Some comments on the use of the agreement
Lain Dare, PhD student
I have been very fortunate to be a PhD student of Professor Vanclay for the past 18 months. I was introduced to the supervisory documents in the first week of my candidature and was very thankful. I have found the MoU document to be very clear about both my role as a student and what I can realistically expect from my supervisory team. This has helped my transition from a professional employee to a PhD student in a university environment, a transition that has certainly been rewarding.
Dr Heather Aslin, Bureau of Rural Sciences, cosupervisor
The Student Supervision Agreement is a particularly valuable innovation and helps formalise what has often in the past been a very vague arrangement between students and supervisors, and encourages both parties to take their obligations seriously. A PhD represents a very significant commitment of time and resources on both sides, and the student may be foregoing considerable income in choosing to do the PhD rather than taking up or continuing paid employment. Also, there is often a very great power imbalance between a PhD supervisor and their student, and so it is desirable for the student to have a formal statement about what they have a right to expect from their supervisor. On the other hand, as the agreement points out, the supervisor has an increasingly significant professional stake in the student completing their PhD. So anything that encourages both parties to recognise their mutual interdependence and mutual obligations, without becoming too legalistic, is to be welcomed. I think the form of an agreement or MoU strikes just the right note to recognise these inter-relationships.
Kevin Redd, PhD student on behalf of the Tasmania University Postgraduate Association
The Tasmania University Postgraduate Association (TUPA) would like to comment on this document from the perspective of postgraduates at UTas. We have gathered opinions from around the postgraduate community and offer the following feedback:
- This document focuses the thoughts of candidates, describes expectations, raises IP issues for discussion, and puts the topics of authorship and publication on the table very early in the PhD process. These subjects are incredibly valuable and very often are not covered by supervisors or candidates in the early stages of a PhD.
- These and other issues which otherwise might (and often do) become contentious are up for discussion very early in candidature. The preemptive discussions that are likely to arise when drafting the MoU are something that many candidates wish they had done with their supervisors, but often it is too late once a problem has arisen.
- This document provides a clear statement of intention and shows commitment from both candidate and supervisor. The expectations which are outlined for both candidate and supervisor are an excellent checklist and concise action plan to inform both parties.
Although a signed MoU document may not be legally binding as far as the University is concerned, the addition of candidate and supervisor signatures acts as a symbol of commitment and prevents later disputes over issues mentioned in the MoU.
Introduction
Why have an agreement
Process to develop an agreement
Some comments on agreements
Example of an agreement