you're prepared for when you are working on your PhD and when you are working on your job.

What if I am an International Student?

If you are an international student in the UK there will be restrictions on how many hours you can work. The UK Government has made some improvements to this. There are more opportunities now to study and work in the UK .

Talking to your University about your options

Your university wants you to succeed at your PhD. It has experienced students working whilst studying and works and what doesn’t. If you are planning to work whilst studying it’s a good idea to talk to your department. These questions may form part of your application process because your Supervisor will want to make sure you have the means to conduct your research as well as support yourself.

Many students study for a PhD and work for at least part of the time and complete their PhD successfully. If you look at the options beforehand, you can plan what works best for you. This way you can get the most from your PhD whilst working at the same time.

Looking for PhD Funding? There are a wide range of study funding opportunities for intending PhD students on PostgraduateStudentships

Receive Email Updates of the latest PhD and Masters opportunities and funding from PostgraduateStudentships and MastersCompare .

• Advertisers
• Cookie Policy
• Terms and Conditions

Sorry! You need to sign up

Sign up to Postgraduate Studentships

Sign up to compare masters

Opportunity added!

Thanks for making your selection. Click below to view your list.

Course Added

Thanks for making your selection. Click below to view your comparisons.

Think Postgrad Ltd 2008-2024 Website By Parachute

• Architecture Faculty Job
• Aeronautical Faculty Jobs
• Automobile Faculty Job
• Agricultural Engineering
• BME Faculty Job
• Civil Faculty Job
• Chemical Engg Faculty Job
• CSE Faculty Job
• EEE Faculty Job
• ECE Faculty Job
• EIE Faculty Job
• Mechanical Faculty Job
• MBA Faculty Jobs
• MCA Faculty Job
• Science and Humanities
• View All Departments
• Polytechnic
• Arts and Science
• Research Jobs
• School Jobs
• Post your Recruitment
• Privacy Policy

Is it worth doing a PhD while working?

Pursuing a PhD is a big commitment that requires time, work, and attention. For many working professionals, the question arises: is it worthwhile to pursue a PhD while working? Balancing work and PhD studies can be difficult, but it can also provide unique benefits and opportunities.

Those who want to pursue PhD studies while working, those can opt for the PhD for Working professional program. This blog discusses the benefits and drawbacks of getting a PhD while working, as well as strategies for navigating this rigorous dual route.

What is a PhD for a Working Professional Program?

A PhD for Working Professional Program is meant to assist professionals in obtaining a doctoral degree while continuing to work. It provides flexible scheduling and online components to fit hectic work schedules.

The program emphasizes advanced research and practical applications relevant to the professional sector. Individuals can improve their skills and professional possibilities without taking a break from their jobs.

Here are the types of PhD for working professional  programs that are specially designed by considering working professionals:

• Part-Time Ph.D: It allows you to work while earning your degree.
• Executive Ph.D: It is intended for senior professionals with extensive job experience.
• Online/Distance Ph.D: They provide the option to study remotely.

What are the benefits of a PhD Program?

Here are the few benefits of pursuing a PhD for working professionals program are listed below:

What are the tips for Successfully Balancing Work and PhD Studies?

Here are a few tips for successfully balancing work and PhD Studies are mentioned below:

• Effective time management: Time management is essential for balancing work and PhD study. Make a precise calendar that sets aside certain periods for work, study, and personal activities. Use calendars, planners, and time-tracking applications to stay organized and manage your responsibilities successfully.
• Communicate with employers and advisors: Open communication with your workplace and academic advisors is critical. Similarly, advise your academic counselors about your professional responsibilities. They can offer assistance and flexibility to help you manage both tasks.
• Set boundaries: Set clear limits for work, education, and leisure time. Avoid multitasking and concentrate on one work at a time to boost productivity and reduce stress. Set aside discrete places for work and study to create a comfortable setting for each activity.
• Seek Support: Don’t be afraid to seek help from coworkers, family, and friends. Their encouragement and understanding can make a major difference in balancing work and school responsibilities. Sharing experiences and recommendations can lead to great insights and motivation.
• Care for Your Health: Maintaining your physical and emotional health is critical when juggling a job and a PhD program. Taking care of your health can boost your overall well-being and ability to handle many duties.
• Be flexible: Flexibility is essential for managing the unpredictability of work and academic demands. Prepare to change your schedule and plans as needed.

How College Vidya Helps:

College Vidya is an online web platform with over 100 reputable online institutions that are UGC-DEB, AICTE, and NAAC-approved. Furthermore, the website is user-friendly. All you need to do is visit the website once and complete a few questions about your selected course, credentials, and budget. Based on your response, College Vidya will only propose institutions that meet these requirements. Furthermore, you may evaluate different colleges based on accreditations, pricing, and other factors to find the perfect fit for you.

Furthermore, there is no need to worry about fraud because College Vidya only displays institutions that are government-approved and have all of the necessary approvals to provide an excellent education.

Conclusion:

Pursuing a PhD while working is a difficult but rewarding flexibility. Its financial security, real-world experience, professional development, and networking opportunities can all help you further your career and academic goals. The PhD for working professional program holds the same recognition as the regular PhD program and this program is specially designed for working professionals.

However, it is fraught with difficulties such as time limits, limited focus, personal sacrifices, and a lengthy period of study. Successful balance necessitates excellent time management, open communication, clear limits, support from others, health considerations, and flexibility. By carefully weighing the benefits and drawbacks and applying ways to balance job and academic duties, you may make an informed decision about whether pursuing a PhD while working is the appropriate option for you.

Finally, the worth of this flexibility is dependent on your unique aims, circumstances, and ability to negotiate the demands of both.

Get Daily Job Alert in WhatsApp , Telegram , Facebook

Related articles more from author.

Is BTech For Working Professionals A Good Option For A Successful Engineering Career?

Do companies accept Online MBAs?

How to Pursue a Doctoral Degree While Working Full Time

Balancing a career while pursuing a doctoral degree—or any degree for that matter—is not easy, but it is possible. With the right plan and support system in place, you can achieve your academic goals. Doctoral students learn—through research-based theory and practice—how to address the many challenges encountered across an array of professional fields. While obtaining a doctoral degree, students begin to integrate the practical skills that they are learning into their own professional careers, to ultimately emerge as leaders within their workplace or field.  We recently spoke with a few Endicott College employees—Brittany Potter ’16 M’17, Assistant Dean of Academic Success, Sendy Suazo ’14 M’16, Community Outreach & Recruitment Coordinator, and Ian Menchini, Director, Graduate Enrollment & Advising—who are all currently pursuing their doctoral degrees while working full time. Here’s what they want you to know:

Leverage your everyday work

As you progress through the program, you’ll begin to notice that when you’re at work, you’re actually doing coursework—you’ll be able to relate real life experiences to the theories you’re learning. Recognize that you should be absorbing and taking your professional experiences into your academic assignments, it will be beneficial to your degree and you’ll see the relevance in your work.

Get organized

Understand that you are weaving your doctoral pursuits into your lifestyle.  To figure out how it will fit, create a schedule and find your rhythm. Keep your goals in mind and plan your time strategically to account for coursework, but also for periods of rest.  

Build a support network

You won’t be navigating through your program alone, your family, friends, and coworkers can all help to support you along your journey. Once you’ve identified a support network, determine how those people can assist you. You will be assigned a mentor who will act as a resource for you throughout your program and who will also serve as your dissertation advisor.  Additionally, identify one or two members from your cohort to connect with—whether for assistance on projects or for accountability.

Your research topic

Choose a dissertation topic related to your career and identify a problem of practice within your professional field—your research will focus on how to solve that problem. Your mentor will help you narrow your topic, through concept mapping, continuous research, and further narrowing. S/he will help you figure out how to gather pertinent data and how to apply it to your topic.  If you are unsure about your topic, your mentor will assist you in navigating through your interests to find what topics you are really passionate about.  You’ll actually enjoy conducting research for your program because it's related to what you love to do. Click here  to learn more about Endicott’s doctoral programs. 

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

By signing up, you agree to the our terms and our Privacy Policy agreement.

10 Time Management Tips for Older PhD Students Who Want to Balance Work and Studies

Breaking barriers: empowering black women over 40 to excel in information systems phd programs. , the top 8 must-know tips for phd preparation: how to get started.

The Pros and Cons of Getting a PhD While Working

Can you do a PhD while working? Before you answer this question, let’s discuss the pros and cons.

Whether you should work while doing a traditional full-time PhD is an important question . No matter what others tell you, the answer is often very personal. The answer is also determined by personal factors (i.e., can you afford to live on a PhD stipend) and external factors (i.e., does the school allow working).

Nonetheless, knowing the answers before you start your PhD education will determine the schools and PhD programs to which you’ll apply. Hence, saving you time and energy at the outset.

Before you make that decision, here are some pros and cons of doing PhD While Working.

The Pros of Getting a PhD While Working

It goes without saying that working will provide additional income.

Let’s face it. Who doesn’t want additional money in their bank account?

Career options:

Working affords you the flexibility of choice. Being on both sides, industry, and academia gives you a breath of knowledge about what’s going on in the field (that’s if your work is related to your field of PhD study).

This keeps your knowledge relevant and gives you a choice to stay in academia or go back to industry.

Research data opportunities:

One thing researchers delight in is access to good-quality data. Organizations produce and have lots of good quality data.

When you’re working for an organization, you can access the organization’s data (with permission) for your research. Studies with this kind of data are sought after.

The Cons of Getting a PhD while Working

Divided attention

Since your time, interests, and goals are split between PhD while working and your PhD education, you may find that your attention is always divided between the two interests.

This presents time management challenges, worrying about whether you’re giving enough attention to each interest.

Low research productivity.

Given the divided attention and time challenges, your research productivity may suffer.

How? You may not have enough time to dedicate to the rigor of research. You’ll almost always exert the minimum effort needed to complete a research project.

Exerting minimum effort is a human condition but can negatively impact the quality and quantity of research you produce.

Difficulty in deciding a career path after graduation.

When you have one foot in industry and the other in academia, it makes it hard to decide which to continue after graduation.

I interned twice in public institutions when I was getting my PhD, with the possibility to stay on. Even though I was only interning, it was still a difficult decision for me.

To make that final decision, I asked myself whether the reasons I wanted to pursue a PhD/be an academic had changed. In other words, I went back to my WHY. The answer was No. So I’m still in academia.

I’m familiar with a PhD while working student in their final year who is finding it hard to make that decision. I can tell you that it’s not a simple decision.

High Quit Rate

Getting a PhD education at any age is not easy; how much more doing so in your 40s and 50s.

People do quit or drop out of their PhD education. They quit for many reasons, including a lack of support from the PhD program and the quality of relationship with an advisor .

However, it isn’t a stretch of the imagination to say that stretching yourself between work and the rigor of a PhD could lead to quitting intentions. You could tackle that research study: “ Does working increase the intention to quit in PhD students ?

Now that you’ve seen some of the pros and cons of working while getting a PhD, think carefully about your decision.

Everyone’s situation is different, so make this decision based on yours. If you do decide that you’ll work while doing a PhD, consider all the different types of doctorate degrees : traditional, DBA, executive, etc. A DBA or Executive PhD allows work and might fit you better.

However, you’ll have to fund your own education (self-funding).  If you want external funding and still want to work, you need to seek out traditional PhD programs that might allow  doing a PhD While Working.

There are a few. They do not advertise it that but I have seen some traditional programs where their students PhD While Working. 

See more information on the difference between the different types of doctorate degrees . Send me a message if you have more questions on this topic.

What’s your story?

Related Posts

A 2023 resolution to start a phd in information systems – make a bold move, seeking a business phd as a black woman over 40 is a good thing, 7 career options: what you can do with a phd in information systems or technology, is it worth it to get a phd in information systems, you’ve decided to pursue a phd in your 40s – now, what, deciding to pursue a phd in your 40s and 50s.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Community Blog

Keep up-to-date on postgraduate related issues with our quick reads written by students, postdocs, professors and industry leaders.

5 Things to Consider Before Doing a PhD While Working

• By Nicholas R.
• August 19, 2020

Those interested in getting a PhD but dreading the several years of no income or a stipend that doesn’t meet their needs may consider a part time or even a full time job. That way, they can gain experience in the field, save up a little money and have a non-academic route they could later make use of. After all, if you’ve already made it to the point where you’re eligible to study at PhD level, you’ve already proven that you have great time management skills and that you can dedicate yourself to your studies, right?…

It might sound like a workable plan to many, but getting a PhD while working might not be as easy as you may think. Take it from many PhD students and postgrads who warn that it a slippery slope from a part time PhD to no PhD at all.

If you decide to go down this route, keep the following considerations in mind to give you the best chance of succeeding.

1. Know Your Programme

Some part time PhD programmes, especially the ones offered by online universities and distance learning schools, are well suited for those who want to work and study at the same time. Some aren’t as rigorous or time-consuming as others, and in some fields, the experience of working in industry through your current career will be a great benefit. A part time PhD will also have a more manageable workload , and supervisors will usually be more experience in providing support to working students. But keep in mind that some PhD part time programmes will not be eligible for financial aid or funding , at which point part time study may no longer be personally worth it.

2. Know Your Job

If your work is related to your field of study and your employers understand and support the requirements of your PhD, you will have a much less stressful few years. Therefore, one of the first things you’ll want to do is to get your employer on your side.

You can go about this by sitting down with them and explaining what your research will be about, how it will benefit your professional development and how it will benefit them as a business. You will also want to reassure them that you’ll be able to remain committed to your job during your studies, as this is likely to be their biggest concern. Don’t just stop at their verbal support, ask your manager to sit down with you to discuss the possibility of funding support, study days and the assignment of a mentor if your workplace has a doctorate holder.

Finding a PhD has never been this easy – search for a PhD by keyword, location or academic area of interest.

3. Know Your Situation

If you have young children, a sick parent, or generally any commitments that require hours of your time, it’s probably best to stay a full time student. If your field requires many publications or relies heavily on being able to network and interact with other researchers, keep in mind that you probably won’t be able to live up to their expectations if you already have work commitments you need to keep up.

4. Know Your Supervisor

Your supervisor should be supportive of the fact that you’re attempting to carry out a PhD whilst working part time rather than seeing it as a hindrance. As is to be expected, part time students generally struggle more than full time ones due to having greater external commitments, less contact time and a longer programme duration (beyond five years). You will want to find a PhD supervisor who is aware of these challenges, and if at all possible, try to get one who has taken this path themselves.

A good supervisor won’t only limit their support to physical help , such as introducing you to other researchers, suggesting relevant literature and facilitating data access, but also to emotional and mental support. A supportive supervisor maintains a good attitude and demonstrates concern for your research project. They should be keen to see you excel, help you refine your research skills and make you feel confident enough to experiment with your research approach and share your work whenever the opportunity presents itself, whether it is at a conference or in your place of work. Although you will be responsible for navigating yourself through your doctorate, a good supervisor will act as your safety net for when you get a little lost.

5. Know Yourself

Even the most organised people aren’t prepared for the workload that comes with a PhD. Make a time chart and be truly honest with yourself about how much time you have in the day, it might not be as much as you would think once you’ve factored everything in. Doing a part time PhD requires about 15-20 hours of commitment per week – will you have 15 hours to spare alongside your job, family and friends and other obligations? If not, then working and studying at the same time will most likely be out of your reach.

These considerations will hopefully put you in a better position to tackle a PhD while working part time (or dare I say it, working full time!). Even still, tackling a several year long PhD programme whilst working is probably one of the hardest things you will do, so if you decide to go down this road, much kudos to you.

Learning how to effectively collaborate with others is an important skill for anyone in academia to develop.

In the UK, a dissertation, usually around 20,000 words is written by undergraduate and Master’s students, whilst a thesis, around 80,000 words, is written as part of a PhD.

Statistical treatment of data is essential for all researchers, regardless of whether you’re a biologist, computer scientist or psychologist, but what exactly is it?

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Browse PhDs Now

Considering whether to do an MBA or a PhD? If so, find out what their differences are, and more importantly, which one is better suited for you.

This post explains where and how to write the list of figures in your thesis or dissertation.

Dr Jain gained her PhD in Molecular Oncology from the Indian Institute of Science. She is now a science illustrator and communicator, and works with TheLifeofScience.com to initiate conversations around sci-art and women in science.

Chris is a third (and final) year PhD student at Ulster University. His project aims to develop a novel method of delivering antibiofilm compounds directly to an infected wound bed in patients.

Join Thousands of Students

You're viewing this site as a domestic an international student

You're a domestic student if you are:

• a citizen of Australia or New Zealand,
• an Australian permanent resident, or
• a holder of an Australian permanent humanitarian visa.

You're an international student if you are:

• intending to study on a student visa,
• not a citizen of Australia or New Zealand,
• not an Australian permanent resident, or
• a temporary resident (visa status) of Australia.

Can I do a PhD while working?

Study tips Published 31 Mar, 2022  ·  4-minute read

Completing a Doctor of Philosophy requires some serious dedication. But committing all your time to research can leave a significant gap in your income. So, can you work and do a PhD at the same time? Let’s find out.

We spoke with two UQ PhD candidates, Chelsea Janke and Sarah Kendall, to get some insights into whether you can get a PhD while working – and how to balance your work with your research.

Can you get a PhD while working?

The simple answer is yes, but we wouldn't exactly recommend it. There’s nothing technically stopping you from continuing to work (at least, to some extent) while you pursue a PhD, but doing a higher degree by research is a big commitment. So, you need to think carefully before you attempt to juggle both.

The more complex answer is that it depends heavily on the type of work you’re doing and how quickly you want to complete your research.

PhD candidates can continue working part time while completing their research. Of course, this depends on the nature of their research and other work.

Keep in mind : some PhD scholarships are only available to full-time candidates and may not allow you to earn more than a certain amount to remain eligible. If you’ve applied or plan to apply for a scholarship, make sure to check the relevant terms.

For  international students , some extra restrictions apply. You can work up to 40 hours per fortnight, but this must not interfere with your full-time study load or your academic performance. Further limitations may apply if you're on an RTP scholarship (maximum 270 working hours per year) or being sponsored by your government.

Doing a PhD while working: full time, part time or casual?

Chelsea is quick to warn us that both working and researching full time is a recipe for disaster.

“A full-time PhD could not be done whilst working full time,” she says.

