UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY
Te Whare Wānanga o Waitaha
Template 7: Graduating Year Review Template 2011
Details
Current Year
Name of Programme
Original Programme Identifier
Name of Self-Review Coordinator
2011
PhD (Health Sciences)
UC-05 – PhD/1
Prof Andrew Hornblow
Programme Statement
Description
The purpose of the proposal in 2005 was to establish “Health Sciences” as a new area of study for the Doctor of
Philosophy degree at the University of Canterbury. The pace and extent of change in the health sciences and
the health sector are unprecedented, requiring increasing interdisciplinary collaboration, both in health care
delivery and in research. In response to these challenges UC had already established an interdisciplinary
Master of Health Sciences and Postgraduate Diploma in Health Sciences, and foreshadowed the establishment
of the PhD (Health Sciences), should these programmes be successful.
As anticipated in the proposal, candidates for the Health Sciences PhD have come from a wide variety of
health-related backgrounds, including medicine, nursing and allied health disciplines, also disciplines which
interface with the health sector, e.g. engineering, sport coaching. Supervisory expertise has drawn on the interdisciplinary team within the Health Sciences Centre, other UC academic departments, (e.g. Education,
Psychology, Management) and adjunct staff from the health sector or collaborating educational institutions.
As proposed, the PhD (Health Sciences) is allowing the University to contribute more effectively to
interdisciplinary health research, is fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, both within and beyond the
University, and is contributing to the development and retention of advanced expertise in the health sector.
Achievement
Goals of the Programme
The goals of the PhD (Health Sciences) programme are to:
 provide opportunities for doctoral level interdisciplinary research in the health sciences, for MHealSc
graduates and others, opportunities not previously offered by the University;
 facilitate an environment of inter-institutional as well as interdisciplinary research, to address current
challenges and opportunities facing the health sciences and health sector;
 strengthen and retain advanced health science expertise in the Canterbury region, and nationally,
through further development and expansion of areas of excellence in health related research.
Graduate Profile
On completion of their Doctor of Philosophy (Health Sciences) degree, graduates will have demonstrated
ability to:
 generate and contribute to advanced knowledge of specific aspects of the health sciences;
 plan, execute and report original research;
 access and critically evaluate published research and current understanding in the area or areas of
the health sciences to which their investigation relates;
1

articulate current issues and challenges in the health sciences and strategies to address these.
Changes
There have been no changes made to the programme since its introduction.
Review Processes
E
Account of Review Processes
The panel assembled for this review comprised Professor Andrew Hornblow (convenor) (Adjunct Professor in
Health Sciences), Prof Letitia Fickel (Head of School of Maori, Cultural and Social Studies) and Associate
Professor Simon Kingham (Head of Department of Geography). The panel reviewed the original proposal,
enrolment and progress data, and met with current and recently graduated students, and PhD supervisors.
Professor Hornblow was not involved in the staff and student meetings, or write-up, because he held a
supervisory role for a number of the PhD candidates.
Review Outcomes
E
Acceptability
Acceptability of the PhD (Health Sciences) programme is indicated in a number of ways. All students who have
completed a PhD (Health Sciences) have gained employment in areas which have allowed them to utilise the
skills gained during their doctoral studies. The acceptability of the programme to the health sector has been
indicated by ongoing collaboration with health sector organisations, these organisations sometimes providing
the setting for the research or utilising its data and findings. The Health Sciences Centre has initiated
Memoranda of Agreement, or collaborative arrangements, with other tertiary education institutions and health
provider agencies which have participated in the PhD (Health Sciences) programme. Three applicants from
overseas obtained UC international scholarships, other students have been funded by their employer, research
funding organisations, or general UC doctoral Scholarships.
Assessment procedures and student performance
Six months into enrolment as a PhD candidate students submit their research proposal. This is reviewed by the
student’s supervisors, the Director of the Health Sciences Centre and then submitted to the Dean of
Postgraduate Research for approval. Three candidates who initially enrolled for doctoral study moved overseas
before submission of the proposal and withdrew from the programme. One candidate submitted a proposal
which was not accepted and chose not to submit a new or revised proposal. At six-monthly intervals thereafter
for the duration of the student’s enrolment a progress report with comments by both student and all supervisors
is submitted to the Dean of Postgraduate Research. Most students require University of Canterbury Ethics
Committee approval and/or Regional Ethics Committee approval. The submitted thesis is examined by two
external examiners, including, normally, one from overseas. A candidate’s supervisor could be part of the
examination process under the old PhD regulations, but not under the current regulations. The candidate also
faces an oral defence of the thesis. All processes conform to the relevant UC Regulations (General Course and
Examination Regulations: Section L. Theses). (UC Calendar, page 51 and following.)
All submitted theses for PhD (Health Sciences) have passed and required only minor changes before final
submission and deposit in the UC Library.
