Exploring and understanding perceived relationships between doctoral students and their supervisors in China

The quality of the supervisory relationship significantly impacts doctoral students' success, satisfaction, and retention. However, this 'fit' is context-dependent, influenced by both cultural and disciplinary factors. Doctoral education, historically rooted in medieval teacher training, evolved with the Humboldtian ideal of researcher nurturing. While a global convergence towards standardized doctoral structures exists, national characteristics remain. In China, Confucianism profoundly shapes teacher-student relationships, traditionally hierarchical and authoritarian, resembling father-son dynamics. While these relationships are evolving, Confucian values persist. STEM disciplines also exhibit unique supervisory dynamics, characterized by high interdependence and collaboration between faculty and students. STEM students often act as a labor force contributing to their supervisors' research, relying on supervisors for resources and mentorship. Despite the growing importance of doctoral education in China and the increasing scholarship on the topic, research on supervisor-student perceived fit remains limited. This study aims to investigate how Chinese doctoral students and their supervisors perceive fit or misfit in STEM supervisory relationships, examining the interplay of cultural and disciplinary contexts through the lens of person-supervisor fit theory.

Existing research reveals conceptual and practical dimensions of fit or misfit in doctoral supervision. The conceptual dimension focuses on beliefs about supervisory behaviors, while the practical dimension concerns actual supervisory practices. Murphy et al. (2007) identified four orientations in engineering doctoral supervision: task-focused/controlling, task-focused/guiding, person-focused/controlling, and person-focused/guiding. Subsequent studies revealed discrepancies between supervisors’ (more guiding and person-focused) and students’ (more controlling and task-focused) orientations. Further research highlights differences in perceived roles, with students expecting broader support than supervisors often provide. Studies also show mismatches between student preferences for supervision styles and what supervisors offer, as well as inconsistencies between supervisor support and student needs. While prior research is insightful, it lacks a comprehensive exploration of cultural influences. This study addresses this gap by considering the influence of Confucianism on supervisory relationships in China.

This qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews with nine supervisory pairs (doctoral students and their supervisors) from a research-intensive Chinese university specializing in STEM disciplines. Purposive and snowball sampling techniques were used to recruit participants, encompassing supervisors from both 'hard-pure' (sciences, mathematics) and 'hard-applied' (technology, engineering) clusters with varying academic ranks and experience. Interviews explored participants' perceptions and practices of supervision, examining their accounts of fit or misfit and underlying reasons. Interviews lasted between 61 and 118 minutes, were audio-recorded with informed consent, and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis using NVivo 12 software was conducted, integrating both inductive and deductive approaches. Established constructs from person-supervisor fit theory informed deductive interpretations, while inductive analysis uncovered emergent themes related to cultural and disciplinary influences.

The study identified supervisory fit or misfit across conceptual (supplementary) and practical (complementary) dimensions. Supplementary fit was characterized by three conceptual congruences: (1) shared understanding of doctoral learning as a developmental process, (2) agreement on essential student dispositions (positive attitude, persistence, independence), and (3) recognition of supervisors' modeling and nurturing roles. Supplementary misfit emerged from differing perceptions of supervisors' familial roles: students desired intimate, almost familial support, while supervisors emphasized their professional boundaries, highlighting the conflicts between traditional Confucian expectations and the demands of a modern academic career. Complementary fit included needs-supplies fit (students' needs met by supervisor resources and guidance in both task-focused and person-focused aspects) and demands-abilities fit (alignment of student skills with supervisor project needs). The needs-supplies fit encompassed both task-focused aspects (instrumental guidance, resources for research) and person-focused aspects (support for academic career choices or non-academic career preparation). Demands-abilities fit was observed in the careful matching of students to supervisors based on prior knowledge and research area, demonstrating that doctoral students are frequently integrated into supervisors' work as assistants. Complementary misfit arose from the contrast between supervisors' strict demands and students’ desires for greater autonomy. However, the hierarchical nature of traditional Chinese teacher-student relationships often resulted in superficial harmony despite these mismatches, with students privately expressing discontent but publicly maintaining respectful distance.

This study's findings contribute to the theoretical integration of fit theory into doctoral education, particularly within STEM supervision. It reveals the complex interplay between disciplinary and cultural contexts, highlighting the 'bidirectional' nature of complementary fit in STEM—students require supervisor support while supervisors rely on student labor. The emphasis on 'superficial harmony' underscores how ingrained cultural norms can mask underlying tensions. The study shows that seemingly harmonious relationships might mask significant misfits, emphasizing the need for institutional support to facilitate open communication between supervisors and students. Supervisors actively creating open environments and signaling this openness to students can proactively address potential conflict.

This research advances the understanding of perceived fit in doctoral supervision in China, particularly within STEM, demonstrating the interplay of cultural and disciplinary factors. The findings highlight the importance of acknowledging both the positive congruences and the potential for misfits, emphasizing the need for open communication and institutional support to improve supervisor-student relationships. Future research should expand the sample size, include diverse institutions, and explore the nuanced impact of variables like supervisor age, rank, and student experience on perceived fit.

The relatively small sample size and focus on a single university limit the generalizability of findings. The broad categorization of STEM disciplines into 'hard-pure' and 'hard-applied' may oversimplify disciplinary differences. Future research should address these limitations by employing larger, more diverse samples and exploring more detailed disciplinary distinctions.