Doing both part time is feasible, but only if you’re happy to wait a few extra years to see the fruits of your labour.

“I know people who have worked part time and done their PhD part time – usually in the same research group or field,” says Chelsea.

“But keep in mind it took them 7-8 years to finish their PhD; it’s not the most efficient strategy.”

Committing to a full-time PhD while doing some incidental work on the side seems like the most popular approach for candidates, in Chelsea’s experience.

“Most full-time PhD students will pick up some casual work tutoring, marking, helping the lab manager, or assisting other researchers with their work,” she says.

“This means they can do a few hours here and there without their own PhD work being too disrupted.”

Sarah’s circumstances allow her to maintain a part-time job while completing her PhD, though she acknowledges you have to be lucky to be in a position to do so.

“PhD candidates can continue working part time while completing their research; of course, this depends on the nature of their research and other work,” says Sarah.

“Both my research and work are very flexible, and I can complete them whenever suits me.”

Learn about Sarah’s research or read her series about becoming an academic in law .

How to balance work with your PhD

If you plan to work whilst doing your PhD, you will need to manage your time well.

It’s one thing to ask can I do a PhD while working – actually managing to juggle the two is a whole other challenge. Sarah and Chelsea agree that time management is the most important part of making this work.

Sarah suggests keeping a strict schedule to divide your time evenly between your commitments, as this is what works for her.

“I find that I maintain a balance best by setting specific hours to work on my PhD (usually from 9am to 4pm Monday to Friday) and then on my other work commitments (usually Saturdays and sometimes a couple of hours before dinner),” she says.

“The hours you set to work on your PhD and other commitments will depend on whether your other work has set hours though, as well as when you work best – you might get some of your best research and writing done at 5am!”

Top tips for working while doing your PhD

• Only do so if you really want/need to and if you know you can manage the dual workloads.
• Tell your boss. Make sure your employer knows about your plans to juggle a PhD with your workload. See if there’s anything they can do to make the journey easier for you. For example, just like Sarah, your employer may be able to provide you the flexibility to complete your work on a schedule that accommodates your research hours.
• Consider a part-time PhD if cutting your hours or quitting your job isn’t a viable option. Yes, it might take longer. But if it means maintaining a comfortable balance between your research and your current career, it might be the best choice for you.
• Chat with your PhD supervisor. They’ve been there and done that, making them a great source of wisdom when it comes to pursuing a PhD while also balancing your other life commitments. You may also have peers currently doing a PhD who can provide some advice.

Haven’t chosen your supervisor yet? Read these tips for finding a suitable academic. It’s also a good idea to be upfront with your supervisor about your intention to work/research part time, as some supervisors prefer to work with full-time PhD candidates.

• Seek casual work at your university and in your field where possible. By keeping your work and research close together (both in terms of location and mindset), you may find it less challenging to keep on top of both.
• Make sure you’re passionate about your PhD topic . If your research just feels like a second job on top of your usual work, you’ll likely burn out before long. When developing your research proposal , make sure your thesis is providing that spark of curiosity that’s going to keep you inspired to follow through with your research – even on nights when you’re drained from work.

Ready to get started? Whether you’re dedicating yourself to a full-time PhD or keeping a balance between research and work, The University of Queensland is ready to support you.

Learn more about completing your PhD at UQ

Share this Facebook X LinkedIn Email

Related stories

How to get a PhD scholarship or funding

3-minute read

How long does a PhD take?

How to find a PhD supervisor

5-minute read

Is a PhD worth it?

9-minute read

• Youth Program
• Wharton Online

How the PhD Program Works

Program Overview

Completing your doctorate at Wharton requires 5 years of full-time study. The first 2 years in the program prepare you for admission to candidacy by taking courses, qualifying exams, and starting research projects. In the last few years, you are primarily conducting research full-time including writing and defending your doctoral dissertation.

Admission to candidacy.

You begin by taking courses required for your program of study. All programs requires a preliminary exam, which may be either oral or written.

Some programs may have further requirements, such as an additional exam or research paper. If you enter with a master’s degree or other transfer credit, you may satisfy the formal course requirements more quickly.

Beginning the Wharton PhD Curriculum How the first two years of the Wharton program helped students discover their interests, learn the tools of the profession, and fuel their passion for teaching.

The Doctoral Dissertation

Upon successful completion of coursework and passing a preliminary examination, you are admitted to candidacy for the dissertation phase of your studies.

Your doctoral dissertation should contain original research that meets standards for published scholarship in your field. You are expected to be an expert in the topic you choose to research.

You are admitted to candidacy for the dissertation phase of your studies upon successful completion of coursework and passing a preliminary examination, but you can start thinking about and working on research of relevance at any time.

The dissertation process culminates with a “defense,” in which you defend the proposal orally before your dissertation committee.

While working on your dissertation, you interact extensively with Wharton faculty. Together with interested faculty, you create your own research community that includes your dissertation advisor and dissertation committee.

Policies and Procedures

Get more detailed explanation of course requirements, academic standards, the Teacher Development Program, time limits, and dissertation procedures and requirements.

Sample Program Sequence

Years 1 & 2.

Coursework Examination Research Papers Research Activities Field-Specific Requirements

Directed Reading & Research Admission to Candidacy Formulation of Research Topic

Years 4 & 5

Continued Research Oral Examination Dissertation

Hear From Our Doctoral Community

Phd student creates a new pipeline for women in academia, what brought this cdc researcher to wharton's phd program, wharton’s phd program prepared this doctor to perform economic evaluations in health care.

Phd-Study-In-Usa

• Working in the USA: How to Find Work During and After Your Studies

Written by Sarah Hastings-Woodhouse

If you’re planning to complete a Masters or PhD in the USA, you may be wondering how you can bring in extra cash while you study, or what career opportunities will be open to you after graduating.

There are quite a few regulations for international students working in the USA, but there are still options on offer! We’ve broken down how to work in the USA during and after your studies.

Working while studying

Provided that you’re enrolled on a full-time programme at a US university and in possession of an F-1 student visa , you can work in the USA during your studies. However, there are quite a few restrictions on the kind of work you can do.

In your first year of study, you can work up to 20 hours per week in an on-campus role, but you will not be allowed to work off campus. You can work off campus in subsequent years, but you can only engage in the following two types of employment:

#1 Curricular practical training (CPT)

CPT allows you to undertake employment directly related to your field of study, for example through an internship or as part of a co-op programme . You’ll usually only have the option of completing CPT if it’s a required part of your course . It’s more common for CPT to be part of the curriculum for more vocational programmes in disciplines such as Business or Engineering, where you’ll benefit most from workplace experience.

You’ll need to complete your CPT before your programme’s end date. You can work either part-time (up to 20 hours per week) or full-time (more than 20 hours per week). CPT is usually paid, but there are also some unpaid options designed solely to help you gain professional experience.

You can technically complete CPT and work in an on-campus role at the same time, but your total time worked per week should not exceed 40 hours. This means you’ll probably have to apply for part-time CPT.

#2 Optional practical training (OPT)

OPT allows you to work in an area related to your field of study for a one-year period. Unlike CPT, OPT can be completed either during or after your programme. If you complete OPT while studying, you will only be able to work for up to 20 hours per week during term time.

Note that if you have already completed one year of full-time CPT, you will not be eligible to apply for OPT.

CPT and OPT allow for both paid and unpaid work experience. Most students will choose to apply for paid employment to support their studies, but you can also complete voluntary work or an unpaid internship, so long as it is relevant to your field of study.

What is a co-op programme?

Co-op programmes allow you to combine postgraduate study with professional experience. Universities offering co-op programmes will usually have partnerships with companies in a range of industries.

There’s no standardised format for a co-op programme, the exact arrangement will depend on your university. You might complete co-op during just one term, or alternate terms on campus with terms on co-op.

How can you search for a job?

If you’re looking for an on-campus job, you’ll generally be able browse listings on the careers section of your university’s website. Good part-time job for students could include library assistant, campus ambassador, peer mentor or receptionist.

If you’re looking for off-campus work to complete CPT, you’ll need to secure a job offer before you can apply for CPT authorisation. There are a number of places you can look for opportunities, such as the websites of companies in industries relevant to your field of study, or online job portals including LinkedIn, Handshake or Indeed. You could also seek advice from your university’s careers service or attend any careers fairs hosted by your institution.

Make sure any jobs you apply for are directly related to your field of study and meet any extra requirements for CPT roles set by your university. Once you have a job offer, you’ll need to apply for CPT authorisation. This is usually done through your Designated School Official (DSO).

The process of searching for a job to complete OPT is similar, except that you don’t need a job offer prior to applying for authorisation.

Federal work-study programmes

Federal work-study is a government-funded initiative that provides part-time jobs for university students who have a proven financial need, to help them cover tuition fees and living expenses. However, international students are not generally eligible. If you’re a US citizen looking to apply, you can check with your university’s financial aid office to see if they’re participating in the programme, or read more on the Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) website.

Working after your studies

The USA does not offer any post-study work visas for international students. However, there are still ways that you can seek work post-graduation!

Post-study Optional Practical Training

As we explained above, you can choose to complete OPT either during or after your course. If you choose the latter, this amounts to a one-year extension of your student visa while you gain practical experience in your chosen field.

You can also choose to complete part of your OPT while studying and part of it after graduating, as long as the total amount of OPT completed does not exceed one year of full-time work. For example, if you worked part-time (20 hours per week) for one year during your course, this would leave you with six months of OPT to use post-graduation.

Graduates of programmes in certain STEM subjects can apply for a two-year extension to their OPT period, allowing them to stay in the USA for up to three years after finishing their programme.

What’s next?

If you want to stay in the USA for longer that your OPT period, you will need to apply for a temporary or permanent work visa. Having completed a Masters or PhD at an American university won’t guarantee a successful visa application, but being educated to postgraduate level will likely still be an advantage!

Want to know more? Check out our guides to studying in the USA , covering universities, applications, student life and more! Or start searching for a PhD in the USA today .

Our postgrad newsletter shares courses, funding news, stories and advice

Why you'll need health insurance as an international student in the USA and how to find the right plan for you.

Our guide tells you everything about the application process for studying a PhD in the USA.

Our guide to PhD funding in the USA has information on fully-funded PhD scholarships, as well as other funding options for international and domestic students.

Our guide tells you exactly what kind of visa you need to study a study in the USA and what you need to apply for it.

FindAPhD. Copyright 2005-2024 All rights reserved.

Unknown    ( change )

Have you got time to answer some quick questions about PhD study?

Select your nearest city

You haven’t completed your profile yet. To get the most out of FindAPhD, finish your profile and receive these benefits:

• Monthly chance to win one of ten £10 Amazon vouchers ; winners will be notified every month.*
• The latest PhD projects delivered straight to your inbox
• Access to our £6,000 scholarship competition
• Weekly newsletter with funding opportunities, research proposal tips and much more
• Early access to our physical and virtual postgraduate study fairs

Or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

*Offer only available for the duration of your active subscription, and subject to change. You MUST claim your prize within 72 hours, if not we will redraw.

Do you want hassle-free information and advice?

Create your FindAPhD account and sign up to our newsletter:

• Find out about funding opportunities and application tips
• Receive weekly advice, student stories and the latest PhD news
• Hear about our upcoming study fairs
• Save your favourite projects, track enquiries and get personalised subject updates

Create your account

Looking to list your PhD opportunities? Log in here .

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Phd-supervisors experiences during and after the covid-19 pandemic: a case study.

• 1 Department of Education, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
• 2 Department of Educational Studies in Teacher Education, Faculty of Education, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Hamar, Norway
• 3 Department of Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
• 4 Faculty of Arts and Physical Education, Volda University College, Volda, Norway

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the education sector, and this case study examined nearly three hundred PhD supervisors in Norway. The study was driven by the urgent need to better understand the professional, social, and existential conditions faced by doctoral supervisors during extended societal shutdowns. This explorative case study builds on a former study among PhD candidates and investigates the experiences of doctoral supervisors when remote work, digital teaching, and digital supervision suddenly replaced physical presence in the workplace, largely between March 12, 2020, and autumn 2022, due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: A mixed-methods research approach, incorporating formative dialog research and case study design, was employed to bridge the conceptual and contextual understanding of this phenomenon. The primary data sources were a survey ( N = 298, 53.7% women, 46.3% men, response rate 80.54%) and semi-structured interviews (with nine PhD supervisors). Supplementary data collection was based on formative dialog research. It included field dialog (four PhD supervision seminars), open survey responses ( n = 1,438), one focus group ( n = 5), an additional survey ( n = 85), and document analysis of PhD policy documents and doctoral supervision seminar evaluations ( n = 7). The survey data, interview data, focus group data, and supplementary data focus also retrospectively on the first year of the pandemic and were collected from August 2022 until October 2023.

Results: The findings from the explorative case study revealed that the PhD supervisors faced numerous challenges during the pandemic, both professionally and personally. For PhD supervisors who extensively worked from home over a long period, the situation created new conditions that affected their job performance. These altered conditions hindered their research capacity, their ability to follow up with their PhD candidates, and their capacity to fulfill other job responsibilities. Although the PhD supervisors received some support during the pandemic, it seems that the incremental measures provided were insufficient.

Discussion: The case study results indicate that it is more important than ever to understand the gap between the formulation, transformation, and realization arenas when distinguishing between incremental, semi-structural changes and fundamental changes in PhD regulations and guidelines brought on by societal crises. This highlights the need for better crisis preparedness at the doctoral level in the years to come.

1 Introduction

Effective doctoral supervision is crucial for guiding PhD candidates through the complexities of their research, ensuring academic rigor and the successful completion of their dissertations ( Bastalich, 2017 ; Wichmann-Hansen, 2021 ; Kálmán et al., 2022 ). The role of PhD supervisors during the pandemic and their impact on educational quality at various levels has been an under-researched area both nationally and internationally ( Börgeson et al., 2021 ; Krumsvik et al., 2022 ). Supervisors who have varying experiences and work under diverse conditions are key players in the transformation arena where central policies are applied at the institutional level. Their interaction with PhD-candidates, whether in-person or remotely, shapes partly the quality of PhD-programs and candidates’ learning experiences. The COVID-19 pandemic has influenced the education sector in numerous ways, and this case study examined nearly three hundred PhD-supervisors in Norway with a Mixed Method Research design and different methods and data. The impetus for the study was the urgent need for a better knowledge base to understand the professional, social, and existential conditions for doctoral supervisors when society is shut down for an extended period. This explorative case study builds on our former study among PhD-candidates ( Krumsvik et al., 2022 ) and investigates the experiences of doctoral supervisors when remote work, digital teaching, and digital supervision suddenly replaced physical presence in the workplace (to varying extents).

First, the introduction contextualizes the study; second, the methodology is described; third, the main part presents the results from the survey part of the study; fourth, the data from the interviews and Supplementary data are presented; fifth, the discussion and conclusion are presented.

International policy documents underline the importance of PhD-supervision [ European University Association (EUA), 2010 , 2015 ] and, in Norway, it is crucial to view PhD supervision considering the specific frame factors for the PhD’s and some general trends of changed frame factors in doctoral education over the last 10 years ( Krumsvik, 2016a , 2017 ). It is therefore important to examine such frame factors in light of PhD-supervisors’ experiences during the pandemic, but the current state of knowledge is still limited around this topic. However, “The United Kingdom Research Supervision Survey Report 2021″ found that among the 3,500 PhD supervisors in the United Kingdom, 65% felt that supervisory responsibilities have increased during the pandemic, 32% agreed that “concerns over supervision have kept me awake at night over the last 12 months” and 31% agreed that “supervising doctoral candidates makes me feel anxious over the last 12 months” ( UK Council for Graduate Education, 2021 ). With these abovementioned issues in mind, this doctoral supervision study builds on our previous research on doctoral-level education ( Krumsvik and Jones, 2016 ; Krumsvik and Røkenes, 2016 ; Krumsvik et al., 2016a , b , 2019 , 2021 ; Krumsvik et al., 2022 ) and aims to examine the experiences of PhD supervisors in Norway during the pandemic to answer the research questions below:

1. To what extent has the COVID-19 pandemic impeded the PhD supervisors’ frame factors on the micro-level, and how do they perceive this situation?

2. To what extent has the COVID-19 pandemic influenced PhD supervisors’ frame factors on the meso-level, and how do they perceive this situation?

3. How do the PhD-supervisors experience the more general aspects of their supervision role during and after the pandemic?

1.1 The Norwegian context

To contextualize the research questions to the Norwegian context, one must remember that doctoral candidates in Norway are not students per se but are employees (on a 3–4 years contract) and more regarded as colleagues than students, and in this sense, the roles are more equal than in traditional supervisory relationships at a lower level (supervisor-student). Both by having PhD fellows being considered highly competent adult employees with state employment contracts, where they receive regular salaries, and have regular offices, they are initially part of the work community found within academia with its routines, duties, and rights. Another contextual aspect is that Norwegian PhD-candidates defend their theses relatively late in their careers. The average age for a candidate’s defense is between 37 and 38 years and higher for many candidates within the humanities and social sciences. In comparison, the median age across OECD countries is 29 ( Sarrico, 2022 , p. 1304). Table 1 provides a generalized comparison of doctoral education across Nordic countries, the UK, and the US ( Andres et al., 2015 ; Burner et al., 2020 ). While such broad overviews might exaggerate differences, they provide a framework for understanding doctoral education on a spectrum. This spectrum ranges from countries with significant government influence, where PhD candidates are employed (e.g., Nordic countries), to countries with moderate government influence, where PhD candidates are not employed (e.g., the UK), and finally to countries with minimal government influence, where PhD candidates are also not employed (e.g., the US). Despite these variations, the global trend indicates that doctoral education is becoming increasingly dependent on external funding ( Bengtsen, 2023 , p. 45).

Table 1 . Overview of the Nordic PhD model in comparison to UK and US models.

