6. Creating Successful Higher Degree Researcher Pathways in a Developing Country – Papua New Guinea

Dora Jimela Kialo; Frieda Siaguru; Imelda Ambelye; Jillian Blacker; Lydia Yalambing; Mirzi Betasolo; Rachel Aisoli-Orake; Sogoing Denano; Susan Gasson; and Veronica Bue

Why read this chapter?

The key learnings from this chapter are:

  • the context of supervising higher degree researchers in Papua New Guinea
  • the key stakeholders informing success
  • a checklist for success.

This chapter is informed by the lived experiences of researchers currently living and working in Papua New Guinea. As you explore this chapter you may find aspects of this discussion that resonate with you regardless of where you are located or the resources that are available to you. However, the fundamentals of supervisory practice are nuanced in this chapter to address the context for supervision of higher degree researchers in Papua New Guinea. Our exploration of this unique research education context contributes to broader discussions of inclusivity, equity and diversity in the higher education sector.  Our chapter recognises the vulnerability of PNG and other less developed nations to global events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change, and technological advances. These events have widened disparities between education systems and resources of the global north and south.  We propose supervisory practices that enable diverse collaboration and network engagement, highlighting the strengths and opportunities that PNG and other developing countries can contribute to global research endeavours.  Our chapter is inspired by Ha’s (2018) notion of “pockets of possibility” and proposes more inclusive approaches to internationalisation (de Wit, 2019).


Supervising higher degree researchers in Papua New Guinea (PNG) is informed by its sociocultural, geographic and economic context. While the country has a wealth of natural resources it ranks 155th out of 189 countries on the United Nations Human Development Index – lower than other Pacific Island nations. It maintains diverse cultures across a population of nearly 10.5 million (including more than 800 spoken languages). The population lives across 3.1 million square kilometres of rugged terrain that hosts 5% of the world’s total biodiversity and the world’s third largest expanse of tropical rainforest. Societal rules and norms continue to deny Papua New Guinean women basic rights, with domestic violence affecting two-thirds of women in the country. Their access to health care and education, and representation in government and public policy debates are also limited.   This profile invites further research and engagement from global researchers.

Sustainable development of higher education and research in PNG is constrained by limited funding and resources, and relatively low participation rates in higher education. Ongoing economic and political pressures create uncertainty and instability in many aspects of daily life, from public safety to access to the internet. This context makes it hard for PNG’s education system to begin to address global standards for accreditation and quality assurance and support the creation of opportunities for research networks and collaboration.

Most of the authors of this chapter are members of a Women in Higher Education SIG (significant interest group) and all are female and reside in PNG and Australia. PNG authors have completed or are completing higher degrees by research in Communication and Development Studies, Civil Engineering and Agriculture at universities in Australia, the Philippines, and Papua New Guinea. Many have been supervising higher degree researchers, as well as teaching and leading, for more than 10 years at the Papua New Guinea University of Technology (PNGUoT).

Established in 1965, PNGUoT became an institute of technology in 1970 and then a University of Technology in 1973. PNGUoT is now one of eight universities operating in PNG. The university continues to strive to develop guidelines and policies to meet global teaching and research standards with support from valued international partners in the Asia-Pacific region. As part of its commitment to women’s rights, it supports the Women in Higher Education SIG (established in collaboration with James Cook University’s Cairns Institute) and its activities.

This chapter provides an example of an inclusive collaborative research culture. The PNGUoT authors have, with Susan and Jill from Australia, researched and written this chapter to identify ways to strengthen research capacity and realise the potential of PNGUoT’s unique research education environment. It would be easy to propose addressing a lack of researcher expertise, weak infrastructure and limited resources.  Instead, we focus on the potential of researchers in PNG and the unique research and fieldwork possibilities offered by the region as value propositions to encourage international collaboration and investment through inclusive supervisory practices.  The authors have drawn on their experiences of supervision and in supporting higher degree researchers to identify ways for supervisors to ensure higher degree researchers can progress uniquely framed  topics of local interest and potential impact, taking advantage of access to:

  • a depth and breadth of global and local methodological and theoretical expertise
  • information services and professional development resources
  • adequate infrastructure.

