Dissertation Research Supervisor Agency for U.S. Online Doctoral Research Supervision

Introduction

The key determinants of American doctoral student persistence and online dissertation research completion have highlighted the relationship between the doctoral candidate and dissertation research supervisor, mentor, or chair (Rigler, Bowlin, Sweat, Watts, & Throne, 2017; Throne et al., 2017; Throne, Shaw, Fore, O'Connor Duffy, & Clowes, 2015). These key elements have also emphasized the necessity for the online doctoral research supervisor to possess the very human traits of trust, honesty, and effective communication, especially for online, hybrid, or part-time doctoral degree programs (Black, 2017; Gardner & Gopaul, 2012; Rademaker, Duffy, Wetzler, & Zaikina-Montgomery, 2016; Throne & Duffy, 2016). In a critical review of the factors of doctoral student attrition, the authors previously noted the high attrition rate in U.S. doctoral programs has proffered much research to explain why doctoral students exit these programs, regardless of delivery modality, prior to dissertation completion (Baghurst, 2013; Rigler et al., 2017). In addition, the authors have identified that a positive, relational, and nonhierarchical online mentoring supervision style was a key determinant for doctoral degree and dissertation research completion in an online U.S. doctoral education program (Throne & Duffy, 2016; Throne et al., 2018; Throne et al., 2017; Throne et al., 2015). Yet, online doctoral students repeatedly report problematic relationships with the dissertation research supervisor as an impediment to dissertation completion regardless of delivery modality (Akagi & Fore, 2016; Levitch & Shaw, 2014; Rigler et al., 2017). On a positive note doctoral program leadership attributes a supportive, high mentoring, and interactive relationship between dissertation research supervisor and candidate as a significant factor in doctoral persistence (Baghurst, 2013; Cornér, Löfström, & Pyhältö, 2017; Kyvik & Olsen, 2014).

Gardner (2009, 2010) and other past researchers have also reported U.S. dissertation researchers, regardless of spatiotemporal distance from the research supervisor or doctoral peers, require socialization (Cornér et al., 2017; Gardner & Gopaul, 2012; Rigler et al., 2017) and access to regular and instructional communication with the dissertation research supervisor (Holmes, Trimble, & Morrison-Danner, 2014). In addition, this relationship must be socialized to involve meaningful interaction (Lave, 1991, 1996; Rademaker et al., 2016; Throne et al., 2015). Several researchers have reported some U.S. research supervisors who were overly involved in their own research agenda and not regularly available for supervision, interaction, and feedback were detrimental to dissertation research completion (Holmes et al., 2014; Rigler et al., 2017; Van de Schoot, Yerkes, Mouw, & Sonneveld, 2013). To this end, in a critical review of the literature surrounding U.S. doctoral persistence and completion, dissertation research supervisors who initiated regular and consistent doctoral student-research supervisor meetings reported higher doctoral completion rates (Rigler et al., 2017; Throne et al., 2017). Thus, as U.S. doctoral candidates engage opportunities to interact with the dissertation research supervisor, it is essential for a socialized, cooperative, and supportive relationship to be established based on clear expectations between the candidate and research supervisor (Gardner, 2009, 2010; Hardre & Hackett, 2015; Rigler et al., 2017).