In addition, women defend their theses on average 2 years later than men. Taking into account that the average age for first-time mothers in Norway is now 30.1 years, there is a lot that needs to happen within a few years, and this may sometimes affect the feasibility of their PhD-projects. This can, e.g., be related to the gender differences in Norway about parental leave days during the pandemic which is much higher for women than for men at the universities ( Krumsvik et al., 2022 ) 1 . Another contextual factor that distinguishes doctoral supervision from other supervision (at lower levels) is that over 90% of the doctoral theses in Norway are article-based theses ( Krumsvik, 2016b ; Mason and Merga, 2018 ; Solli and Nygaard, 2022 ), which implies 3–4 published articles and an extended summary or synopsis (a “kappe” in Norwegian, ranging between 50 and 90 pages). This means that the PhD-candidates receive “supervision” and feedback from approximately 8–10 referees in scientific journals on their articles, in addition to feedback from their PhD supervisors. Because of this, many PhD-supervisors are co-authoring their doctoral candidates’ publications. A final contextual aspect is the recent studies indicating a decrease in doctoral disputations nationwide in Norway over the past two years ( Steine and Sarpebakken, 2023 ) – probably as a consequence of the pandemic. In a survey, Ramberg and Wendt (2023 , p. 22) found that about 60 percent of PhD candidates and 50 percent of postdoctoral candidates ( N = 300) were delayed during the autumn of 2022. The study showed that illness or leave, often due to caregiving responsibilities during the pandemic, was the most common reason for delays among PhD candidates and postdoctoral candidates, particularly impacting women more than men. Following illness, reduced access to supervisors, empirical data, research facilities, and external partners were significant factors contributing to delays in their research activities. Nearly a third of delayed candidates reported reduced access to supervisors, and about a fifth faced issues with external partner access, highlighting the critical role of these resources in completing research projects. When it comes to the PhD-supervisors, more specifically, the supervision differs from other types of supervision in that a formal PhD agreement is signed with a binding supervisor contract that lasts for 3–4 years (the PhD period) and is signed by both the supervisor and the candidate. The supervisor also has an overarching responsibility to avoid delays and ensure that the PhD program can be completed within the standard time frame. Supervisors are primarily responsible for guiding doctoral candidates on the specific, content-related aspects of their projects. This includes helping candidates identify the knowledge frontier in their field, position their study within the research field, develop clear and consistent research questions, choose appropriate scientific and methodological approaches, and provide expert guidance in discussing results and addressing ethical issues related to the thesis. This obviously places relatively high competence requirements on the supervisors, both in terms of their academic and research skills, and in relation to the doctoral supervision itself, as poor or inadequate supervision at this level can expose the candidate to a certain “drop-out risk” in the project.

Maintaining education quality during the COVID-19 pandemic has been challenging due to the widespread shift to digital teaching, supervision, and remote work. Many university teachers were unaccustomed to the online, digital learning environment, working with PhD candidates remotely for extended periods. Some taught in hybrid settings, with some PhD candidates quarantined at home while others attended in-person classes. Additionally, others navigated ordinary learning contexts with COVID-19 precautions like masks and social distancing. This situation altered frame factors, adding complexity to the discussion of education quality.

Considering this, the case study seeks to understand if, and potentially how, external factors in pedagogical contexts over which institutions, academics, and teachers have no direct control play out. Lindensjö and Lundgren (2014) find that such external factors might have a significant impact on the outcomes of educational training, teaching, and supervision. Therefore, it is crucial to contextualize the pandemic experiences among PhD supervisors with respect to these factors, as they imply national and institutional frames for their PhD supervision. Though there exist several quantitative, survey-based studies on the impact of COVID-19 on PhD supervision (e.g., Pyhältö et al., 2023 ; Löfström et al., 2024 ), there is still a lack of in-depth qualitative understanding of the impact of COVID-19 on the supervisory relationship. The studies of Löfström et al. (2024) and Pyhältö et al. (2023) indicated that supervisors faced significant challenges in identifying when PhD candidates needed assistance and providing adequate support for their well-being during the shift to remote supervision. Supporting the progress and wellbeing of full-time candidates, who were more adversely affected by the pandemic than their part-time peers, became increasingly difficult. The increase in email communications could overwhelm supervisors, exceeding manageable levels and complicating their ability to offer timely and effective feedback. The lack of spontaneous, informal conversation, previously facilitated by in-person meetings, further hindered their ability to monitor and support the candidates effectively. These challenges were particularly pronounced for supervisors in scientific fields requiring lab work and practical training, which were severely disrupted by the pandemic, and supporting the progress and wellbeing of full-time candidates, who were more adversely affected by the pandemic than their part-time peers, became increasingly difficult. Furthermore, supervisors reported that their PhD candidates’ lack of a scholarly community and inadequate supervision were significant challenges. This reflects the supervisors’ view that the availability of a supportive research environment and adequate supervision are critical for candidates’ success ( Pyhältö et al., 2023 ). The study by Pyhältö et al. (2023) also found that supervisors generally estimated the impact on candidates’ progress and well-being to be more negative than the candidates themselves did, which may imply that supervisors have a broader perspective on the long-term consequences of disruptions like the COVID-19 pandemic. Research prior to the pandemic ( Pyhältö et al., 2012 ) has shown that apart from the importance of having clear and long-term financing, proper research facilities, and sufficient time to pursue a PhD, supervisors also stress the significance of PhD candidates’ motivation, self-regulation, efficacy, and engagement as essential personal regulators for success in the PhD process.

1.2 Theoretical framework

This case study is exploratory and intrinsic ( Stake, 1995 , 2006 ), utilizing an abductive approach to theory with frame factor theory as our theoretical framework ( Lundgren, 1999 ; Lindensjö and Lundgren, 2014 ). Frame factor theory suggests that society’s influence on education manifests through a target system, an administrative system, and a legal system. This theory, used in educational sciences and pedagogy, acts as a lens for planning and analysis, positing that external factors, beyond the control of institutions and educators, significantly affect educational outcomes. We will further explain the contextual application of frame factor theory in this case study below.

Previous research highlights a gap in (doctoral) education between the formalization and realization arenas in frame factor theory ( Lindensjö and Lundgren, 2014 ; Krumsvik et al., 2019 ). Linde (2012) introduces a transformation arena between these two, explaining the difficulty of implementing measures in complex organizations like universities. There is rarely a straightforward relationship between central decisions (formulation arena or macro-level) and their implementation (realization arena or micro-level). Policy documents require interpretation and application by faculty leaders, PhD program leaders, supervisors, and PhD candidates (transformation arena or meso-level) ( Linde, 2012 ).

Given this context, a main focus of this case study was to evaluate how Norwegian PhD supervisors managed changed frame factors and education quality during the pandemic. The Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education (NOKUT) defines education quality as “the quality of teaching classes, other learning facilities, and students’ learning outcomes in terms of knowledge, skills, and general competence” ( Skodvin, 2013 , p. 2). It is important to differentiate between educational quality, study quality, and teaching quality.

Education quality is a broad concept encompassing everything from the subject/study program level to the government’s education policy. In contrast, study quality is narrower, referring specifically to the educational institution ( Skodvin, 2013 , p. 3). Teaching quality goes further to the micro-level, focusing on course quality, teacher effectiveness, and PhD supervision. This study examined how PhD supervisors experienced COVID-19 restrictions at the micro- and meso-levels, considering two of the three levels. Figure 1 illustrates the analytical lenses in this mixed methods research (MMR) and formative dialog research case study:

Figure 1 . The analytical focus in the case study ( Krumsvik et al., 2019 ) is based on the frame factor theory ( Linde, 2012 ; Lindensjö and Lundgren, 2014 ).

2 Methodology

To understand and corroborate conditions faced by doctoral supervisors related to COVID-19 extended societal shutdowns, both in breadth and in depth, we employed a mixed-methods research design, combining quantitative data to show the strength of associations and qualitative data to explore their nature ( Johnson et al., 2007 ; Creswell and Plano Clark, 2017 ). We utilized a three-stage design, QUAL-QUANT-QUAL (qualitative-driven sequential design, Schoonenboom and Johnson, 2017 ), making it a qualitative-dominant mixed-methods study ( Johnson et al., 2007 , p. 124). Using mixed methods research allowed us to explore the complex research problem more comprehensively compared to using either quantitative or qualitative data alone. Though the approach is less common in case studies ( Tight, 2016 , p. 380), the mixed methods are increasingly used (e.g., Ertesvåg et al., 2021 ; Hall and Mansfield, 2023 ; Peters and Fàbregues, 2023 ). Advocates of such approaches consider mixed methods to “complement and extend one another and thus lead to better descriptions, clearer explanations and an enhanced understanding of phenomena, research aims and questions” ( Ertesvåg et al., 2021 , p. 655).

Specifically, an exploratory, sequential mixed-methods design was used to address the research questions ( Fetters et al., 2013 ; Creswell and Plano Clark, 2017 ). This design involves collecting and analyzing qualitative data first (QUAL), using those findings to guide the quantitative data collection and analysis in the second phase (QUANT), and then using the quantitative results to inform further qualitative data collection and analysis in the third phase (QUAL). This method integrates through building, where results from one phase inform the next.

We conducted a cumulative data collection and analysis process ( Creswell and Guetterman, 2021 ), basing survey questions on previously collected data from field dialogues, online observations, seminar evaluations, and document analysis. The questionnaire consisted of a general demographic questions (e.g., gender, educational background and what field(s) the supervisor supervised in), in addition to a range of multiple response items addressing four key themes: (1) important factors to complete a PhD, (2) supervisor challenges, (3) working from home experiences, and (4) perceived need for future competences as supervisors. Finally the questionnaire contained a range of statements measured on a Likert-scale from 1 to 5 where 3 was neutral (e.g., to what extent do you feel that your PhD-candidate(s) are on track with their doctoral project?). The qualitative interview guide ( Kvale and Brinkmann, 2015 ) was developed from the prior quantitative data (survey), and the focus group guide was based on earlier survey and qualitative interview data (see Figure 2 below). We integrated research questions, methods, interpretation, and reporting at various points, using narratives where qualitative and quantitative results are presented in different sections of the same article through the contiguous approach ( Fetters et al., 2013 ). This article primarily examines the coherence between qualitative and quantitative findings based on confirmation , expansion , or discordance ( Fetters et al., 2013 ). The approach used in the study is similar to Hall and Mansfield (2023) and the coherence is derived from joint displays using visual means.

Figure 2 . The research process. The yellow arrows show the main data sources, and the blue arrows show the Supplementary data in this article. In addition, we have conducted focus group interviews and an extra survey, which will be published in another article (since they mainly focus on academic writing with the large language models).

As a consequence of the mixed-methods design, this study combines two approaches in case study research. The first, proposed by Stake (1995 , 2006) and Merriam (2009) and Merriam and Tisdell (2016) , is situated in a social constructivist paradigm, and is attached to the qualitative part (connected to the second part of each research question). The second, based on Eisenhardt (1989) , Flyvbjerg (2011) , and Yin (2012) , approaches the case study from a post-positivist perspective ( Hyett et al., 2014 , p. 1) (connected to the first part of each research question). This intrinsic case study ( Stake, 1995 ) aims to focus on ecological validity:

“Ecological validity is the degree of correspondence between the research conditions and the phenomenon being studied as it occurs naturally or outside of the research setting” ( Gehrke, 2018 , p. 563). Informant selection was based on a purposeful method ( Maxwell, 2013 ), in which we recruited PhD supervisors from Norway.

Next, all interviews were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis ( Braun and Clarke 2019 , 2021 ) where themes were constructed and presented in this paper (see section 4). In addition, we also conducted a sentiment analysis ( Dake and Gyimah, 2023 ) of the nine interviews (see Supplementary file ).

To answer the research question, we combined formative dialog research ( Baklien, 2004 ) and case study research ( Stake, 2006 ). Data collection consisted of fieldwork (see Supplementary file ), a survey N = 298, 53.7% women, 46.3% men, response rate 80.54%, nine semi-structured interviews (with PhD supervisors), and one focus group ( N = 5). Supplementary data consisted of an additional survey ( N = 85), PhD-policy document analysis ( N = 6), field dialogues (4 PhD supervision seminars), open survey data (1,438 responses), seminar observations ( N = 4), and reviews of relevant documents such as evaluations of doctoral supervisor seminars. We also used policy documents and regulations concerning PhD education in Norway as supplementary sources.

We focused on how PhD supervisors experienced changing frame factors, such as university lockdowns, remote work, digital teaching, digital supervision, doctoral progression, and others, with an emphasis on illuminating the micro-level (course and teaching level) from the PhD supervisors’ perspective. This focus is twofold: the program’s structure and quality directly affected the PhD- supervisors during the pandemic. The second is simply that they conducted several evaluations about matters related to the structure and quality compared with the others. However, PhD- candidates’ opinions are also important, and their views are also interwoven because some of them have been present during field dialogs and participated in the PhD-supervision seminars.

When focusing on how PhD-supervisors experience their supervision, PhD’s research progression, psychosocial aspects, their nearest superior, and the main focus are on illuminating the meso-level (institutional and program level).

2.1 Cumulative research process

In our case study, we brought the experiences and our study among PhD’s ( Krumsvik et al., 2022 ) from the period March 12, 2020, to November 30, 2021, into our design of this study. We executed an excessive cumulative data collection process (including a part during the pandemic) and analysis, especially from August 2022 – October 2023. The relatively long time period allowed the researchers to test their interpretations along the way and detect contrary evidence, e.g., reach saturation during the coding and analysis of the qualitative data ( Creswell and Guetterman, 2021 ).

3.1 Quantitative part (survey)

Above and below are the results of the quantitative part of the study, based on the survey data. This analysis is tentative and covers only the survey results. The interview data and Supplementary data will be presented later in the paper. Two hundred and forty respondents completed the survey ( N = 298, 80.54% response rate). The academic backgrounds of the supervisors were diverse, with the three largest groups coming from natural sciences, humanities, education and teacher training. The largest group of supervisors (41.75%) supervised PhD candidates in education and teacher training (see Table 2 ).

Table 2 . Distribution of supervisors by academic background and PhD supervision in various fields.

A narrow majority (58.08%) of the supervisors had submitted an article-based dissertation (see more in attachment 5 in the Supplementary file ), in the Supplementary file meaning that approximately four out of ten supervisors have not “hands on” experience with article-based thesis as their thesis in their own doctoral degree. A large majority (81.67%) had supervised PhD candidates before and after the pandemic, while 11.67% had only supervised during and after. 41.27% of the supervisors stated that the coronavirus pandemic (from March 12, 2020 - January 2022) had impeded their candidate(s) progress in their doctoral project. 21.12% agreed (to a large or very large extent) that the PhDs’ publication process of articles to scientific journals has been delayed because of the journal’s peer review process during the pandemic (i.e., journal processing times seemed to increase due to several factors including a lack of available peer reviewers because of heavy workloads, health issues, more teaching, etc.).

3.1.1 Challenges in supervision

Results in Table 3 indicate that the most commonly reported challenges faced by supervisors during the pandemic were balancing work and family life and working from home, each affecting more than a third of the supervisors. Psycho-social aspects, such as loneliness, also emerged as a notable challenge. The cancelation of conference participation and stays abroad were significant issues, reflecting the broader impact on professional development opportunities. Concerns about supervision quality were also prominent. Some supervisors reported no challenges, highlighting a degree of variability in experiences. Other challenges included delays in the peer review process for journals, difficulties with publishing, and issues related to research ethics, though these were less commonly reported.

Table 3 . Challenges faced by supervisors during the pandemic in terms of supervision.

3.1.2 Challenges in working from home

Results in Table 4 indicated that supervisors faced multiple challenges while working from home during the pandemic. The most common issue was having little contact with colleagues, which affected more than six in ten supervisors. Supervisors also frequently reported having little contact with their PhD candidates. Distractions from others at home were another prevalent challenge. Many supervisors experienced an increased workload due to digital teaching from home, and lacking office equipment, such as desks and office chairs, was also commonly reported. Psycho-social aspects, such as loneliness, were significant issues as well. The lack of space and increased home responsibilities, such as childcare, were notable challenges. A smaller number of supervisors reported having no challenges at all. Other less commonly reported issues included limited access to library services and poor internet access.

Table 4 . Challenges faced by supervisors during the pandemic working from home.

3.1.3 Factors PhD candidates need to complete their doctorate

We find that there is a high degree of consistency between what supervisors ( Table 5 ) and PhD candidates ( Table 6 ) consider to be the most important factors for completing the doctorate. In particular, it is persistence, resilience, and the ability to work independently are the most important factors, in addition to supervision and co-writing with supervisors.

Table 5 . Most important factors in completing a PhD as reported by PhD supervisors.

Table 6 . Most important factors in completing a PhD as reported by PhD Candidates.

Thus, there is considerable agreement between what the supervisors and the PhD candidates report, which may indicate that within the academic tradition, the doctoral journey is primarily seen as an individual endeavor (feat of strength) where the supervisor is the closest supporter.

3.1.4 Appreciation of supervision

The supervisors mostly agreed that both they and the PhD candidates value supervision. 89.91% responded they agree or strongly agree to this question for themselves, and 92.47% responded they agree or strongly agree on behalf of the PhD candidates. In comparison, 61.25% responded similarly to whether the department values supervision, while 24.17% were neutral, and 14.59% responded they disagree or strongly disagree. This may suggest that the supervisory relationship is primarily between the PhD candidate and the supervisor, with less firm ties to the institution.

When it comes to what extent the supervisors think that their institution has been accommodating regarding compensating the loss of progress due to the coronavirus pandemic for their own PhDs, 27.2% stated that this had been done to a small extent or very small extent and 29.39% stated that this had been done to a large extent or very large extent. 30.1% agreed (large extent and very large extent) that supervisory responsibilities have increased during the pandemic. 13.3% expressed (to a large or very large extent) that supervising doctoral candidates makes them feel anxious’ over the last 24 months” (pandemic), but the majority (64.3%) experienced this to a small and very small extent. 9.3% expressed (to a large and a very large extent) that concerns over doctoral supervision have kept them awake at night over the last 24 months (pandemic), but the majority (69.3%) experienced this to a small and very small extent. 56.1% of the supervisors have not discussed any challenges with the progress of their doctoral candidate(s) project due to the coronavirus pandemic with the department’s human resources manager/head.

When asked how many hours they have enshrined in their working plan per semester as the main supervisor per PhD candidate, supervisors state this varies from zero to above 80 h, but for the majority, it is between 20 and 40 h per semester (40.46%). 23.1% state they do not think that their PhD-candidate(s) are on track with their doctoral project, while 50.2% state that their PhD-candidate(s) are on track with their doctoral project. Some PhDs publish their articles in their thesis based on pre-collected data (e.g., as a part of bigger projects), while others publish their articles in their thesis based on data collections done by themselves. 58.77% of the supervisors think this affects the completion time for the last group of PhDs (large and very large extent). 53.4% of the supervisors have been co-authoring their doctoral candidates’ publications.