Scene setting – The path to success

Figure 6.1 shows the range of stakeholders who can assist supervisors in creating a path to success for their higher degree researcher:

Five nested circles, each with a different label indicating the stakeholder name. The outer circle is labelled as Networks. The next inner circle label is Institution. The next inner circle label is Supervisor. The next inner circle label is Project Topic. The smallest inner circle is labelled Higher Degree Researcher.
Figure 6.1 Key stakeholders on the HDR path by Rachel Aisoli-Orake, Susan Gasson and Jill Blacker used under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 licence

The Higher Degree Researcher is at the centre of the model, without them there is no research education environment. The project topic is defined here as a stakeholder because it strongly influences, and is influenced by, the skills and capacities of other stakeholders, and the resources and contexts where the research is conducted. Ensuring the topic can be supported and is sustainable is a primary key to success in the fragile PNG research education context. The figure emphasises that stakeholders do not operate in isolation. Accounting for interdependencies between stakeholders is a vital practice for supervisors to model to higher degree researchers.

The important factors for success


Supervisors, in working with their higher degree researcher, will take the lead initially to ensure that the topic selected aligns with the supervisors’ areas of expertise. In the unique PNG context there is also a need to account for the availability of suitable literature and selection of suitable research design and data analytics sensitive to the local context. Identification of local fieldwork sites or accessible datasets and tools is also key. The PNG context is a rich site for research, but researchers need to be alert to socio-cultural, geographic, resourcing and economic considerations that may affect topics that can be examined, and data collection practices that will be feasible. These fresh fields ensure the potential for the social impact of research is rich, despite the need to constrain the focus and scope of higher degree research undertaken. Leveraging the strengths and expertise of local supervisors and engaged national and international research networks may enhance the viability of a given topic or proposed research design, and lead to richer more strategically beneficial research partnerships.

Case study – Recruiting quality higher degree researchers

The thesis topic is normally a consideration from pre-admission through to the completion of candidature. For example, the selection of higher degree researchers is undertaken by each department, after initial screening for entry requirements by the PNGUoT Admission committee. The respective postgraduate committee (faculty members) for each department meet to screen the applications. During this time the supervisors get to assess the higher degree researchers’ proposed research topics, and their qualification and experiences in conducting research. Through the screening process, the supervisors get to have pre-knowledge of the higher degree researchers they would potentially be supervising. Having pre-knowledge of the higher degree researcher helps the supervisors in providing the necessary supervision and mentoring throughout the postgraduate research journey.

Another aspect to consider is the logistics if 3 or 4 higher degree researchers have indicated their interest to study in a field where there is only one suitable supervisor. Such selection can be dictated by the thesis topic, resulting in many higher degree researchers being assigned to one supervisor. That is why at times the number of higher degree researchers allocated to one supervisor may go over the supervisory limit. This has impacts on both supervisory load, and the quality of the supervision that is able to be provided to each of the higher degree researchers. Supervisory practices in this context are explored further in the next section.

Supervisors and higher degree researchers

Supervisors must take time to get to know the background, experience and interests of their higher degree researcher in order to identify a topic that aligns with available expertise, research resources and networks. Additionally, there is a need to address research integrity and ethical conduct considerations. PNG guidelines and policy are often in development and may be relatively untested in the local context. It is for the supervisors to be the guides, aware of potential delays, or difficulties that could arise due to societal rules and norms or environmental driven constraints. The confidence of higher degree researchers in the topic and their supervisors will be enriched by open discussion of research design considerations that result in the setting of realistic plans and approaches to the research process. The tyranny of distance, when supporting a Higher Degree Researcher located away from campus, is much harsher in PNG. Online interview data collection, sharing of large data sets or written drafts may not be feasible in a context of limited internet and electricity supplies. Visits to multiple sites may not be realistic in certain seasons of the year or in particularly harsh terrain. Finding ways to be available to problem solve and contribute to discussion with your higher degree researcher on the merits of alternative approaches enriches the learning and reduces anxiety and frustration when attempting to make steady progress. In time the higher degree researchers, like their supervisors, will come to navigate around limitations and weaknesses and to access experts and reliable approaches routinely. Finding ways to optimise use of limited internet services, and avoid expensive and unreliable postal services, can be essential strategies for supervisors trying to provide timely feedback.