Data
Table 1: Numbers enrolling and completing
Year
Projected
No.
Enrolling
Actual No. Enrolled
Full-time
Parttime
EFTS
No.
Completed
Withdrawals
2008
4-6
6
3
3
4.8
0
1
2009
4-6
8
4
4
6.3
1
2
2010
4-6
13
4
9
7.3
4
1
2
Table 2: Distribution of grades (for final year courses)
No.
Year
Course Code
Enrolled
No. Completed and
passed
Continuing
2008
HLTH790
6
0
5
2009
HLTH790
8
1
5
2010
HLTH790
13
4
12
Programme Evaluation
The graduate profile for the Health Sciences PhD programmes has four desired outcomes which graduates are
expected to be able to demonstrate. The panel reviewed the programme in light of the programme outcomes,
and have drawn on two sources of information: programme documents and matriculation data; and student and
staff perspectives gathered through two (2) focus group meetings on 12 September, one each with staff and
students. The turnout for these meetings was rather small; there were 3 currently enrolled student participants
and only 1 staff participant. Additionally we have received email communication with 1 graduated student, and
1 staff member.
The summary below outlines key strengths identified by students and staff, and supported by the programme
documents. We have also provided a few recommendations for further strengthening and enhancing the
programme as it continues its trajectory of growth with respect to national/international recognition and
increasing student numbers.
Findings
It is important to note here that we have found it rather difficult to disentangle and separate out the student
perceptions of the programme as pre-earthquake and post-earthquake. It is clear from the student focus group
discussions that students enrolled after the onset of the earthquakes last September have had quite different
experiences within the programme than the student who was enrolled prior to the earthquakes. This is mainly
due to the disruption of their co-location with peers and academic staff members in the Waimairi Building, and
the typical access this allowed for the informal learning support and engagement in the academic community of
scholars within the Health Sciences Centre. All the students felt the keen loss of this sense of community.
Those students who had experienced this engagement prior to the quakes deeply felt its loss. Those who arrived
after the quakes and had not experienced this nonetheless felt its absence and expressed their desire for more
regular opportunities to engage with the expertise of the staff and fellow postgraduate students and be part of
the life of the academic community within the Health Sciences Centre. This includes both formal and informal
interactions.
This current status must be acknowledged as the context in which this summary is situated. Moreover, the panel
wants to acknowledge that the recommendations we have made are not necessarily unique to the Health
Sciences PhD programme. Many of the PhD programmes across the university would similarly benefit from
addressing these areas.
Programme Strengths
1. Quality of Supervision—Students felt their supervisors were knowledgeable and supportive.
Supervisors were able to strike an appropriate balance of guidance and opportunities with the
expectation for student self-direction and initiative. Staff agreed that supervision was a critical factor in
student success, and noted that to date all students submitting theses for examination have passed.
2. Resources—Students were very positive and encouraged by the resources available to them, with
especially high praise for the quality of library resources and access to top journals and books. They
were also positive about the research/study space provided pre-EQ and what has now been allocated in
the Dovedale Village. However, as stated above, they did mention the serious disruption caused by not
having these facilities for 5 months.
3. Post-Proposal Presentation—This opportunity was noted by students as being of enormous benefit to
3
their progress with their research, as it provided supportive feedback and critique for honing and
refining their projects. Although it is not a required part of the programme, they felt it was a key
learning opportunity and were pleased it was an option.
4. Programme Outcomes—The stated outcomes for graduates are ones that take into account both the
academic and professional learning needs of students. It prepares them for continuing as universitybased researchers, as well as providing a foundation for the rigorous application of their knowledge and
skill set to other professional contexts.
Recommendations
1. PhD Coordinator—The programme is growing rather rapidly, and as the numbers of students grow
having a designated staff member as the coordinator could ensure streamlined support for students and
supervisors.
2. Regular PhD Student meetings—Such meetings have been held in the past with a focus on providing a
forum for students to raise programme concerns. However, due to the students’ desire for more informal
opportunities to engage with each other and staff in support of their learning, we recommend that these
meetings be reinstituted with the focus on arranging them as a series of colloquia or other informal
learning situations. It may be that a sequence of colloquia and process/programme meetings would best
serve both students and staff. It should be noted that there also may be a role for informal meetings for
students to share their experiences without staff present.
3. Clarifying Expectations—While students felt they received excellent supervision in terms of the
expertise of the staff, they did express a desire for staff to engage with them early in more explicit
discussions of roles and shared expectations. They suggested that this would perhaps enable the initial 6
months of the proposal development stage to proceed in a more efficient and timely manner. Although
this would clearly be of assistance to all students, it is of particular concern as a potentially proactive
support structure for Maori, Pasifika and international students who bring varied cultural assumptions,
understandings and experiences to their roles as learners and students.
Continuation or Discontinuation
The success and growth of the PhD (Health Sciences) supports continuation.
4