3.1.5 What competencies supervisors need

As seen from Table 7 , nearly half of the supervisors believed they needed more pedagogical and methodological competence related to supervision. Additionally, about one-third felt they lacked knowledge about formal aspects, such as guidelines, related to the PhD program. The supervisors reported that the guidelines for the doctoral program were somewhat clear, particularly those for article-based dissertations. This perceived clarity was positively correlated ( r = 0.23, p = 0.002) with the extent to which the institution offered “continuing professional development” (CPD), and 39.88% of the supervisors stated that their institution did not provide supervisors with CPD. Thus, while many supervisors recognized the need for enhanced pedagogical and methodological skills, as well as a better understanding of formal guidelines, the availability of CPD programs was associated with clearer doctoral program guidelines. This suggests that increasing access to professional development opportunities could improve supervisors’ competence and clarity regarding program requirements, ultimately benefiting the supervision process.

Table 7 . Competencies PhD supervisors believe they need to increase.

3.1.6 Female academics with children

About four out of ten supervisors (41.07%) agreed (to a large or very large extent) that female PhDs with children seem to have more home responsibilities than men (e.g., for childcare, household, homeschooling, own children in quarantines, etc.) during the pandemic. About three out of ten (27.77%) agreed (to a large or very large extent) that female PhDs’ (with own children) submission rates to scientific journals have been delayed as a consequence of COVID-19, considering that women seem to have more home responsibilities (e.g., for childcare, household, homeschooling, own children in quarantine, etc.) during the pandemic. About two out of ten (23.64%) agreed (to a large or very large extent) that female supervisors’ (with their own children) submission rates to scientific journals have been delayed as a consequence of COVID-19, considering that women seem to have more home responsibilities (e.g., for childcare, household, homeschooling, own children in quarantine, etc.) during the pandemic.

Cronbach’s alpha ( α = 0.87) indicated a high level of consistency among three statements concerning the increased home responsibilities faced by female researchers with children compared to their male counterparts during the pandemic. These statements highlighted that female researchers with children appeared to bear more responsibilities at home, such as childcare, household tasks, and homeschooling, and as a result, their submission rates to scientific journals had been adversely affected by COVID-19. The average response (mea n = 3.18, standard deviatio n = 0.88) indicated that the supervisors were generally neutral toward these statements. However, closer inspection revealed that female supervisors (mea n = 3.29, standard deviatio n = 0.92) agreed with these statements more than male supervisors (mea n = 3.03, standard deviatio n = 0.79), a difference that was statistically significant ( p = 0.017) but with a small effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.30). There was a positive correlation ( r = 0.23, p = 0.002) between whether the PhD candidate had considered quitting the PhD program and the three statements, which suggests that supervisors who reported that PhD candidates had considered quitting also agreed more with the statements. Conversely, a negative correlation ( r = −0.21, p = 0.002) was found between considering quitting the PhD program and the belief that the institution made sufficient efforts to compensate for the lack of progress during the pandemic, indicating that better institutional support might have reduced the likelihood of candidates considering quitting.

3.2 Qualitative part (interview data and other types of qualitative data)

We conducted a cumulative data collection process where the qualitative interview guide questions were built upon previously collected quantitative data (survey). Based on a snowballing sample ( Patton, 2015 ), we recruited nine doctoral supervisors from the humanities, social-, and educational sciences with diverse experience and approaches to supervising PhD candidates during the pandemic. Using semi-structured interviews ( Brinkmann, 2022 ), each supervisor was interviewed online using Zoom with interviews lasting from 30 to 60 min. All interviews were conducted in Norwegian and later transcribed verbatim. We followed Braun and Clarke’s, (2019 , 2021) approach to reflexive thematic analysis to analyse the interview data. The themes constructed from the analysis of the interview data focus issues, such as “The Impact of the Pandemic on Supervision,” “Home Office Experience,” Workload and Employer Support,” “PhD Candidate Preparation for Article-Based Theses,” “Competence in Supervising Article-Based Theses,” and “Guidelines and Structuring the PhD Process.”

3.2.1 Analyzing the interview with Kyle

Introduction: Kyle, aged 47, specializes in professional ethics. He completed his doctoral degree through a monographic thesis and is relatively new to supervising PhD candidates, currently guiding three, two of whom he is the main supervisor.

Impact of the Pandemic : Kyle wore two hats during the pandemic: as a PhD supervisor and as a leader of a doctoral program. He noted that the pandemic did not significantly impact his supervisees due to well-planned data collection that adapted to digital formats when necessary. His role as the program leader gave him broader insights into how other candidates fared, with some experiencing difficulties in recruiting interviewees and needing to adjust their research plans accordingly.

PhD Supervision During the Pandemic : Kyle’s supervision was largely unaffected by the pandemic as most of it was conducted digitally, catering to students located in different parts of the country. He emphasized the importance of maintaining frequent contact, especially when usual social and professional gatherings were suspended. The pivot to online platforms like Zoom and increased digital communication tools helped maintain the continuity and quality of supervision.

Home Office Experience : Working from home was generally positive for Kyle, who appreciated the reduced distractions and the ability to maintain productivity with a well-equipped home office. However, he missed informal interactions with colleagues, which were hard to replicate through digital means.

Workload and Employer Support : Kyle experienced a slight increase in workload as more effort was required to monitor and support students remotely. His interactions with his Head of Department/direct manager were supportive, helping him navigate the challenges of remote supervision.

PhD Candidate Preparation for Article-Based Theses : Kyle observed that many PhD candidates were unprepared for the intricacies of article writing, including the lengthy processes of submission and peer review. He attributed this to their educational background, which primarily focused on monographic work at the bachelor’s and master’s levels.

Competence in Supervising Article-Based Theses : Although Kyle has not written a synopsis (‘kappe’, i.e., a synthesis chapter for article-based theses) himself, he feels prepared due to his involvement in supervisor training programs that include synopsis writing. He believes in collaborative supervision where co-supervisors with more experience in specific areas can complement his guidance.

Guidelines and Structuring the PhD Process : Kyle praised the clarity of guidelines regarding the synopsis writing at his program, highlighting proactive efforts to discuss and understand these guidelines among candidates and supervisors. He supports the idea of starting the synopsis early in the PhD journey, allowing candidates to develop a clear perspective on how their articles will integrate into their larger thesis narrative.

Summary: Kyle’s approach to PhD supervision during the pandemic was proactive and adapted to the challenges of remote interactions. He emphasizes the importance of clear guidelines, structured support from the academic program, and the benefits of collaborative supervision. His perspective offers valuable insights into managing PhD supervision under crisis conditions and highlights areas for potential improvement in preparing candidates for the demands of article-based theses.

3.2.2 Analyzing the interview with Sally

Introduction: Sally, aged 46, is experienced in the field of educational sciences and professional research, having supervised 15 PhD candidates to completion. She conducted her doctoral research through an article-based thesis.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates : Sally observed that the pandemic had a limited impact on most of her PhD candidates, except for 2–3 individuals who experienced delays, partially due to the pandemic. Disputations were delayed for some candidates who preferred physical attendance, affecting their completion timeline.

Adaptations in Supervision Methods: The pandemic made Sally diversify her supervision methods, including more frequent digital meetings with Zoom or Teams and asynchronous communications like email. She shifted from paper-based to digital comments on drafts, which enhanced the efficiency and immediacy of feedback. This change is something she intends to continue using beyond the pandemic.

Home Office Experience: Sally found working from home manageable and returned to the office as soon as feasible, particularly because she needed to balance work with family responsibilities. The transition to the home office did not significantly disrupt her supervision activities, though it introduced minor challenges like occasional distractions from family.

Increased Workload During the Pandemic: Sally reported a slight increase in her workload during the pandemic due to a need for more frequent communication to ensure the continuity and quality of supervision. This was compounded by the timing of her candidates being in critical phases of their thesis work.

Support from Employer: She felt that the focus of her institution’s support during the pandemic was more on ensuring that PhD candidates were well-supported rather than directly supporting the supervisors themselves.

Preparedness of PhD Candidates: Sally noted that while the PhD candidates were generally well-prepared academically, they often lacked specific training in writing article-based theses, a significant adjustment from writing monographic theses typical at the bachelor’s and master’s levels.

Competence in Supervising Article-Based Theses: Sally felt confident in her ability to supervise article-based theses despite recognizing the ongoing need to adapt and learn, particularly in managing the synthesis chapter or “kappen.”

Clarity of Guidelines for the Synopsis: She found the guidelines for writing the synopsis at her institution clear and involved in educational efforts to help candidates understand these guidelines better. However, she questioned whether standardization would improve understanding or unnecessarily restrict academic freedom.

Timing for Writing the Synopsis: Reflecting on her experience and current practices, Sally advocated for thinking about the synopsis early in the doctoral process but cautioned against producing extensive texts prematurely. She emphasized the importance of adapting the scope of the synopsis as the research evolves.

Use of Doctoral Committees’ Guidelines: Sally observed that adherence to guidelines varies depending on whether committee members are national or international, with international members often impressed by the candidate’s ability to publish in high-ranking journals.

Overall, Sally’s experiences and insights provide a nuanced view of PhD supervision during the pandemic, highlighting flexibility, adaptation, and the importance of maintaining high standards of communication and support. Her approach demonstrates a balance between structured guidance and allowing academic independence, aiming to foster resilience and adaptability among her PhD candidates.

3.2.3 Analyzing the interview with Gabbie

Introduction: Gabbie, aged 54, specializes in school and teacher education. She has supervised two PhD candidates to completion and is currently guiding four others. Her doctoral thesis was article-based.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates : Gabbie observed varied impacts of the pandemic on her PhD candidates. While two of her students were minimally affected, one faced significant challenges in data collection due to difficulties in recruiting informants. This disparity seems to have been influenced by the candidates’ approaches or perhaps their personal rapport with potential informants.

Changes in Supervision Practices: The pandemic shifted Gabbie’s supervision to entirely online formats using Zoom, Teams, or phone apps. While she was accustomed to digital interaction, the lack of informal, face-to-face interactions led to a more formal and structured supervision style. The spontaneous “corridor conversations” that often enhance relational aspects of supervision were missing, which she felt detracted from the personal connection in the supervisor-supervisee relationship.

Home Office Experience: Gabbie had a positive experience working from home, finding it efficient and beneficial due to eliminating commute times and the conducive environment at home for focused work. Her family setup supported this arrangement well, allowing her to balance work and home life effectively during the pandemic.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic: Her workload in terms of PhD supervision remained roughly the same, though the nature of interactions changed. Instead of impromptu office drop-ins, there were more scheduled meetings, primarily online via Zoom or Teams, which required a different kind of preparation and possibly led to more structured discussions.

Support from Employer: Gabbie noted a lack of specific support for supervisors from her employer during the pandemic; the focus was more on ensuring that she, like other staff, was generally coping with the pandemic’s challenges. There was an emphasis on looking out for the PhD candidates’ well-being, translating into a directive for supervisors to maintain close contact and support.

Preparedness of PhD Candidates for Article-Based Theses: Similar to Kyle and Sally, Gabbie agreed with the survey findings that many candidates are not well-prepared for writing article-based theses. She attributes this to their academic background, which primarily focuses on monograph writing. She advocates for collaborative writing for the first article to help familiarize candidates with the process of scholarly writing and peer review.

Evaluation of Own Competence in Supervising Article-Based Theses: She feels confident in her supervisory skills but acknowledges that continuous learning and discussion with peers are essential for handling complex or unfamiliar issues that arise during supervision. Gabbie appreciates the collaborative nature of the supervisory teams at her institution, which helps in managing any gaps in her experience or knowledge.

Clarity of Guidelines for the Synopsis: Gabbie finds the guidelines for writing the synopsis to be somewhat unclear and open to interpretation, suggesting that more explicit guidelines could help, especially for those new to supervising or external committee members who evaluate the theses.

When to Start Writing the Synopsis : She recommends that PhD candidates consider the synopsis throughout their doctoral journey but compile it towards the end. Gabbie advises keeping a file of potential content for the synopsis from the start of the doctoral process, which can include discarded sections from articles or ideas that do not fit into the articles but are valuable for the overarching thesis narrative.

Overall, Gabbie’s experience reflects a pragmatic and flexible approach to PhD supervision. She adapts to the demands of the pandemic while trying to maintain the quality of academic mentorship. Her strategies for managing remote supervision and her positive attitude toward the enforced changes highlight a successful adaptation to the challenges posed by the pandemic.

3.2.4 Analyzing the interview with Henrik

Introduction: Henrik, aged 46, specializes in school and educational research. He has successfully guided three PhD candidates as a primary supervisor and is supervising four more. His doctoral thesis was a monograph.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates: Henrik noted that the pandemic affected his PhD candidates differently based on the nature of their research. Those engaged in classroom interventions faced significant challenges due to pandemic-related restrictions, particularly in accessing schools and conducting fieldwork. Conversely, candidates focused on desk-based research, such as literature reviews, experienced fewer disruptions. One of his candidates, involved in empirical research, had to receive an eight-month extension due to difficulties in data collection, exacerbated by strikes in the secondary education sector.

Changes in Supervision Practices: The transition to online supervision did not significantly affect Henrik, as he was already accustomed to conducting supervision via video conferencing tools like Teams and Zoom. However, he missed the informal, face-to-face interactions that often enrich the supervisory relationship. He noted that the absence of casual corridor conversations led to a more formal and structured online interaction.

Home Office Experience: Henrik found the exclusive home office setup challenging and detrimental to his well-being. He prefers a balance between working at the office and from home. The lack of physical interaction with colleagues and the continuous remote work environment negatively impacted his mental health, requiring him to seek professional health support.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic: Henrik reported that his workload related to PhD supervision did not increase significantly during the pandemic. However, other responsibilities became more demanding, and the overall context of working from home without the usual workplace interactions made certain tasks more difficult.

Support from Employer: There was no specific support provided by his employer concerning his role as a PhD supervisor during the pandemic. Support efforts were more generalized and not tailored to the unique challenges faced by supervisors.

Concerns for PhD Candidates: Henrik was particularly concerned about the mental health of his candidates, noting that the isolation and disruption caused by the pandemic were significant stressors. He proactively discussed these issues with his candidates, acknowledging the challenges faced by those with families and those who were isolated without a support network.

Personal Health Concerns: The pandemic had a substantial impact on Henrik’s mental health, highlighting the importance of considering the well-being of supervisors along with their candidates during such crises.

Effect on Completion Times: Henrik observed that the pandemic inevitably led to delays in the completion times of his PhD candidates, with some requiring extensions. He noted a disparity in how extensions were granted, suggesting a need for more consistent criteria.

Preparation for Article-Based Theses: Henrik believes that most PhD candidates are not well-prepared to write article-based theses, as their previous academic training typically does not include writing journal articles. He spends significant time discussing the publication process with his candidates to demystify it and help them understand the expectations of journal editors and peer reviewers.

Overall Reflection: Henrik’s experience reflects the diverse impacts of the pandemic on different types of research activities and highlights the importance of flexibility and support in PhD supervision. His proactive approach to discussing mental health and the structural changes in supervision practices illustrate adaptive strategies that can be beneficial in navigating future disruptions in academic settings.

3.2.5 Analyzing the interview with Luna

Introduction: Luna, aged 55, specializes in English as an Additional Language didactics. She completed her doctoral degree with an article-based thesis and has supervised a total of 11 PhD candidates, two of whom have completed their dissertations under her primary supervision.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates : Luna discussed the varying impacts of the pandemic on her supervisees. One candidate, who was already far along in her research when the pandemic hit, was less affected in terms of supervision but faced uncertainty and stress related to her digital dissertation defense using Zoom. For two new candidates who started during the pandemic, the experience was particularly challenging. They struggled with integrating into the academic community and adapting to remote work, significantly affecting their progress and emotional well-being.

Changes in Supervision Practices : The pandemic required Luna to adapt her supervision methods, emphasizing digital communication tools and frequent check-ins via Teams, Zoom, or phone apps. She noted that these changes allowed for maintaining close communication but shifted many supervision interactions to support coping with the emotional and logistical challenges posed by the pandemic.

Home Office Experience: Luna had a positive experience working from home, which was facilitated by having enough space and a family structure that supported a conducive work environment. She did not face significant challenges balancing work and family life, which helped maintain her productivity and well-being.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic: While her direct supervision workload remained stable, Luna’s role as a researcher education coordinator significantly increased her overall responsibilities. She was deeply involved in supporting a broader range of PhD candidates beyond her direct supervisees, which included mediating between candidates and their supervisors and helping navigate the challenges posed by the pandemic.

Support from Employer: Luna felt well-supported by her employer, particularly in terms of responsiveness to her needs and concerns as she navigated her roles during the pandemic. This support was crucial in managing the increased demands on her time and ensuring the well-being of the candidates for whom she was responsible.

Concerns for PhD Candidates: Luna expressed significant concern for the mental well-being of her candidates, noting that the pandemic exacerbated feelings of isolation and stress. She was particularly worried about those who could not integrate into the academic community or faced severe disruptions in their personal lives.

Personal Health Concerns: Despite managing her workload and maintaining her health, Luna acknowledged the intense pressures of her role during the pandemic, which were compounded by the high demands of her coordinator position.

Effect on Completion Times: Luna observed that the pandemic delayed completion times for many PhD candidates, with extensions being necessary but variably granted. She emphasized the importance of transparent and equitable handling of extension requests to ensure fairness.

Preparation for Article-Based Theses: Luna believes that PhD candidates are generally underprepared for writing article-based theses, attributing this to the educational focus on monographic rather than article-based work before the PhD level. She highlighted the importance of guidance in academic writing and understanding publication processes as essential components of PhD education.

Overall Reflection: Luna’s experience during the pandemic underscores the critical role of adaptability in supervision, the importance of mental health support for PhD candidates, and the need for clear communication and guidelines in managing extended impacts on doctoral education. Her proactive approach to addressing these challenges reflects a comprehensive and empathetic supervision style aimed at supporting candidates through unprecedented times.