Case study – Building positive relationships

An anecdote shared by a first-time supervisor, who was the principal supervisor of two Masters students highlights positive relationship building. “Being a first-time supervisor as well as a PhD candidate in the final stages of writing is no easy task. I focus on factors or themes I experience, and have dealt with, in order to successfully help the students I supervised”.

It is important that supervisors have a positive relationship with their higher degree researchers. The supervisors must provide consultative support and feedback and assist in networking with the related communities of practices in scientific research and the context of the study. Consultation tools including Google apps (Google Sheets, Google Docs, Google Slides, Gmail), WhatsApp, Messenger, LinkedIn, and text messaging are useful but can be limited by access to relevant technology and internet stability as well as considerations such as electricity blackouts. So, while there is a willingness to embrace technology to progress both research activities and supervisor/researcher relationships, there are factors that impact that are beyond the control of both the researchers and their supervisors. For those in remote areas, a letter does help, or a message is sent to the higher degree researcher through someone else.

Different perspectives on time and prioritisation of research in the context of broader social concerns can be hard to monitor in PNG and can impact the effective use of time. In one example, the supervisor created a structured schedule, distributing specific time slots for supervisory meetings, teaching undergraduate courses, research consultations, and personal study. Being aware of the time commitments of higher degree researchers is important. Consider the time they have available to conduct their studies routinely, and their expected timeline for progressing to completion. Consider logistical constraints, and check that timelines reflect the actual durations of key research activities. Discuss how long it takes the researcher to travel to campus, ask them what forms of transport, and timetables are available. Take these and their work and family commitments into account when scheduling meetings (See also Chapter 2).

A key consideration in PNG is that information services within the university may be very limited, so routine access to online journals, or current textbooks may not  be possible. Consider institutional and research networks that may provide additional access or can – given time – facilitate the sharing of key documents. Plan with your higher degree researcher to navigate away from places and spaces that may put the conduct of rigorous research at risk.

Here are some examples of risks to three of the key stakeholders:

  1. The higher degree researchers – their development must be managed in a context of limited resources, while research standards remain unchanged regardless of context.
  2. The project topic – contingency plans for conducting research on the topic are essential. Loss of access to resources, data or expertise can be very disruptive, putting the conduct of the study at risk.
  3. The supervisors – their expertise in supporting the higher degree researchers and their research projects are vital, especially in a potentially volatile research context. Supervisors become the core, and sometimes sole, source of guidance and advice. Their roles include: building researcher capacity, sponsoring access to networks and resources, and overseeing the conduct of projects.

Case study – Jane and Adam building expectations

Jane had used Adam as a tutor in a number of her subjects and always found him easy to work with and able to conduct his classes professionally. As a Senior Lecturer she was also on the university ethics committee and academic board, supervised two higher degree researchers as primary advisor and was working on a grant application. Her grant topic allowed her to ask for funds for research support.

Jane and Adam agreed that Adam would work with Jane on the grant application with a budget for a PhD scholarship for Adam. Jane had also invited a colleague from a developed country to join the work. A librarian by profession as well as a researcher, Ray was able to contribute to the grant writing and provide access to the latest journals based on agreed search strategies. By developing the application together, they ensured that the academic requirements of the grant matched their expertise. Adam also monitored some online modules to refresh his methodological skills and began reading journals to become familiar with the field.

Together they set out the details of the grant to show a timeline for Adam’s doctoral studies. Adam talked to his family about his plans to enrol in a PhD if the grant was successful. The scholarship would allow him to devote all his time to his project, but he hoped to continue to do a small amount of teaching to continue developing his practice. His family accepted that if the grant was successful Adam would need time to focus on his studies and they talked about finding a quiet space at home for him to write and think.


