Introduction/Background
Honours programmes are often considered the beginning of research training in Australia. The structure of these degrees can represent an uneasy mix of undergraduate degree and Higher Degree by Research course design. Students are expected to navigate this ‘in between’ as they navigate new ways of conceptualising their own knowledge and area of study. As of yet, there has not been a scoping review of the literature regarding the preparation of and pedagogies for honours students in Australian universities.
Aims/Objectives of the presentation
This presentation reports on the findings of a scoping review, following Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) framework for scoping reviews. This presentation provides insights into the current pedagogies reported in the literature and other preparatory techniques reported in the research literature. It will also examine what is currently known about the preparation of honours supervisors in Australia.
Methods
The scoping review was conducted to examine what is currently known about honours student preparation, pedagogies and supervision in Australia. Using studies from 2003-present, published in English and focussed on Australian honour students and their research supervisors, this presentation will report on the current evidence base. After screening was completed, only ten studies were included in the review. Following the screening stage, a process of data extraction was completed for each included paper. The papers were split equally between the research team and Covidence was used as a means to support the data extraction. Each paper was read in its entirety and key characteristics recorded: participant numbers, year of publication, methodology, universities included, duration of study and the discipline of the participants involved. The research findings and any insights related to the research questions were also extracted. Once the extraction was complete, an excel spreadsheet was used to thematically group the research findings and insights related to the research questions. In the next section the themes and key characteristics are presented.
Results/Discussion
In the published literature there is no pattern in terms of types of participants, area or research. The participants ranged from less than 10 to over 140, in mostly qualitative research. There were a mix of projects that ranged from student reflections to program evaluations. The themes in the literature were broad, however, largely students feel unprepared for the process of the honours year and effective supervision is key to the success of students.
Conclusion
This review set out to scope the literature surrounding support of honours students, including pedagogical supports and resources. In doing so, the presentation addresses the national setting of educational practice and policy in terms of honours pedagogy and support. It considers the challenges and possibilities that are integral to the development of future researchers, whilst offering explicit strategies for supervisors to support students. Honours students represent a significant opportunity to shape the future of education research in Australia, and thus the agendas we pursue as a research community. It is important for us to understand how these students are being taught, and the most appropriate pedagogies for supporting them.