3.2.6 Analyzing the interview with Lydia

Introduction: Lydia, aged 52, specializes in educational research, focusing on professional development, assessment, and teacher education. She completed her doctoral degree through a monographic thesis and has supervised three PhD candidates to completion, with six currently under her guidance.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates: Lydia noted that the pandemic affected the progress of her PhD candidates, especially those with young children or those who started their projects around the onset of the pandemic. The challenges of remote work and caring for family members led to minor delays in their research timelines.

Changes in Supervision Practices: For candidates who had already started their projects, Lydia managed to continue effective supervision by meeting them on campus when possible. However, starting a supervisory relationship entirely online via Zoom or Teams with new candidates presented difficulties, particularly in building rapport and trust.

Home Office Experience: Lydia found working from home to be somewhat liberating and enjoyed the quiet environment, which contrasted with the often-hectic campus life. Her home setup, which included adult family members who managed their responsibilities independently, provided a conducive environment for work without significant distractions.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic: While the actual supervision tasks did not significantly increase in time, Lydia spent more effort on providing emotional support to her candidates. Discussions often veered from academic topics to personal well-being, reflecting the heightened anxieties and social isolation experienced by the candidates.

Support from Employer : Lydia expressed disappointment with her institution’s lack of direct support during the pandemic. The focus remained on expecting faculty to adapt and manage without specific interventions aimed at easing the transition to remote supervision or addressing the unique challenges posed by the pandemic.

Concerns for PhD Candidates: She was particularly concerned about the psychological well-being of her candidates, as many were navigating difficult life stages compounded by the pandemic. Lydia felt a strong responsibility to reassure them and help them maintain confidence in their ability to progress in their research.

Personal Health Concerns: Lydia did not report significant concerns about her own health, feeling relatively privileged and well-adapted to the circumstances. She maintained a positive outlook, supported by stable family dynamics and the ability to engage in outdoor activities, which helped preserve her mental well-being.

Effect on Completion Times: Acknowledging the inevitable delays caused by the pandemic, Lydia noted that extensions were likely necessary for most PhD candidates during this period. She appreciated that post-pandemic policies allowed for extensions to address disruptions, especially those related to family responsibilities.

Preparation for Article-Based Theses: Despite not having written a synopsis herself, Lydia observed that candidates often lack preparedness for writing article-based theses, a gap she attributes to the traditional focus on monographic work at earlier academic stages. She advocates for enhanced training and support for candidates transitioning to this format.

Overall Reflection: Lydia’s reflections reveal a nuanced understanding of the challenges faced by PhD candidates and supervisors during the pandemic. Her approach highlights the importance of flexibility, emotional support, and the need for institutions to provide clearer guidelines and more robust support systems to adapt to such unprecedented circumstances effectively. Her experience underscores the critical role of empathy and adaptability in academic leadership during crises.

3.2.7 Analyzing the interview with Michelle

Introduction: Michelle, 41, specializes in educational science, teacher education, and language didactics. She has previously supervised five PhD students to completion and is currently the main and co-supervisor for ten PhD candidates.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates: Michelle reported varied impacts of the pandemic on her PhD candidates. Those who were in the final stages of their research before the pandemic began experienced minimal disruptions, benefiting from the shift to remote work which allowed them more focused time for writing. However, candidates in earlier stages of their projects or those with young children faced significant challenges due to reduced childcare hours and the need to juggle multiple responsibilities.

Changes in Supervision Practices: The pandemic greatly affected Michelle’s ability to provide regular supervision. With the demands of her own childcare responsibilities and the limitations of remote work, the frequency and quality of her interactions with her PhD candidates suffered. Supervision sessions were delayed, and Michelle had to adjust her practices, often conducting meetings via phone, online with Zoom or Teams, or in socially distanced outdoor settings.

Home Office Experience: Michelle found working from home to be extremely challenging, particularly due to the presence of young children and the constant interruptions that blurred the lines between work and home life. She experienced a persistent sense of being unable to adequately meet all her responsibilities as a supervisor and a parent.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic : Her workload related to PhD supervision became more demanding due to the difficulties in maintaining regular and effective communication. Michelle had to find creative ways to support her students, which often meant extended work hours and adapting to less conventional interaction methods.

Support from Employer: Michelle expressed significant disappointment with the lack of support from her employer during the pandemic. She felt that the institutions did not provide clear guidelines or additional support for managing the unique challenges brought on by the pandemic, leaving supervisors to manage as best they could under difficult circumstances.

Concerns for PhD Candidates: Michelle was particularly concerned about the psychological well-being of her candidates, noting that the isolation and disruptions affected different groups in varied ways. She observed that while parents were stressed and overextended, single young men often felt isolated and unproductive, which sometimes led to detrimental lifestyle changes.

Personal Health Concerns: Michelle mentioned that, like many in academia, she was accustomed to working excessively and did not have time to focus on her own health due to the demands of the pandemic situation.

Effect on Completion Times: Michelle anticipated that the pandemic would likely extend the completion times for many PhD candidates due to delays in data collection and the general disruption of academic schedules. She noted that while some extensions were granted, many were not, which added to the stress and uncertainty for the candidates.

Preparation for Article-Based Theses: Michelle believes that PhD candidates are generally not well-prepared to write article-based theses, which is often not addressed until during the PhD program itself. She emphasized the importance of structuring doctoral education to prepare better candidates for the realities of academic publishing and the peer review process.

Overall Reflection: Michelle’s experience during the pandemic highlights the complex challenges faced by PhD supervisors. Her insights underscore the need for better institutional support and clearer guidelines to navigate such unprecedented situations. Her commitment to adapting her supervisory practices despite personal and professional challenges demonstrates her dedication to her role and the success of her students.

3.2.8 Analyzing the interview with Ollie

Introduction: Ollie, aged 55, specializes in educational science and has completed his doctoral degree with a monograph. He has guided one PhD candidate to completion and is currently supervising three, with one about to defend their thesis.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates: Ollie noted significant disruptions for his PhD candidates due to the pandemic. One candidate was fortunate to have completed major data collection just before lockdowns, which somewhat insulated their progress. However, others struggled as their research depended heavily on data collection in schools, which became nearly impossible due to access restrictions and subsequent strikes affecting the school system.

Changes in Supervision Practices: While the physical data collection was hindered, Ollie found digital supervision effective, especially for discussing and editing texts. He appreciated the direct focus on the text that digital platforms such as Teams or Zoom facilitated, contrasting with the sometimes-awkward setups of physical meetings. Nonetheless, the lack of access to schools for his candidates meant there was less content to supervise, which altered the dynamics of his guidance.

Home Office Experience: Ollie had a relatively positive experience working from home, appreciating the convenience and reduced commute time. He noted that being at home allowed for a more relaxed dress code and flexible work hours, although he acknowledged a potential for decreased social interaction and the blurring of work-life boundaries.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic: Ollie’s workload in terms of PhD supervision remained largely the same, but the nature of the supervision changed. He spent more time helping candidates pivot their projects to adapt to the new realities, which included more discussions and finding alternative approaches to research obstacles.

Support from Employer: Ollie felt that there was a lack of specific support for PhD supervisors from his employer during the pandemic. The focus seemed to be more on undergraduate and master’s students, with little attention paid to the challenges faced by PhD candidates and their supervisors.

Concerns for PhD Candidates: He was concerned about the delays and the psychological impact on his students, noting the challenges of maintaining motivation and morale under such uncertain and stressful conditions.

Personal Health Concerns: Ollie was proactive about maintaining his physical health during the pandemic, investing in ergonomic furniture to ensure comfort while working from home. He did not express concerns about his psychological health, suggesting a pragmatic approach to dealing with the pandemic’s challenges.

Effect on Completion Times: He anticipated that the pandemic would significantly delay his PhD candidates’ completion times, mainly due to disrupted data collection processes. Ollie stressed the importance of data quality and how difficulties in data collection could impact the overall quality of doctoral research and subsequent publication opportunities.

Overall Reflection: Ollie’s insights reflect a nuanced understanding of the diverse challenges posed by the pandemic to doctoral education. His adaptation to online supervision using videoconferencing platforms such as Zoom or Teams highlights the potential benefits of digital platforms for focused academic work, even as he recognizes the significant disruptions to traditional research pathways. His experience underscores the need for institutions to provide more robust support systems for doctoral candidates and supervisors, ensuring that doctoral training quality and integrity are maintained even in adverse circumstances.

3.2.9 Analyzing the interview with Tyler

Introduction: Tyler, aged 60, specializes in the philosophy of science, organization, and educational leadership. He completed his doctorate with a monograph and has guided two PhD candidates to completion, with four currently under his supervision.

Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Candidates: The pandemic significantly disrupted the plans of Tyler’s PhD candidates, particularly affecting those involved in international collaborations and empirical research. One candidate missed a crucial research stay in Italy, impacting their opportunity to engage with an international academic community. Another had to revise their empirical approach due to restricted access to schools, which was a common issue during the pandemic.

Changes in Supervision Practices: Tyler’s supervision was heavily affected by the pandemic, with all interactions moving to digital platforms, including Teams and Zoom. This shift resulted in less frequent and less personal guidance, which he felt was less effective than the planned intensive seminars abroad. Like Ollie, however, Tyler noted some benefits to digital supervision using videoconferencing platforms, such as the ability to engage with text during sessions directly.

Home Office Experience: Initially, Tyler took on additional teaching responsibilities to compensate for colleagues struggling with digital formats, which increased his workload. Over time, he found a rhythm of working from home and even appreciated the focused time that allowed him to complete a book. He alternated working from home and the office, leveraging the strengths of both environments to maintain productivity.

Workload Changes During the Pandemic: Tyler’s workload in terms of PhD supervision did not increase significantly. Digital Teams or Zoom meetings tended to be shorter and more focused, which somewhat compensated for the increased preparatory work required for effective digital instruction.

Support from Employer: Tyler expressed frustration with his institution’s management during the pandemic, particularly concerning doctoral courses and the increased bureaucratic oversight that he felt stifled academic freedom. He noted a lack of focus on the needs of PhD supervisors and candidates compared to other groups within the university.

Concerns for PhD Candidates: While not overly concerned about the mental and physical health of his candidates, Tyler was worried about the practical aspects of their research, especially those needing to conduct fieldwork, which was severely impacted by the pandemic restrictions.

Personal Health Concerns: Tyler did not express particular concerns about his health; however, he took proactive measures to ensure a comfortable working environment by investing in ergonomic office equipment.

Effect on Completion Times: Tyler anticipated that the pandemic would extend the completion times for his PhD candidates, especially due to disruptions in data collection and the broader impact on academic research activities.

Overall Reflection: Tyler’s experiences reflect the complex challenges faced by academic supervisors during the pandemic, balancing the shift to digital platforms with maintaining academic rigor and support for their candidates. His story highlights the need for institutions to provide better support and flexibility for supervisors and PhD candidates during crises, ensuring that academic standards and well-being are maintained. Tyler’s ability to adapt and find personal benefits during the pandemic, such as completing a book, also underscores the potential for finding opportunities in the face of challenges.

3.2.10 Comprehensive analysis of the Main findings across nine interviews of doctoral supervisors in Norway

3.2.10.1 overview.

This analysis integrates the findings from interviews with nine doctoral supervisors in Norway, structured by the interview guide (based on the main findings from the survey) and analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s (2021) approach to reflexive thematic analysis. The analysis focuses on how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the progression of PhD candidates and the corresponding changes in supervision practices.

Main Themes Identified:

1. Impact of the Pandemic on PhD Progression:

• Disruptions in Data Collection : Most supervisors reported significant disruptions in their candidates’ ability to collect data, especially those requiring access to external facilities like schools or international institutions. This was primarily due to lockdowns and restrictions imposed to curb the spread of the virus. As one supervisor noted: “One of my candidates had to delay their project significantly due to the inability to collect data as schools were not accessible.” (Ollie)

• Adaptations in Research Plans : Many candidates had to alter their research methodologies or adjust their empirical scopes to suit the new constraints, highlighting the flexibility required under crisis conditions. However, one of the supervisors mentioned that: “It affected them very differently. I had three candidates before the pandemic, and two of them were barely affected. However, the third struggled significantly with data collection due to difficulties in recruiting informants.” (Gabbie)

2. Changes in Supervision Practices:

• Shift to Digital Supervision : All supervisors transitioned to online platforms for conducting supervision, such as Zoom, Teams, or phone apps (e.g., Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp). While some found digital tools effective for sharing and reviewing written work, others felt the lack of physical presence reduced the quality of interaction and guidance they could provide. As one supervisor noted: “Digital supervision worked very well because it allowed sharing and discussing texts more effectively than in-person meetings. This actually enhanced the focus on the text during sessions” (Ollie).

• Increased Need for Emotional Support : Supervisors noted an increased need to support the psychological well-being of their candidates, as many struggled with isolation and stress due to the pandemic. As one supervisor noted: “I was particularly attentive to the mental health of my candidates, especially those without local family support. Regular check-ins were crucial during this period” (Gabbie).

3. Work Environment and Work-Life Balance:

• Home Office Challenges : Responses about working from home were mixed; some supervisors appreciated the flexibility and reduced commute times, while others struggled with distractions and the blending of personal and professional spaces. As one supervisor mentioned: “I actually enjoyed working from home as it provided a peaceful environment, but I missed the informal interactions with colleagues.” (Lydia)

• Institutional Support : There was a notable lack of targeted support for supervisors from their institutions. This often left supervisors and their candidates feeling overlooked in broader university responses to the pandemic. As one supervisor noted: “There was no specific support for me as a PhD supervisor during the pandemic. The general support was the same as for all staff members” (Lydia).

4. Professional Development and Academic Output:

• Delays in Academic Milestones : The pandemic delayed key academic milestones, including thesis submissions and defenses, primarily due to halted data collection and extended research timelines.

• Publication Challenges : The disruption also impacted candidates’ abilities to publish their research, a crucial component of their academic careers, due to delays and changes in their research projects.

Integration of Findings with Saldaña’s Coding Framework and Interview Guide:

• Using Saldaña’s coding method allowed for identifying recurring challenges and adaptations among the supervisors’ experiences. The thematic analysis revealed a consistent need for increased flexibility in research planning and supervision methods.

• The interview guide helped maintain a focus on how the pandemic specifically impacted various aspects of PhD supervision and candidate progression. It ensured that all relevant areas, such as changes in work routines, supervision adjustments, and overall impacts on PhD timelines, were systematically explored.

Comprehensive Assessment : The interviews collectively underscore the resilience and adaptability required by PhD candidates and their supervisors during the pandemic. They highlight several areas for improvement:

• Enhanced Institutional Support : Institutions clearly need to provide more structured support tailored to the needs of PhD candidates and supervisors during crises.

• Flexibility in Research and Supervision Plans : Adapting research plans and supervision methods to accommodate unexpected disruptions is crucial for maintaining the integrity and continuity of PhD education.

• Focus on Mental Health : The increased emotional and psychological support needed by candidates suggests that institutions should integrate mental health resources more fully into their doctoral training programs.

• Preparedness and Training : The experience has shown the importance of preparing PhD candidates for unexpected changes in their research environment, including training in digital tools and remote research methodologies.

In conclusion, the pandemic has not only disrupted traditional PhD education paths but also provided insights into how flexibility, digital preparedness, and institutional support can be enhanced to better prepare for future crises. These insights are vital for shaping resilient and adaptive academic environments that can withstand global challenges while supporting doctoral candidates’ academic and personal well-being.

From the analysis of the nine interviews, a few aspects stood out as particularly notable, offering deeper insights (expansion) into the unique challenges and responses within the context of PhD supervision during the pandemic:

1. Resilience and Innovation in Supervision:

• Some supervisors noted that despite the significant challenges, the shift to digital platforms allowed them to explore new forms of engagement with texts and supervision methods. For example, one supervisor highlighted the effectiveness of digital tools for collaborative work on documents, suggesting that these might even surpass traditional face-to-face interactions in certain aspects. This adaptation was a positive takeaway that some found surprising and worth integrating into their post-pandemic practices.

2. Diverse Impacts on Different Research Types:

• The differential impact of the pandemic on empirical versus theoretical research was striking. Supervisors of candidates who needed to conduct fieldwork, especially in schools or abroad, faced severe disruptions. As one supervisor noted: “We had to adjust research plans significantly, shifting to alternative data sources and methods where possible.” (Kyle). In contrast, those whose work was more theoretical or could be conducted remotely experienced fewer setbacks. This variance highlighted certain types of research vulnerability to external disruptions, which was a notable point of concern.

3. Underestimation of Emotional Challenges:

• Another well known, but still important aspect was the depth of emotional and psychological impacts on PhD candidates as noted by their supervisors. The extent to which these challenges affected the candidates’ productivity and well-being was significant and perhaps underappreciated by the institutions themselves. This underscores a critical area for future academic support systems to address more robustly.

4. Lack of Institutional Support:

• The widespread sentiment of insufficient institutional support was particularly striking. Several supervisors felt that there was a lack of targeted strategies to support PhD supervision during the pandemic. This lack of support was not just in terms of transitioning to online modes but also in addressing the specific needs of PhD candidates and their projects during such a disruptive period.

5. The Positive Impact of Forced Adaptation:

• Interestingly, some supervisors pointed out that the forced adaptation to new circumstances led to unexpected benefits, such as enhanced focus and productivity in certain cases, and even opportunities for personal and professional growth, such as writing a book or developing new teaching methods. These outcomes, while not universal, were surprising positives that emerged from a generally challenging time.

The sentiment analysis of the 9 interviews (see attachment 4 in the Supplementary file ) showed some individual variations, but that resilience and adaptability among doctoral supervisors during the pandemic were quite common. Supervisors recognized the challenges but overall maintained a positive and proactive stance, focusing on solutions and effective management of their supervisory roles. The objective nature of their responses indicates a practical approach to dealing with the pandemic’s impact, emphasizing the importance of communication, adaptation to remote supervision, and institutional support.

These insights not only highlight the varied experiences of PhD supervisors during the pandemic but also suggest areas for improvement in how institutions support doctoral education in times of crisis. The resilience and innovative approaches developed during this period could inform future policies and practices to better support PhD candidates and supervisors alike.

3.2.11 Integrated analysis: the main findings from the interviews and the open survey responses

To integrate and analyze the findings from the interviews (see attachment 1) and the 1,483 open survey responses (see attachment 2) from the survey among 293 doctoral supervisors, we can draw on several key themes and concerns that emerge consistently across these data sources. This approach will help us understand the broader implications of the insights gathered from different perspectives within the same study.

