SWEDISH SOUTH ASIAN STUDIES NETWORK
INPUT – Recruitment, financing and supervision:
Introduction
Challenger 1: Lisa Eklund
Challenger 1: Wimal Pathmasiri
Champion: Staffan Lindberg
Group discussions
Conclusions
The first session of SASNET’s symposium was
introduced by Ulla Thoresen from the Dept
of History of Religion, Lund University.
She briefly presented the basis for the discussion which had been prepared
by the PhD candidates Kristina Myrvold and Katarina Plank,
from the same department.
The paper (in Swedish only) is available here
as a pdf file.
Ulla Thoresen took up the main issues for the session: Recruitment, financing
and supervision, and then presented the two ”challengers” selected
for the session: PhD candidates Lisa Eklund from the Dept
of Sociology, Lund University, and Wimal Pathmasiri from the
Dept of Medicinal Chemistry, Division of Pharmacognosy,
Uppsala University.
Challenger 1: Lisa Eklund
Lisa Eklund shared her experiences as a PhD student at Lund University,
but financed by SSAAPS, the Swedish
graduate School of Advanced Asia Pacific Studies. Lisa who initially
was a student of Chinese told about the problems she had to face before
getting accepted as a PhD student at the Sociology department:
– Without personal contacts it is really difficult to be accepted.
I wish that senior advisers should be more open-minded.
As means of creating personal contacts at an early stage Lisa suggested
a system where students on C and D-level should get involved in a system
with peers and mentors.
Catch 22 situation regarding funding and acceptance
She also mentioned the need for good language skills in her special field
doing research on China, which is a problematic issue, and also the difficulty
in general to find good supervisors, competent to deal with specific areas.
– I could not find any sociologist at the department who was really
good on China.
Lisa Eklund ended up by bringing into focus the dilemma concerning funding:
– In order to get funding from SSAAPS it is necessary to show a letter
of acceptance from the department. But in order to be accepted you must
prove that your funding is secured. It is a Catch 22 situation!
– And another problem is that funders nowadays pay only for half
of the time period needed for a PhD. This also creates a complicated situation.
Challenger 2: Wimal Pathmasiri
Wimal Pathmasiri who is a PhD candidate in a totally different area followed.
He described his subject, pharmacognosy, and his research, which is mainly
on Sri Lankan medicinal plants. Wimal studied at Colombo University, from
where he applied for funding from ADB; Asian
Development Bank.
He was granted a scholarship to pursue his PhD studies anywhere in the
World. But that was not enough. He must himself find out a department
and be able to get accepted there. He was keen on going to Sweden and
sent requests to Swedish departments, but he did not get any replies.
Personal contacts deciding factor
Finally he managed to realise his project, but it all depended on personal
contacts. After approaching Premila Perera Ivarsson, then assistant
professor at the Division of Pharmacognosy at Uppsala University, and
an expert on Ayurvedic medicine in Sri Lanka, he was given a chance. He
was invited to Uppsala and there he was finally accepted for PhD studies.
The ADB funding could now be used, funding which is good for three years.
Champion: Staffan Lindberg
The session’s senior, ”champion”, Prof Staffan Lindberg
from the Dept of Sociology, Lund University, responded to the demands
and questions raised by the two challengers.
He commented on Lisa’s critical comments on the problem finding supervisors
with enough knowledge about the thesis work, saying that this is an important
matter mostly in the beginning of the PhD studies.
– Naturally it is a problem to find suitable supervisors, as doing
research is a question of breaking barriers, while on the other hand there
are few people to choose from.
But the solution to this problem is not really searching for an ideal
supervisor:
– Anyway you cannot keep insular with a professor who does not know
your field, even if it is a wonderful environment. It is necessary to
break out of the island, away from the routine at home, and find yourself
a unique network.
Create your own network of research partners
Staffan told about his own experiences from his research work in India
in the 1970’s, when he created his own network of research partners
all over the World.
To create such a network necessitates keeping in dialogue with other people:
– In order to be seen and read yourself you must also see and read
what others are doing. And you must decide for whom you are writing the
thesis. It is extremely important to have an addressee in mind.
Staffan Lindberg changed topic and talked about the problems concerning
recruitment. He was rather optimistic for the future of South Asia related
research in Sweden. There are naturally many motives for increasing interest
in South Asia, but the events of 11 September 2001 have certainly contributed
to it.
– But it is necessary for the universities to go all the way, to
start with undergraduate studies – like the course
started at Österlen’s folk high school in Tomelilla last
year, and then promote South Asian studies up to PhD level.
Even if only few students finally end up as PhD candidates those who do
are carried by a strong emotional attachment and love for the subject.
No more a lifelong dedication
Staffan then talked about the dramatic change in attitudes on writing
theses.
– We have gone from a situation 25 years ago when it was considered
to be a lifelong dedication till today’s limited ambitions that it
should not take more than 4-5 years to complete the thesis.
The changed rules for student funding, through CSN, to allow funding for
not more than 10 semesters, also plays a great role in reducing the time
spent on writing the thesis, as the need to secure funding is the major
problem for pursuing doctoral studies.
