Third of PhD students in Europe ‘fail to complete in six years’

Under the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) duration of a PhD in Australian universities is 36 to 48 months. The duration of scholarships provided by government or universities are also maximum 4 years. After 48 months duration of PhD as per AQF the students become unfunded students. Meaning if they linger on they may not have funding and that their supervision will not be counted as part of the supervisors workload. Universities are obliged to provide supervisory training as well as training for PhD students on how to be an effective student and manage themselves and their supervisors. We cannot expect students to complete their PhDs on time unless we provide the required support for both students and their supervisors. One other point that is widely practiced in the Australian universities is for doctoral students to have more than one supervisor. Supervisory teams are consistent of the Principal supervisor, a Co-supervisor and, in many cases, an industry supervisor all of whom should be supporting the students for a timely completion of their PhDs. Professor Acram Taji

Whilst interesting, this doesn’t explain any real reasons why a student will drop off a Doctoral programme. It seems to solely point at it being a supervisor issue with only a brief comment that ‘some will drop out in the first few weeks’. Was this information purely looking at if a candidate dropped out of a course? Or when/why they dropped out? The fact that most candidates only get funded for 3.5-4 years seems to have been missed out here, the only referal being to the ‘average length of the programme’. When funding runs out, what happens to candidates then? I agree there should be training for PhD supervisors, indeed there should be some form of formal lecturing/teaching qualification/certificate that lecturers should have, because regardless of how brilliant most of them are, they can be the worse teachers! All this being said, I’m still not sure whether this article is showing how long candidates take to complete their PhDs, or whether their supervisors need to be trained - HS

In the UK, it is the student who decides if and when to submit a thesis, not the supervisor, who is in a purely advisory role. Whilst I agree that all supervisors need appropriate training, it is a stretch to say that this is the reason for low completion rates - Where is the evidence? A few anecdotes are not sufficient. There are multiple reasons cited here, from funding to alternative career opportunities. A more nuanced assessment is required. My own experience (anecdote, I know) is that the biggest issue is students not fully appreciating what they are taking on with a PhD. I think there is a link here with the recently reported issues with mental health in PhD candidates. A PhD is a grind and it is often stamina as much as intellect that gets you through it. As a supervisor, there is only so much you can do (horses and water come to mind).

3/4 years following a 2 year masters is about right. 5 years is not excessive. Only a few appear to take longer (12% approx) so what’s all the fuss? A bigger fuss should be made about the missing 2 year masters (designed for PhD study not for milking the overseas cash cow) in English universities. That’s a very major problem, leading to narrowly focused and predominantly poor quality outputs that would barely pass if at all in other systems.

Laziness is another cause and it can be looked at from both the student and supervisor perspective. While some students are just lazy and they choose to drop out at will, supervisor's laziness affects many students who lose the steam to continue pursuing the degree. In fact some supervisors take so long to respond and guide a student. In my opinion, better student laziness than supervsior's as this affects students who are hardworking and determined to complete their studies within the stipulated time. In addition, as ridiculousit may seem, some supervisors do not want to see many students graduating as they will be 'suffocating' them in their 'exclusive club.'