1. Adaptation to Digital Tools and Platforms:

• Interviews : The interviews highlighted how supervisors adapted to using digital tools for communication and supervision. This was generally seen as effective but lacking in certain qualitative aspects, particularly in building deeper relationships and managing more nuanced discussions.

• Open Survey Responses : The survey also reflected a reliance on digital tools, with many supervisors recognizing their utility in maintaining continuity. However, there was also an acknowledgment of the challenges in fully replicating face-to-face interactions.

2. Ethical and Practical Concerns with Digital Supervision:

• Interviews : Concerns were raised about the relational and ethical implications of the lack of physical presence and interaction, and the extensive use of digital tools in academic settings during the pandemic.

• Open Survey Responses : Similar concerns were noted, with supervisors emphasizing the importance of ensuring academic integrity and the genuine intellectual development of PhD candidates.

3. Impact of the Pandemic on Supervisory Practices:

• Interviews : The pandemic’s impact was a significant theme, affecting the logistical aspects of supervision and the mental well-being of both supervisors and their candidates.

• Open Survey Responses : Responses indicated varied impacts of the pandemic, with some supervisors noting increased stress and difficulty in maintaining research productivity and supervisory quality.

4. Institutional Support and Professional Development:

• Interviews : There was a noted lack of sufficient institutional support for adapting to new modes of supervision and research during the pandemic.

• Open Survey Responses : This theme was echoed in the survey responses, with mixed reports about the availability and effectiveness of continuing professional development (CPD) related to research supervision. Some respondents felt unsupported, particularly in navigating the challenges posed by remote supervision and digital tools.

5. Preparedness of PhD Candidates:

• Interviews : Discussions highlighted concerns about the varying levels of preparedness among PhD candidates, especially in writing the synopsis and adapting to new research methodologies that include digital tools and remote data collection.

• Open Survey Responses : Supervisors expressed a range of experiences regarding candidate preparedness. While some noted their candidates were well-equipped, others pointed out significant gaps, especially in writing the synopsis and article-based theses and handling the referee process, the timeline and complex research independently.

6. Valuation of Supervision:

• Interviews : Supervisors discussed feeling that their efforts were not adequately valued by institutions, with a need for greater recognition and support for their roles.

• Open Survey Responses : This sentiment was reinforced by survey data, where some supervisors felt that their contributions to doctoral training were undervalued by their institutions, particularly when compared to other academic duties.

7. Suggestions for Institutional Changes:

• Interviews : There were calls for institutions to adapt more proactively to the changing landscape of doctoral education, including better training for using digital tools and more robust support systems for both supervisors and candidates.

• Open Survey Responses : Supervisors suggested various improvements, such as more structured professional development opportunities, better guidelines for remote supervision, and enhanced support for mental health and well-being.

3.2.12 Summary

The integrated analysis across interviews and open survey responses suggests a complex landscape of doctoral supervision during and potentially beyond the pandemic era. Key themes highlight both challenges and potential areas for policy and practice enhancements:

• Digital Adaptation and Ethical Concerns : While digital tools have provided necessary solutions for continuity in supervision, they bring up ethical concerns that institutions need to address more thoroughly, particularly concerning academic integrity and the quality of student learning.

• Support and Development Needs : There is a clear need for institutions to offer more targeted support and development opportunities for supervisors, addressing both the technical aspects of digital supervision and the broader pedagogical skills required in a changing academic environment.

• Recognition and Valuation of Supervision : Supervisors feel that their work is not sufficiently valued, suggesting that institutions should reevaluate how they recognize and support supervisory roles within the academic career framework.

• Candidate Preparedness : There is variability in how prepared PhD candidates are for the demands of modern doctoral research, indicating the need for more robust preparatory programs and entry assessments.

• These insights call for a strategic reassessment of doctoral training programs, supervisory support mechanisms, and institutional policies to better align with the evolving needs of both supervisors and their candidates.

4 Limitations and future research

The present study provides in-depths insights into PhD supervision during the pandemic; however, the study also has several limitations apart from inherited limitations of self-reports and interview data. Firstly, the findings might be context-specific to the educational setting in Norway. The unique characteristics of the Norwegian educational system, cultural aspects, and institutional structures may not be entirely generalizable to other countries. However, the globalization of doctoral education, with increasing international collaborations, international publishing, and standardization of academic practices, might mitigate this issue to some extent, making the findings relevant beyond the Norwegian context. Secondly, the study lacks data on PhD supervisors’ experiences prior to the pandemic. This absence of baseline data means we cannot directly compare the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. Nonetheless, the experiences reported in this study correspond well with prior research on academic supervision ( Pyhältö et al., 2012 , 2023 ; Löfström et al., 2024 ), indicating that the challenges and adaptations observed are not entirely unprecedented, even if intensified by the pandemic context.

Future research should aim to explore the long-lasting impacts of COVID-19 on doctoral education. It is necessary to investigate whether the changes observed in supervisory practices during the pandemic are fleeting or have led to a permanent shift in how supervision is approached. Specifically, studies should examine if new models of remote supervision, increased flexibility, and the use of digital tools will continue to be integrated into doctoral education post-pandemic, or if traditional methods will resume dominance. This is of special interest in cases where PhD supervisors and PhD candidates are located at different institutions. By addressing these questions, future research can contribute to a deeper understanding of the pandemic’s legacy on doctoral education.

5 Conclusion

In this article we examined the experiences of PhD supervisors in Norway during the pandemic to answer the research questions:

1. To what extent has the COVID-19 pandemic impeded the PhD supervisors’ frame factors on the micro- level, and how do they perceive this situation?

2. To what extent has the COVID-19 pandemic influenced PhD supervisors’ frame factors on the meso- level, and how do they perceive this situation?

We conducted a cumulative data collection process and analysis, where survey questions were based on previously collected field dialog data, online observation data, seminar evaluation data, and document analysis data. The qualitative interview guide questions were built upon previously collected quantitative data (survey), and the Supplementary data was based on previously collected quantitative data (survey) and qualitative interview data.

The coherence between qualitative and quantitative findings is mainly examined based on confirmation , expansion , or discordance in this article ( Fetters et al., 2013 ).

The findings from the explorative case study revealed that the PhD supervisors faced numerous challenges during the pandemic, both professionally and personally. They found digital supervision with their PhD fellows via platforms like Teams and Zoom to be convenient and efficient but occasionally lacking in quality. They also encountered difficulties in addressing the psychosocial aspects of their PhD candidates’ experiences and faced various research-related challenges with their PhD-candidates during the pandemic. For PhD supervisors who extensively worked from home over a long period, the situation created new conditions that affected their job performance. These altered conditions hindered their research capacity, their ability to follow up with their PhD candidates and their capacity to fulfill other job responsibilities. Although the PhD supervisors received support during the pandemic, it seems that the incremental measures provided were insufficient. The PhD regulations were established before the pandemic under normal conditions and for normal circumstances. However, it appears that no significant adjustments have been made to accommodate the extraordinary pandemic conditions, which have altered some aspects of their professional roles as academics and PhD supervisors. This was particularly critical for PhD supervisors with young children, especially female supervisors, who had to deal with lockdowns, social distancing, remote work, homeschooling, quarantine for themselves and their children, and COVID-19 illness, since the data showed that they seemed to have more home responsibilities than men during the pandemic. We also found that some supervisors thought that female PhDs’ (with own children) submission rates to scientific journals have been delayed as a consequence of COVID-19, considering that women seem to have more home responsibilities. In addition, the supervisors thought that female supervisors (with own children) submission rates to scientific journals have been delayed as a consequence of COVID-19, considering that female supervisors seem also to have more home responsibilities (e.g., for childcare, household etc.).

This slow-motion disaster lasted up to 20 months and can be perceived as an “external intervention” or a naturalistic experiment which was impossible to predict for universities and society. The case study results indicate that it is more important than ever to plan for the unforeseen in order to be better prepared for the next societal crisis. Therefore, it is important to be vigilant and understand the gap between the formulation, transformation, and realization arenas when it comes to the distinction between incremental, semi-structural changes and fundamental changes in PhD regulations and guidelines brought on by societal crises. Although some support from employers has been offered, the overall PhD guidelines, regulations, and supervision norms remained unchanged in the transformation arena (meso- level) during the pandemic. On a general level, this highlights the need for better crisis preparedness at the doctoral level in the years to come.

A common finding related to RQ1 and RQ2 and across the different data sources was that the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted some of the PhD supervisors in different ways on both micro- and meso-levels, and some of them perceive this long-lasting pandemic challenging and difficult, while others have experienced this to a lesser degree. This reveals a confirmation across the quantitative and qualitative data in the study. Also, these findings mostly confirmed and expanded on the understanding of the impact of the pandemic on PhD candidates ( Krumsvik et al., 2022 ), with some minor discordance.

More specifically, the PhD supervisors in the study were somewhat satisfied with the educational quality regarding digital teaching but experienced various supervision, research-related and psycho-social challenges. Although some of the supervisors received support during the pandemic, it seems like the majority did not receive sufficient support and their workload increased significantly during the pandemic. This is due to the high complexity of frame factors that have changed the underlying premises for doctoral education during the pandemic, affecting both the PhD- supervision and the PhD candidates’ feasibility on several levels. The regulations for PhD scholarships and PhD regulations, implemented before the pandemic in 2018, were designed under normal educational and social conditions and may not fully address the challenges faced during the pandemic. Therefore, this study shows that to reduce this gap and strengthen the feasibility of the PhDs and the frame factors for PhD-supervision, the institutions must significantly enhance their preparedness to effectively manage demanding situations at both micro- and meso-levels, ensuring they are fully equipped to address future societal crises of a similar nature.

When it comes to RQ3 we find both confirmation, expansion, and discordance across the quantitative and qualitative data. We find confirmation across the quantitative and qualitative data when it comes to the variability in preparedness of PhD candidates for writing the article-based thesis. Article-based theses present unique challenges compared to traditional monograph-based dissertations, particularly in terms of integration and the breadth of skills required. One of the primary challenges with article-based theses is integrating articles that may cover slightly different aspects of a research topic into a coherent overall thesis. This integration is critical, it requires a high level of academic writing skills and ability to secure the coherence of the synopsis. Candidates often come into PhD programs with varying levels of experience in academic writing and publication. The survey and interviews, as well as Supplementary data , indicate that many candidates are not well-prepared for writing article-based theses, highlighting a need for more targeted training in academic writing and publishing early in the doctoral process. The need for robust supervisory support is acutely felt in guiding article-based theses, where candidates must navigate the complexities of publishing in peer-reviewed journals alongside synthesizing their research in the synopsis. This implies that PhD-candidates both are taking a doctoral degree in the Norwegian context and at the same time are publishing articles for the international research context, which can be challenging.

We find expansion when it comes to the need to have guidelines for the synopsis. Supervisors reported significant variation in the guidelines for the synopsis across institutions, both in the qualitative and quantitative part, which can lead to confusion and inconsistency in expectations for candidates and supervisors. Some respondents found these guidelines sufficient, while others find them unclear or obscure, complicating their task of effectively guiding PhD candidates. Clear, comprehensible guidelines are essential for ensuring that the synopsis effectively synthesizes the research in a manner that meets academic standards ( Wollenschläger et al., 2016 ).

And we find some discordance regarding variability in candidate preparedness where both strands of the data indicated a significant variability in how prepared PhD candidates are when they enroll in doctoral programs. Candidates’ preparedness often depends on their previous educational experiences, which can vary widely regarding exposure to research methods, academic writing, and critical thinking skills. The variability in preparedness suggests a need for more robust preparatory programs to equip all incoming doctoral candidates with the necessary skills and knowledge to succeed in their research endeavors. Implementing comprehensive entry assessments could help identify specific areas where candidates might need additional support, allowing programs to tailor preparatory courses or early doctoral training to address these gaps.

These findings collectively point to a need for doctoral programs to clarify guidelines, particularly for the synopsis in article-based theses, to enhance support for supervisory roles, and to develop preparatory programs that address the broad variability in candidate preparedness. This is also based on research on the need for rubrics ( Wollenschläger et al., 2016 ), which shows that transparency around requirements and guidelines is important for students learning. By tackling these issues, institutions can better prepare PhD candidates for the demands of modern doctoral research, ultimately leading to more consistent and successful outcomes in doctoral education. And despite that only 20 (8.3%) of the supervisors agreed or strongly agreed that they were supervising a PhD candidate who had considered quitting the PhD program during the pandemic, it is important to be vigilant around the (complex) reasons that causes this, since this is in many ways a drastic decision, first of all for the candidate themselves, but also for the supervisors, as well as for the society in general who has invested almost 5 million Norwegian kroner in each PhD-scholarship. Dropping out can partly be related to the observed findings that many PhD candidates were unprepared for the intricacies of article writing, including the lengthy processes of submission and peer review, attached to their educational background, which primarily focused on monographic work at the bachelor’s and master’s levels. This also implies that while PhD’s are perceived, assessed and evaluated as student/candidates when they are completing assignments in a doctoral program, there might be a quite new situation for them when they submit their articles to scientific journals with blind review, where they are evaluated as other researchers (and not only as students/candidates). Such findings (and similar findings) seem to go “under the radar” in doctoral programs in Norway and by taking into account such “tacit knowledge” we might be better prepared to bridge the formulation arena and realization arena within doctoral education in the years to come. This development also demands a vigilance within doctoral education of the importance of theory development within doctoral education since international research shows that doctoral supervision is under-theorized and lacks a solid knowledge base ( Halse and Malfroy, 2010 ; Halse, 2011 ) where also eclectic use of theories ( Dalland et al., 2023 ) can improve this area.

Author note

GPT-4o ( OpenAI, 2024 ) was employed in this article to translate interview findings to English after a general thematic analysis conducted in Norwegian and as one of several validity communities for the open survey responses. The GPT-4’s output was manually examined, edited, and reviewed by the authors. The sentiment analysis of the 9 interviews was done by the first author and by using the GPT-4o. Then it was carried out a validation of this sentiment analysis by SurveyMonkey ( SurveyMonkey, 2024 ), Claude ( Anthropic, 2024 ) and Gemini Advanced ( Google, 2024 ).

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary material , further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author contributions

RK: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. FR: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Validation, Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft. ØSk: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. LJ: Conceptualization, Data curation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. SS: Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. ØSa: Data curation, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. KH: Methodology, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all doctoral supervisors for their responses to the surveys and for participating in interviews and focus groups on this study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2024.1436521/full#supplementary-material

1. ^ Some of the Norwegian statistic from universities shows the following: about parental leave (day’s work) (women 69%, men 31%), sick children (day’s work) (women 69%, men 31%), self-certified sick leave (day’s work) (women 65%, men 35%) and doctor-certified sick leave (day’s work) (women 72%, men 28%) during one of the year in the pandemic ( Krumsvik et al., 2022 ).

Andres, L., Bengtsen, S. S. E., Gallego Castaño, L., Crossouard, B., Keefer, J. M., and Pyhältö, K. (2015). Drivers and interpretations of doctoral education today: National Comparisons. Frontline Learn. Res. 3, 5–22. doi: 10.14786/flr.v3i3.177

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Anthropic. (2024). Claude 3. Large Language Model (version 14. March 2024) . San Francisco. Available at: https://claude.ai/new

Google Scholar

Baklien, B. (2004). Følgeforskning. Sosiologi i Dag 34, 49–66.

Bastalich, W. (2017). Content and context in knowledge production: a critical review of doctoral supervision literature. Stud. High. Educ. 42, 1145–1157. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2015.1079702

Bengtsen, S. S. E. (2023). “Doctoral education in-the-world: (dis)connections between research and society” in From splendid isolation to global engagement . eds. B. Wolf, T. Schmohl, L. Buhin-Krenek, and M. Stricker (WBV Media), 43–55.

Börgeson, E., Sotak, M., Kraft, J., Bagunu, G., Biörserud, C., and Lange, S. (2021). Challenges in PhD education due to COVID-19- disrupted supervision or business as usual: a cross-sectional survey of Swedish biomedical sciences graduate students. BMC Med. Educ. 21:294. doi: 10.1186/s12909-021-02727-3

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Braun, V., and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3, 77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N., and Terry, G. (2019). “Thematic analysis” in Handbook of research methods in health social sciences . ed. P. Liamputtong (Singapore: Springer), 843–860.

Braun, V., and Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: a practical guide. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Braun, V., and Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health , 11, 589–597. doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806

Brinkmann, S. (2022). Qualitative Interviewing: Conversational Knowledge Through Research Interviews (2 ed.) . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Burner, T., Bjerkholt, E., Gaathaug, A. V., Kleiven, S., and Ljoså, T. M. (2020). Doctorateness across higher education Institutionsin Norway. Uniped 43, 3–18. doi: 10.18261/issn.1893-8981-2020-01-02

Creswell, J. W., and Guetterman, T. C. (2021). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research . 6th Edn. Hoboken, NJ: Pearson.

Creswell, J. W., and Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research . 3rd Edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dake, D. K., and Gyimah, E. (2023). Using sentiment analysis to evaluate qualitative students’ responses. Educ. Inf. Technol. 28, 4629–4647. doi: 10.1007/s10639-022-11349-1

Dalland, C. P., Blikstad-Balas, M., and Svenkerud, S. (2023). Eklektisk bruk av teori i doktorgradsavhandlinger innen utdanningsforskning. Acta Didactica Norden 17, 1–24. doi: 10.5617/adno.9837

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of Management Review , 14, 532–550. doi: 10.2307/258557

Ertesvåg, S. K., Sammons, P., and Blossing, U. (2021). Integrating data in a complex mixed-methods classroom interaction study. Br. Educ. Res. J. 47, 654–673. doi: 10.1002/berj.3678

European University Association (EUA) (2010). “Salzburg II” in Recommendations. European universities’ achievements since 2005 in implementing the Salzburg principles (Brussels: European University Association (EUA)).

European University Association (EUA) (2015). Annual Report 2015 . Brussels: European University Association (EUA).

Fetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., and Creswell, J. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs—principles and practices. Health Serv. Res. 48, 2134–2156. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12117

Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). “Case study” in The SAGE handbook of qualitative research . eds. N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln. 4th ed (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage), 301–316.