Till recently it was necessary for the prospective PhD student to secure
funding in advance for the entire period, but that rule has been relaxed:
– Now you only need to secure funds for the first two years. After
that it is the responsibility of the department, which has accepted you
for PhD studies to fund the remaining period.
Normally that is done by giving the PhD student an assignment as teaching
assistant at the department (‘doktorandtjänst’).
– But there are also other solutions. Some people may still have
study loans to take, others might have working wives/husbands who can
provide for them.
The big money to be found within the universities
Staffan Lindberg finally talked about the over-all financing of South
Asian studies at Swedish universities. He claims that the big money which
could be used for such are not with the Research councils and other external
funding agencies, but are to be found within the universities themselves.
– If we go together it is possible for us to change the priorities,
which have been set, and redirect money from traditional topics to South
Asia related research.
He gave an example from his own university in Lund where, due to a decrease
in the number of student opting for natural sciences and technology, funds
have been redirected to the humanities and social sciences, which recently
have attracted more students.
Group discussions:
The issues of recruitment, financing and supervision were discussed in
four groups, three with PhD candidates and post-docs, and one with senior
researchers. The discussions lasted for 45 minutes, after which summaries
were given in a plenary session followed by a general discussion.
Group 1 (represented by Ulla Thoresen) discussed
the potential role SASNET could play in these matters, ending up in a
demand that SASNET should give active assistance to PhD students. This
should be done through appointment of a special person, who is not a supervisor
himself/herself, to become a sort of PhD Ombudsman, to deal with their
problems and give them help. This person would act as a kind of supervisor
for the supervisors.
Group 2 (represented by Wimal Pathmasiri)
also discussed the problems concerning supervision, but references were
also made to the session’s speeches. PhD candidate Ravinder Kaur,
Centre for Development Research, Copenhagen,
told about the personal researchers network she has created, just like
Staffan Lindberg described. She also informed how she was able to find
her own supervisor by writing a letter directly to a famous researcher
whose books she had read.
Several participants in the group described the situation in their respective
departments, and not unexpectedly it turned out be very different stories
depending on environment. PhD candidates from the humanities asked for
more and better supervision, and even asked for the possibility of paying
for supervision from abroad, whereas PhD candidates from the fields of
medicine and natural sciences described instances of too much supervision.
PhD candidate Jan Nilsson, Karolinska Institutet/NEUROTEC,
thought it is out of question to pay for supervision, as the supervisors
build their careers out of the research results from their PhD students.
The relationship between supervisor and student also varies depending
on the age difference. Young PhD students more easily accept bad treatment
from supervisors, whereas older students automatically get a more equal
relation.
Group 3 (represented by Lisa Eklund) also
focused on the question of supervision. They asked for better possibilities
of obtaining external supervision, from outside their own departments,
and they supported the idea of each researcher building up his/her own
individual external network. The group also highlighted the different
problems that Nordic PhD students face compared to those coming from South
Asia, and finally the problem of getting funding for South Asia related
research was brought to attention. As a case study PhD candidate Ashok
Nath, Dept of Human Geography, Södertörn
University College, described how it was impossible to get funding for
his special subject, South Asian History. In order to get acceptance from
a Swedish university, and funding, it was therefore necessary for him
to completely change track.
The senior’s group (represented by Staffan
Lindberg) mainly commented on the propositions and critical comments
raised by the PhD students during the session. Staffan admitted that the
acceptance or not by individual departments is a tricky issue, especially
when the department is small. However he pointed out that the main problem
is not getting accepted but in the first place getting in contact with
somebody at the desired department. SASNET is instrumental in this respect,
giving information on relevant persons and institutions to contact through
its web site’s presentation of departments with South Asia related
research at Swedish universities.
Regarding the issue of bad supervisors Staffan said it is important to
have a possibility to change supervisor. Something which can easily be
done at big departments, but once again is more problematic in smaller
environments.
Staffan also commented on the problem to get funding for any type of research,
saying that it is just like it is written in the Gospel of St. Matthew:
To Those Who Have It Shall Be Given. In other words, those researchers
who are successful get all the funding. It is only to hope that a positive
upward spiral is created so that possibility for funding improves in general.
Research groups and Sandwich system
Professor Bo Lindblad, Karolinska Institutet/IHCAR,
commented on the problem of finding suitable supervisors, advising the
PhD students to get in touch with senior researchers at an early stage.
One way of doing so is by joining a research group. SASNET could play
an important role in identifying such research groups and stimulating
the creation of new groups with a multidisciplinary approach.
Bo Lindblad also explained the advantages with the Sandwich system being
used for the Pakistani PhD students at Karolinska Institutet. This involves
having double supervisors (one in Sweden and one in Pakistan), and a formalised
system where PhD students after returning home become supervisors for
new students in Pakistan, and build research groups there.
Summary of INPUT session:
Ulla Thoresen finally made a short summary of the main points from the
discussions, and once again put forward the demand that SASNET should
work actively for the PhD students, mainly on the awareness front. The
creation of a supervisor’s supervisor, a PhD Ombudsman, should also
be desirable.
|