Hall, J., and Mansfield, L. (2023). The benefits and complexities of integrating mixed method findings using the pillar integration process: a workplace health intervention case study. J. Mixed Methods Res. doi: 10.1177/15586898231196287

Gehrke, P. (2018). “Ecological validity” in The SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation . Ed. B. Frey. (Thousand Oaks: Sage), 563–565.

Google. (2024). Gemini Advanced. Large Language Model (version 20 May 2024) . Menlo Park, California. Available at: https://gemini.google.com/advanced?hl=no

Halse, C. (2011). ‘Becoming a supervisor’: the impact of doctoral supervision on supervisors’ learning. Stud. High. Educ. 36, 557–570. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2011.594593

Halse, C., and Malfroy, J. (2010). Retheorizing doctoral supervision as professional work. Stud. High. Educ. 35, 79–92. doi: 10.1080/03075070902906798

Hyett, N., Kenny, A., and Dickson-Swift, V. (2014). Methodology or method? A critical review of qualitative case study reports. Int. J. Qual. Stud. Health Well Being 9:23606. doi: 10.3402/qhw.v9.23606

Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., and Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. J. Mixed Methods Res. 1, 112–133. doi: 10.1177/1558689806298224

Kálmán, O., Horváth, L., Kardos, D., Kozma, B., Feyisa, M. B., and Rónay, Z. (2022). Review of benefits and challenges of co-supervision in doctoral education. Eur. J. Educ. 57, 452–468. doi: 10.1111/ejed.12518

Krumsvik, R. J. (2016a). Noen betraktninger om forskningsveiledning PhD- nivå (some considerations about supervision at the doctoral level). In R. J. Krumsvik. En doktorgradsutdanning i endring – Med fokus på den artikkelbaserte PhD- avhandlingen (a doctoral education in alteration – With focus on the article-based PhD thesis) (pp. 125–148). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.

Krumsvik, R. J. (2016b). The synopsis of article-based theses. In R. J. Krumsvik. En doktorgradsutdanning i endring – Med fokus på den artikkelbaserte PhD- avhandlingen (a doctoral education in alteration – With focus on the article-based PhD thesis) (pp. 93–123). Fagbokforlaget.

Krumsvik, R. J. (2017). Trenerene i den akademiske maraton (The trainers in the academic marathon). Utdanningsforskning (Educational Research) , Oslo: The Educational Association. 1–3.

Krumsvik, R. J., and Jones, L. Ø. (2016). Hvorfor dropper “kronjuvelen” ut? (why do the “crown jewels” drop out?). Tidsskrift for Norsk Psykologforening 12, 1022–1024.

Krumsvik, R. J., Jones, L. Ø., Leer-Salvesen, K., Høydal, K. L., and Røkenes, F. M. (2019). Face-to-face and remote teaching in a doctoraleducation course: using flipped classroom, formative assessment and remoteteaching to increase the teaching quality of a literature reviewcourse. Uniped 42, 194–214. doi: 10.18261/issn.1893-8981-2019-02-07

Krumsvik, R. J., Mæland, B., and Solstad, S. H. (2021). “Doctoral education in Norway and inter-institutional collaboration within doctoral education” in The future of doctoral research . eds. A. Lee and R. Bongaardt. 1st ed. (New York, NY: Routledge), 110–119.

Krumsvik, R. J., Øfstegaard, M., and Jones, L. Ø. (2016a). Retningslinjer og vurderingskriterier for artikkelbasert PhD. Uniped 39, 78–93. doi: 10.18261/issn.1893-8981-2016-01-07

Krumsvik, R. J., Øfstegaard, M., and Jones, L. Ø. (2016b). Retningslinjer og vurderingskriterier for artikkelbasert PhD-avhandling (guidelines and assessment criteria for article-based doctoral thesis). In R. J. Krumsvik. En doktorgradsutdanning i endring – Med fokus på den artikkelbaserte PhD-avhandlingen (a doctoral education in alteration – With focus on the article-based PhD thesis) (pp. 78–93). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget, 39.

Krumsvik, R. J., and Røkenes, F. M. (2016). Literature review in the PhD thesis. In R. J. Krumsvik. En doktorgradsutdanning i endring – Med fokus på den artikkelbaserte PhD-avhandlingen (a doctoral education in alteration – With focus on the article-based PhD thesis) (pp. 51–91). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.

Krumsvik, R. J., Skaar, Ø. O., Røkenes, F. M., Solstad, S. H., and Høydal, K. L. (2022). Experiences of WNGER II PhD. fellows during the COVID-19 pandemic – a case study. Front. Educ. 7:860828. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.860828

Kvale, S., and Brinkmann, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing . 3rd Edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Linde, G. (2012). Det ska ni veta! En introduktion till läroplansteori (3rd Edn.). Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Lindensjö, B., and Lundgren, U. P. (2014). Utbildningsreformer och politisk styrning . Stockholm: HLS Förlag.

Löfström, E., Tikkanen, L., Anttila, H., and Pyhältö, K. (2024). Supervisors’ experiences of doctoral supervision in times of change. Stud. Grad. Postdoctoral Educ. 15, 34–48. doi: 10.1108/SGPE-01-2023-0004

Lundgren, U. P. (1999). Ramfaktorteori och praktisk utbildningsplanering. Pedagogisk Forskning 4, 31–41.

Mason, S., and Merga, M. (2018). Integrating publications in the social science doctoral thesis by publication. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 37, 1454–1471. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2018.1498461

Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach . 3rd Edn Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation . Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B., and Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation . 4th Edn. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass.

OpenAI. (2024). ChatGPT (May 20204 version) [Large language model]. San Fransisco, LA Available at: https://chat.openai.com/chat

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practic . Sage.

Peters, M., and Fàbregues, S. (2023). Missed opportunities in mixed methods EdTech research? Visual joint display development as an analytical strategy for achieving integration in mixed methods studies. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. , 1–21. doi: 10.1007/s11423-023-10234-z

Pyhältö, K., Tikkanen, L., and Anttila, H. (2023). Is there a fit between PhD candidates’ and their supervisors’ perceptions on the impact of COVID-19 on doctoral education? Stud. Grad. Postdoct. Educ. 14, 134–150. doi: 10.1108/SGPE-05-2022-0035

Pyhältö, K., Vekkaila, J., and Keskinen, J. (2012). Exploring the fit between doctoral students’ and supervisors’ perceptions of resources and challenges Vis-à-Vis the doctoral journey. Int. J. Dr. Stud. 7, 395–414. doi: 10.28945/1745

Ramberg, I., and Wendt, K. K. (2023). Forskerhverdag under koronapandemien: Resultater fra en panelundersøkelse av norske forskere 2022 (Oslo: NIFU Working Note 9). Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/11250/3069589

Sarrico, C. S. (2022). The expansion of doctoral education and the changing nature and purpose of the doctorate. High. Educ. 84, 1299–1315. doi: 10.1007/s10734-022-00946-1

Schoonenboom, J., and Johnson, R. B. (2017). How to construct a mixed methods research design. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift Für Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie 69, 107–131. doi: 10.1007/s11577-017-0454-1

Skodvin, O. J. (2013). “NOKUT og kvalitet i IKT-støttet høyere utdanning” in Ulike forståelser av kvalitet i norsk, fleksibel høyere utdanning . eds. T. Fossland, K. R. Ramberg, and E. Gjerdrum (Tromsø: Norgesuniversitetet).

Solli, K., and Nygaard, L. P. (2022). ‘Same But Different? Identifying Writing Challenges Specific to the PhD by Publication’, in Landscapes and Narratives of PhD by Publication . Eds. K. Solli and L. P. Nygaard Cham: Springer. 13–30.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research . Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis . New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Steine, S., and Sarpebakken, B. (2023). Færre doktorgrader innenfor matematikk og naturvitenskap i 2022 . Oslo: Statistics Norway.

SurveyMonkey. (2024). SurveyMonkey . San Mateo. Available at: https://surveymonkey.com

Tight, M. (2016). “Case study research” in The BERA/Sage handbook of educational research . eds. D. Wyse, N. Selwyn, E. Smith, and L. Suter (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications), 376–394.

UK Council for Graduate Education (2021). The UK research supervision survey report 2021 . London: UK Council for Graduate Education.

Wichmann-Hansen, G. (2021). DUT Guide on Supervision. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift . 16, 1–13. doi: 10.7146/dut.v16i31.127292

Wollenschläger, M., Hattie, J., Machts, N., Möller, J., and Harms, U. (2016). What makes rubrics effective in teacher-feedback? Transparency of learning goals is not enough. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 44–45, 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.11.003

Yin, R. K. (2012). Applications of case study research . 3rd Edn: Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Keywords: PhD-supervisors, experiences, COVID-19, supervision, PhD-fellows, frame factors

Citation: Krumsvik RJ, Røkenes FM, Skaar &O, Jones L, Solstad SH, Salhus & and Høydal KL (2024) PhD-supervisors experiences during and after the COVID-19 pandemic: a case study. Front. Educ . 9:1436521. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1436521

Received: 22 May 2024; Accepted: 15 July 2024; Published: 09 August 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Krumsvik, Røkenes, Skaar, Jones, Solstad, Salhus and Høydal. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Rune J. Krumsvik, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Division of Student Life

No such thing as a silly question: answers to questions you might be afraid to ask.

Whether you just arrived at Iowa or have found a familiar rhythm on campus, you probably have questions. And like many students, you might be too shy to ask or you might not know where to go for an answer.

We’re here to help.

Here is a list of questions — and answers — on topics you might want or need to know.

1. What should I do if I feel anxious or if I’m struggling mentally? How do I find help?

First, know you are not alone, and there’s nothing embarrassing or shameful about reaching out for help. We know it can be intimidating, but finding the right resources is the first step to feeling better.

The UI has various mental health services that you can access no matter what you are going through, including anxiety, depression, substance use, eating disorders, trauma, grief, identity development, and relationship concerns.

If formal counseling isn’t for you, several student support groups offer space where you and others with shared experiences can talk. You can drop in to any of these groups at any time.

The UI also offers several free workshops that focus on managing stress and anxiety. Check out the workshop options at Student Wellness and University Counseling Services, which cover topics such as mindfulness, sleep, motivations and procrastination, anxiety, and distress coping skills. These workshops help you build effective skills so you can better manage stress and anxiety.

If you think counseling services would be helpful:

• Contact University Counseling Service at 319-335-7294 or email [email protected] . UCS has locations on the west side of campus (3223 Westlawn) and the east side (Suite 1950 in University Capitol Centre). Individual and group therapy are offered.  
• If you are unsure what services may be best for you, UCS staff can guide you in the right direction through an initial consultation . Please know you will be asked to fill out paperwork if you visit UCS for the first time or if it has been more than three months since you were last seen. More information on what paperwork may be needed will be provided during appointment scheduling.  
• In addition, you can receive 24-hour support through the UI Support and Crisis Line by calling or texting 844-461-5420 or chatting on this page online . You can use the line anonymously if you wish to do so.  
• You can also schedule a same-day, one-time appointment with a counselor if you would like to talk about an immediate issue or develop a plan to work on your well-being without ongoing therapy.

2. What do I do if I feel sick?

We understand that you don’t want to miss anything or fall behind in classes, but we recommend that you do not try to go to class if you are sick. Contact your professor to let them know you are sick, see if there is any makeup work you might need to do, and ask a classmate to provide notes for you.

If you think you may have an illness more severe than a common cold or you just want peace of mind, a visit to Student Health could help get you back on the mend sooner. Student Health is located at 4189 Westlawn and is open from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Friday. You can call 319-335-8394 to make an appointment or schedule one online.

There is no cost to visit Student Health; a student health fee is included in the fees you pay each semester. You might be charged for other things related to your visit, such as lab work, medications, or medical supplies. Those charges will be submitted to your insurance, and, if you are a first-time patient or change health insurance, you can fill out this form so Student Health has that information. Charges not covered by insurance can be paid with cash or with your U-Bill. 

If you are unsure if a visit to Student Health is best, you can contact the Student Health Nurseline at 319-335-9704. The Nurseline can help you decide if you need to make an appointment, how to take self-care measures, answer medication questions, and more.

3. I started Iowa with one major, but I’m having doubts if this is the right one for me. What should I do if I’m considering switching majors or colleges?

Don’t worry! Many students switch their majors. The idea of what you thought you wanted to do might look much different now that you have started college, or you may not love your area of study as much as you thought you would.

First, your academic advisor is a great resource. Set up a meeting with them to talk about what you’re not loving about current classes in your major, what classes you do enjoy, and your interests. Your advisor can also help you figure out the length of time it would take to complete your degree if you decide to switch.

If you’re a first-year student, it’s likely your advisor is in the Academic Advising Center . But if your advisor is located within a college and you are thinking about a switch in majors that would also require a switch in colleges, your current advisor is still the best person to lead you in the right direction. You could also contact the Academic Advising Center to speak with an advisor about exploring other majors.

If you want to start thinking about a new area of study, looking at the general catalog can give you more information. You can also access sample plans on MyUI that will outline what an eight-semester plan for a new major may look like.

The Pomerantz Career Center also has resources for exploring majors and career options, including career assessment s. Iowa has more than 200 majors to choose from, so be assured you will find something that both excites you and helps you reach your career goals.

4. What should I do if I’m feeling overwhelmed with my courses or I’m failing a class?

First, don’t panic. Many students feel overwhelmed with their class load from time to time.

Speaking to your professor or teaching assistant is the first step. Your instructors will be able to give you a good picture of where you stand in a class and what you can do to get your desired grade. Professors and TAs hold office hours, and having one-on-one conversations with them can help you make a study plan or get a better grasp on the course material.

Your academic advisor is also a good resource, especially if you would like to change your schedule. They can go over the pros and cons of dropping a class.

If you are considering dropping a class, here is what that process will look like:

• Keep in mind that you need 12 credits a semester to keep your full-time student status. Dropping below 12 credits could affect financial aid and scholarships. If you are concerned that dropping a class would affect your financial aid, contact the Office of Student Financial Aid.
• You can drop a class on MyUI before the sixth day of the fall or spring semester, but it’s a good idea to speak with your academic advisor first.
• After the drop deadline has passed for a semester, you can still request to drop a course, but you will need your academic advisor’s approval.

If you don’t want to drop a class but your grade is slipping, take advantage of tutoring resources . You can find academic help for specific courses, helpful tips in videos and worksheets, a private tutor or workshop, or a free supplemental instruction session.

5. Campus seems so big and I’m afraid of getting lost. How do I find my way around?

Navigating campus can be overwhelming when you first arrive and everything is new. There are plenty of campus maps to choose from, and it’s a good idea to walk to any buildings you’re unfamiliar with to find where your class will be held.

The UI campus is very walkable and bikeable, and those are main modes of transportation you will see students using. Students can also use Cambus for free around campus; here is a map of where bus routes will take you.

The main routes are the red and blue routes, which travel the entire campus. A helpful way to remember the direction red and blue routes go is “Blue to Burge, Red to Rienow.” The red route goes in a clockwise direction, and the blue route goes counterclockwise. Cambus also operates an Interdorm route, which goes to the residence halls and the Pentacrest.

The Transit app will show you real-time bus arrivals, departures, locations, and the closest bus stops. By subscribing to alerts on the app, you will be notified of service changes or severe weather impacts.

While we understand why you might like your vehicle on campus, you don’t need to bring one to get around and we encourage you to use other transportation. If you do bring a car, you will have to pay for a permit. More details on how to do so are here . 

6. I used to play sports in high school, but that’s changed since I started college. How can I stay active?

Without sports and high school gym classes, it can be an adjustment to incorporate staying active into your college routine. Luckily, Iowa has many opportunities for you to get exercise (not to mention you’ll get your steps in walking around campus to your classes).

• Campus Recreation and Wellness Center: This is perhaps the most well-known recreation facility, located on the east side of campus. Not only does it include all the gym equipment and weights you might want, but it also has an indoor climbing wall, swimming pools, a jogging track, and basketball and volleyball courts. It also has the Wellness Suite, where staff provide fitness assessments, nutrition counseling, and more.
• Field House: Located on the west side of campus, this space houses basketball, volleyball, and badminton courts; a cycling studio; an indoor track; and a weightlifting room. It also has a swimming pool.
• Fitness East: Fitness East is in Halsey Hall, and it can be accessed through the walkway between Halsey Hall and the IMU Parking Ramp. While this space is smaller than other facilities, it has all the gym equipment you need for your workout.
• Hawkeye Tennis and Recreation Complex: Located on Prairie Meadow Drive on the far west edge of campus, this space has indoor and outdoor tennis courts, pickleball courts, cardio equipment, and weights.

All enrolled UI students can access any recreational services facility, but you must present your student ID to get in. The cost to use the facilities is included in your student fees.

If you need something more structured, Iowa has many intramural sports teams you can join if you miss doing activities with a team or competing.

7. I’m away from all or most of the friends I grew up with. How can I make new friends and find a new community at Iowa?

Making new friends is hard, no matter what age you are. If you’re a recent high school graduate, you may have grown up with the same people and friends for most of your life. While trying to make new friends can be intimidating, the new people you meet in college can be some of the most meaningful relationships of your life. Just remember: You are not the only one trying to make new friends.

If you’re living in the residence halls, start by introducing yourself to people on your floor. You can also leave the door of your room open as a sign you’re welcome to visitors. 

Attending campus events that pique your interest can help you connect with other like-minded people. In addition, joining a student organization — even if you stick with it for only a semester — can help you meet new people. If you don’t know where to start with finding the right student org for you, schedule a meeting with a Leadership and Engagement advisor to talk about your interests and get connected.

You can also meet new people by getting  a job or volunteering on campus.  

Again, know that many other people are also looking for new friendships. Asking someone to grab a cup of coffee after class or to meet you for a weekend lunch session will likely make their day as much as it will yours.

8. Being away from home for the first time is harder than I thought it would be. What can make this easier?

No matter how far you may have traveled to become an Iowa student, it’s normal to feel bouts of homesickness, especially if it’s your first semester on campus. Here are some tips:

While it may seem counterintuitive, try to limit your trips back home because they could prolong your feelings of homesickness. Staying on campus for longer stretches of time can help it become more familiar to you and will help Iowa feel more like a new home.

Iowa also has so many ways to get involved. Be it a club, intramural sports, or a job, getting involved on campus can make you feel like you belong here (and you’ll make new friends).

Having new, yet familiar experiences can also help you feel more at ease. For example, if you enjoyed spending Sunday mornings at your hometown’s local coffee shop, find a new place to get your caffeine fix. If you liked spending your mornings at the gym, head to one of our great recreational facilities.

Time is the best way to work through this new transition, and know that you can talk to anyone on campus about how you’re feeling. Also, remember all your loved ones are just a call or text away.

9. This is my first time having to budget and be responsible for my own finances. What are some money tips relevant for me?

Budgeting can be hard, even for people who have been doing it for years. This may be the first time you’ve really had to think about all your monthly expenses. Making a plan to manage your money will be less stressful in the long run because it will help you create some savings and will make unexpected expenses less scary — while also building good habits for the future.

Many tools are available to help you create a budget, from just writing down a plan in a notebook to using an app. No matter what method you use, all budgets are made roughly the same way.

First, figure out what time span you want to create a budget for. Weekly or monthly budgets are common, but you could also create one for an entire semester. Next, determine your income for that time frame. Then, add up your fixed expenses (U-Bill, car payments, cellphone, etc.) and variable expenses (groceries, gas, entertainment, etc.). Once you subtract expenses from your income, you can determine if there are any areas where you’d like to save or how much money you have left over to save.

If you’re not sure what your expenses are for a certain time span, make a note of the money you spend during that time frame and see if your habits are on par with your goals.

Also, make sure you’re being responsible with any credit cards you may have. Even though you don’t have to worry about charges put on the card immediately, you don’t want any surprises when the bill arrives. Building credit is a good practice to start, but making note of charges to credit cards is equally important.

Lots of financial wellness resources can be found here . If you’re struggling with budgets or have other financial questions, meet with a financial aid advisor by scheduling an appointment on MyUI or email [email protected] . 

10. How do I balance academics, social life, and my other commitments?

Once you step onto campus, it’s probably tempting to jump headfirst into everything that piques your interest, but piling too much on your plate can lead you to feel stressed out or overwhelmed. Academics, jobs, student organizations, having fun with friends — it’s important to have all these things in your life, and finding the right balance for yourself is key.

Establishing a routine (that still leaves time for fun and spontaneous ice cream runs!) is a great way to feel balanced. After you get used to your class and homework schedule, figure out what you want to prioritize and determine if you’re using your time effectively. If you feel you’re lacking in one area, make it a bigger priority the next week.

If you’re struggling academically, you can connect with Academic Support and Retention for more resources to help you succeed. Also, Student Care and Assistance can help provide a personalized assessment of how you spend your time and ways you can adjust your schedule to match your priorities.

The Student Life Development Fund: provides support for the Vice President for Student Life to support all departments and units across the division. This fund is utilized to support many priorities and initiatives across the division.

Get the Reddit app

An online community for discussing issues related to academia, faculty life, research, and institutional structures. This is NOT the place to ask questions about your homework, your particular school or professors, or to get admission advice! Survey posts must be approved by mods in advance, must include contact/IRB info, and must be specific to academia.

PhD with a full time job and young family?

I was hoping to ask the community, I am about to finish my masters in Canada and would like to consider a PhD. How possible is this in relations to having a young family and a full time job.

By continuing, you agree to our User Agreement and acknowledge that you understand the Privacy Policy .

Enter the 6-digit code from your authenticator app

You’ve set up two-factor authentication for this account.

Enter a 6-digit backup code

Create your username and password.

Reddit is anonymous, so your username is what you’ll go by here. Choose wisely—because once you get a name, you can’t change it.

Reset your password

Enter your email address or username and we’ll send you a link to reset your password

Check your inbox

An email with a link to reset your password was sent to the email address associated with your account

Choose a Reddit account to continue

Money blog: Bakery chain under fire for selling day-old croissants for 95p more

Welcome to the Money blog, a hub of personal finance and consumer news/tips. Leave a comment on any of the stories we're covering in the box below - we round them up every Saturday.

Friday 16 August 2024 17:00, UK

• Fines for parents taking children out of school to increase next month
• Gail's under fire for selling day-old croissants for £1 more
• Mortgage product shelf life drops significantly in sign of volatility
• The UK's highest-earning roads revealed

Essential reads

• Is this the end of the British pub?
• What's gone wrong at Asda?
• Best of the Money blog - an archive of features

Tips and advice

• All the discounts you get as a student or young person
• TV chef picks best cheap eats in London
• Savings Guide : Why you should now be checking T&Cs
• 'I cancelled swimming with weeks of notice - can they keep my money?'

Ask a question or make a comment

By Jimmy Rice, Money blog editor

The centre-point of a significant week in the economy was inflation data, released first thing on Wednesday, that showed price rises accelerated in July to 2.2%.

Economists attributed part of the rise to energy prices - which have fallen this year, but at a much slower rate than they did last year. 

As our business correspondent Paul Kelso pointed out, it felt like the kind of mild fluctuation we can probably expect month to month now that sky high price hikes are behind us, though analysts do expect inflation to tick up further through the remainder of the year...

Underneath the bonnet, service inflation, taking in restaurants and hotels, dropped from 5.7% to 5.2%.

This is important because a large part of this is wages - and they've been a concern for the Bank of England as they plot a route for interest rates.

On Tuesday we learned average weekly earnings had also fallen - from 5.7% to 5.4% in the latest statistics.

High wages can be inflationary (1/ people have more to spend, 2/ employers might raise prices to cover staff costs), so any easing will only aid the case for a less restrictive monetary policy. Or, to put it in words most people use, the case for interest rate cuts.

Markets think there'll be two more cuts this year - nothing has changed there.

Away from the economy, official data also illustrated the pain being felt by renters across the UK.

The ONS said:

• Average UK private rents increased by 8.6% in the 12 months to July 2024, unchanged from in the 12 months to June 2024;
• Average rents increased to £1,319 (8.6%) in England, £748 (7.9%) in Wales, and £965 (8.2%) in Scotland;
• In Northern Ireland, average rents increased by 10% in the 12 months to May 2024;
• In England, rents inflation was highest in London (9.7%) and lowest in the North East (6.1%).

Yesterday, we found the UK economy grew 0.6% over three months to the end of June. 

That growth rate was the second highest among the G7 group of industrialised nations - only the United States performed better with 0.7%, though Japan and Germany have yet to released their latest data.

Interestingly, there was no growth at all in June, the Office for National Statistics said, as businesses delayed purchases until after the general election.

"In a range of industries across the economy, businesses stated that customers were delaying placing orders until the outcome of the election was known," the ONS said.

Finally, a shout for this analysis from business presenter Ian King examining what's gone wrong at Asda. It's been one of our most read articles this week and is well worth five minutes of your Friday commute or weekend...

We're signing out of regular updates now until Monday - but do check out our weekend read from 8am on Saturday. This week we're examining how couples who earn different amounts split their finances.

Each week we feature comments from Money blog readers on the story or stories that elicited most correspondence.

Our weekend probe into the myriad reasons for pub closures in the UK prompted hundreds of comments.

Landlords and campaigners, researchers and residents revealed to Sky News the "thousand cuts" killing Britain's boozers - and what it takes to survive the assault.

Here was your take on the subject...

I've been a publican for 19 years. This article is bang on! It's like you've overheard my conversations with my customers - COVID, cost of living, wages - the traditional British boozer going out of fashion. (My place: no food, no small children). Hey Jood

I own a small craft ale bar or micropub as some say. The current climate is sickening for the whole hospitality sector. This summer has been ridiculously quiet compared to previous ones. Micropubs were on the rise pre-COVID, but not now even we're struggling to survive… Lauren

I am an ex-landlord. It's ridiculous you can buy 10 cans for £10 or one pint for £5 now. It's not rocket science, it's a no-brainer: reverse the situation. Make supermarket beer more expensive than pub beer, then people will start to go out and mix again rather than getting drunk at home. Ivanlordpeers

Bought four pints of my regular drink at a supermarket for less than one pint in our local pub. It's becoming a luxury to go to a pub these days. Torquay David

Traditional pubs are being taken over by conglomerates who don't sell traditional beer, only very expensive lager, usually foreign, and other similar gassy drinks. How can they be called traditional pubs? Bronzestraw

The main reason for pubs closing is twofold! 1: The out-of-reach rents that the big groups charge landlords. 2: Landlords are told what stock they can hold and restrict where they can purchase it from. Strange, but most pubs belonged to the same groups! A pub-goer

Less pubs are managed now, pub companies are changing them to managed partnerships, putting the pressure onto inexperienced young ex-managers. Locals complain that their local pub has gone. but they don't use them enough. Can government regulate rents and beer prices for business owners? John Darkins

I was a brewery tenant in Scotland for many years and sequestrated because of the constant grabbing at my money by greedy brewers who wanted more and more. I made my pub very successful and was penalised by the brewery. James MacQuarrie 

The only reason pubs are closing is locals only use them on Boxing Day, New Year's Eve, and one Sunday a year. Plus breweries don't need pubs, they sell enough through supermarkets! Use them or lose them. Peter Smith

The closing of pubs is a terrible shame. I still go to my local and have great memories of getting drunk in many in my hometown. They are important places in society. As someone once said: "No good story ever started with a salad." Kev K

It's the taxman killing pubs. £1 of every £3 sold. Utter disgrace. Stef

I go with my girlfriend, Prue, every day to my local. It's a shame what's happening to prices. It used to be full of people and joy but now it's a ghost town in the pub since prices are too high now. I wish we could turn back time and find out what went wrong. Niall Benson

Minimum wage is around £11 and the tax threshold is £12,600 per year. How can you possibly afford a night in a pub out when a pint costs between £3 and £8 a pint on those wages? Allan7777blue

Unfortunately, the very people who have kept these establishments going over the years (the working man) have been priced out, and they're paying the price. Dandexter

The pubs are too expensive for people to go out regularly as we once did a decade or so ago. People's priorities are on survival, not recreation. Until the living wage increases beyond an inflation that wages haven't risen above in years, then we will see shops, pubs, etc. close JD

Who wants to spend hard-earned money going into a pub that's nearly always empty. It takes away one of the main attractions - socialising. Michael

Monzo has been named the best bank in the UK for customer satisfaction, according to a major survey. 

More than 17,000 personal current account customers rated their bank on the quality of its services and how likely they would be to recommend to friends or family. 

Digital banks made up the top three, with Monzo coming out on top, followed by Starling Bank and then Chase. 

Some 80% of Monzo customers said they would recommend the bank. 

The digital banking app said topping the tables "time and time again" was not something it would "ever take for granted". 

Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) was bottom of the ranking for another year. 

The banks with the best services in branches were Nationwide, Lloyds Bank and Metro Bank. 

Gail's bakery chain has come under fire for repurposing unsold pastries into croissants and selling them for almost £4 the next day.

The retailer lists the "twice baked" chocolate almond croissants as part of its "Waste Not" range, which means it is made using leftover croissants that are then "topped with almond frangipane and flaked almonds".

The scheme has been hit with criticism online, with many pointing out the £3.90 price tag is 95p more than the original croissant.

One X user said: "The audacity of bragging about it being part of their 'Waste Not' range like we should be grateful to them and proud of ourselves for contributing to reducing food waste when they could just sell it for less money – not one pound more than yesterday.

"Unsure whether to be impressed or horrified that someone has come up with a concept to capitalise on yellow sticker goods to make more profit."

It should be added, however, that the practice was not invented by Gail's - and almond croissants were originally created by French boulangeries to reuse day-old croissants and stop them going stale.

When factoring in the extra ingredients (almond frangipane and flaked almonds) and baking time, the bakery chain would likely defend the increased price by pointing to the additional costs incurred.

It comes as locals in a trendy London neighbourhood signed a petition against a Gail's bakery setting up shop in their area.

After (unconfirmed) rumours began circulating that the chain was looking to open a site in Walthamstow village, more than 600 have signed a petition opposing the plans.

The petition says the village "faces a threat to its uniqueness" should Gail's move into the area (see yesterday's 11.54am post for more).

Gail's has been contacted for comment.

British retailers saw a rise in sales last month after a boost from Euro 2024 and summer discounting, according to official figures.

High street retailers said sales of football shirts, electronics such as TVs, and alcoholic drinks were all stronger amid the Three Lions' journey to the final.

Total retail sales volumes rose by 0.5% in July, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said. It was, however, slightly below predictions, with economists forecasting a 0.7% increase.

It followed a 0.9% slump in volumes in June as retail firms blamed uncertainty ahead of the general election and poor weather.

ONS director of economic statistics, Liz McKeown, said: "Retail sales grew in July led by increases in department stores and sports equipment shops, with both the Euros and discounting across many stores boosting sales.

"These increases were offset by a poor month for clothing and furniture shops, and falling fuel sales, despite prices at the pump falling."

The data showed that non-food stores saw a 1.4% rise, driven by a strong performance from department stores, where sales grew by 4% for the month as summer sales helped to stoke demand.

However, clothing and footwear shops saw a 0.6% dip, whilst homeware retailers also saw volumes fall 0.6%. Food stores, meanwhile, saw sales remain flat for the month.

There are fears that the £2-cap on single bus fares could be scrapped after the government declined to say whether the policy would continue past December.

Bus companies said it was vital the cost of using their services is kept low for young people to "enhance their access to education and jobs".

Alison Edwards, director of policy and external relations at industry body the Confederation of Passenger Transport, said: "Bus operators are working closely with the government so that together we can find a way to avoid a cliff edge return to commercial fares.

"Analysis has shown that supporting fares, which can be done in a range of different ways, is great value for money and can support many other government objectives.

"For example, keeping fares low for young people would enhance their access to education and jobs, while also encouraging them to develop sustainable travel habits to last a lifetime."

Transport Secretary Louise Haigh said in a recent interview with the PA news agency that her officials were "looking at various options" in relation to the cap, including whether they could "target it better".

It's been a busy week on the economic front.

There was no major shift in the overall outlook - since Monday we've had it confirmed that the UK economy has lower inflation and more growth than the last two years, while wages have grown faster than the overall pace of price rises.

On the back of all that news the pound is at the highest rate since early this month against the dollar, worth $1.2882, and the highest since July when it comes to buying euro with one pound equal to €1.1733. 

Signs of a recovery from the global market sell-off of Monday last week can be seen in the share prices of companies listed on the London Stock Exchange.

Share prices have grown among the most valuable companies on the stock exchange, those that comprise the Financial Times Stock Exchange (FTSE) 100 list of most valuable companies.

Today though, this benchmark UK index fell 0.19% but finishes the week higher than the start.

Also finishing the week higher than the start are the more UK-based companies of the FTSE 250 (the 101st to the 250th most valuable firms on the London Stock Exchange).

On Friday morning that index was up 0.08%. 

With tensions in the Middle East and Eastern Europe high as Iran mulled a retaliatory strike on Israel and Ukraine made incursions into Russian territory, there had been concern about energy price spikes.

But the benchmark oil price has remained steady at $80.13 dollars for a barrel of Brent crude oil.

Gas prices have remained below the Monday high of 100 pence a therm (the measurement for heat) and now are 94.50 pence a therm. 

A Cabinet Office minister has said it is "unfair" to suggest other public sector workers will be queuing up for a pay rise after the government's offer of a 15% increase for train drivers and junior doctors.

"I think that's an unfair characterisation as well," paymaster general Nick Thomas-Symonds told Times Radio.

"I think what is absolutely crucial here is we are a Government again that is sticking to the promises we made in opposition.

"We promised we would sit down and find solutions, and people expressed scepticism about that, but actually that is precisely what we have done in Government."

Last month, the government and the British Medical Association struck an improved pay deal for junior doctors in England worth 22% on average over two years.

Meanwhile, train drivers will vote on a new pay deal following talks between representatives of drivers' union ASLEF and the Department for Transport.

The new offer is for a 5% backdated pay rise for 2022/23, a 4.75% rise for 23/24, and 4.5% increase for 24/25.

The Dartford Crossing is the highest-earning toll road in the UK, new data shows. 

The Kent to Essex route raked in £215.9m in the last year - 2,159 times more than the Whitney toll bridge in Hereford. 

The crossing, which was supposed to stop charging customers in 2003, costs between £2 and £6 to use (depending on the vehicle you're driving) between 10am and 6pm every day. 

Car finance company Moneybarn found it earned just over £209m in 2022. 

It topped the chart of 13 toll roads in the country, making over £100m more than the second highest-earning road in 2023 - the M6 Toll in the West Midlands. 

In third place was the Mersey Gateway Bridge between Halton and Cheshire, which made £48.9m. 

You can see how the other toll roads fared below... 

Fines for parents who take their children out of school will increase this upcoming term as the government continues with plans to improve attendance. 

From next week, fines for unauthorised absences will go up by as much as £40.

Under the new system, the cost of a penalty charge notice will rise from £60 to £80 if paid within 21 days, and from £120 to £160 if paid within 28 days . 

This marks the first increases since the system was introduced in 2013. 

So, when do parents get fined? 

Children are only allowed to miss school if they are unwell, or they have been given permission from the school in advance. 

Parents can make an absence request to take their children out of school, but there needs to be "exceptional circumstances" and the headteacher needs to authorise it. 

Currently, it's the responsibility of the local authority to decide when to issue fines, meaning the process varies from council to council.

But, under the new rules which were created by the Conservative government, all schools will be required to consider a fine when a child has missed at least five days of school for unauthorised reasons.

What happens if you keep getting fined? 

If a parent receives a second fine for the same child within any three-year period, this will be charged at the higher rate of £160.

A parent can only receive two fines within any three-year period, and once this has been met, other actions can be considered. 

This includes a parenting order or prosecution. 

Parents who are prosecuted and attend court because their child hasn't been attending school, can be fined up to £2,500.

Where is the money spent?

Government guidance states any money collected from fines should be used by the local authority to cover the costs of administering the system. 

Any surplus after that should be spent on "attendance support". 

Any cash remaining at the end of the year must be paid to the education secretary.

A Department for Education spokesperson said: "High and rising school standards are at the heart of our mission to break down barriers to opportunity and give every child the best start in life. Strong foundations of learning are grounded in attendance in the classroom.

"Tackling the root causes of absence is a major priority for the government. 

"Our support-first approach outlined in our guidance is designed to help parents to meet their responsibility to ensure their child attends school.

"However, in some cases, including term-time holidays, it may be necessary to issue penalty notices." 

Be the first to get Breaking News

Install the Sky News app for free