A university’s infrastructure should cater for the needs of the higher degree researcher’s program of study. This can include but is not limited to, access to technology, access to laboratories and related resources, access to libraries and scholarly articles and databases, funding and scholarships, and workload recognition for supervisors. To explore these elements in practice, consider the following. Within the last decade, there has been a dynamic shift in research practices with the use of Learning Management Systems (LMS) and electronic devices. These electronic and technical devices have had an impact on various stages and aspects of academic research (collecting, measuring and recording data and writing the report on the findings). So higher degree researchers have to be trained to learn, and know how to use, the device and computer programs. Additionally, the capacity of both researcher and supervisors to use these devices to conduct the research successfully, and with ease must be considered.

Further, the institution’s support of the availability of laboratory equipment in a technical institution is very important to the success of research outputs. For example, if the water samples brought to the laboratory cannot be appropriately processed and stored, the validity of the test results would be compromised.

Access to resources goes beyond the availability of laboratory equipment. Facilities such as libraries and academic writing and language support are fundamental to the success of a higher degree research candidature. If these cannot be made available at the institutional level, then the higher degree researcher and supervisors must explore research networks and institutional partner organisations to identify alternative ways to access resources. This may involve getting a grant to travel elsewhere to conduct research, or sending samples or data elsewhere, or inviting key experts to visit at key times to engage locally.

Case study – Professional development resources

The establishment of the Academic Resource Centre at PNGUoT could provide professional development and writing resources to maximize higher degree researcher progress. While it is acknowledged that this is a good step, the addition of a dedicated academic writing and learning support centre, with professional tutors specially tailored to assist higher degree researchers, is an ideal that requires funding. Papua New Guineans use English as a second, third or fourth language, so the need for good writing is a big challenge. This challenge remains the supervisors’ responsibility when there are no resources or access to an academic writing centre.

Chapter 9 and Chapter 10 explore the roles of libraries and librarians, freely available online programs and resources, and the role of supervisors. These chapters explore how supervisors can facilitate the use of libraries and informed learning resources. Capacity to access, gather and process information is key to the development of independent researchers.

Funding can also impact the success of a research project. Anecdotal experience of supervisors and higher degree researchers is reflected in the following observation: ‘The university has a facility to draw funds for my projects, however, there is a funding limit that constrains production of much better research results’. Lack of scholarships and fund sources for high degree researchers can force them to engage in full time work that can distract from their research progress. Work commitments can impact on higher degree researcher’s ability to conduct research, realise quality research outcomes, and gain experience as an independent researcher. Higher degree researcher studies require large blocks of time for deeper thinking and engagement with key literature. Scheduling 30-minute blocks between teaching classes is unlikely to be a productive way of progressing studies. Access to quiet workspaces where interruptions are infrequent can be highly beneficial. It can be hard to find such space in a busy work or home environment if facilities are not available on campus.

Finally, institutional support for supervisors to manage workload is essential. Academics face ever-increasing pressures to publish, and to maintain heavy teaching loads and administrative roles. Pressures are also on higher degree researchers to publish before graduation to enhance their employability. Supervisors can work on publications with higher degree researchers, to reduce the pressures for all concerned and share the workload, and their expertise. Teamwork can reduce the amount of time that needs to be found for research and writing. Equally university leadership has a key role to play in ensuring that workload is distributed fairly, giving everyone opportunities across the domains of teaching, research, and service. These pressures are no different for those in PNG, where teaching and service workload allocations are high, and potentially more so for women academics.


Networking and collaboration with other researchers is a fundamental aspect of successful supervision. In developing countries like PNG, networks may be used to access essential resources and expertise. Networks can be used to give researchers in other institutions and other countries privileged access to unique local data sets and knowledge that will allow their conduct of research in country. Collaborators can become external supervisors or ‘critical friends’ of the higher degree researcher. They may agree to review or examine projects.  They may be able to grant supervisors and higher degree researchers access to additional library resources, research funding, data analytical tools or infrastructure. Network relationships developed and maintained by supervisors can involve mentoring where those more experienced can guide and role model supervisory practices. They may share different ways of critiquing work, or different theoretical and methodological approaches to inform research conduct and design. In return local supervisors can grant access to unique data sets and knowledges, explain the navigation of rich and diverse cultural contexts, and manage expectations of research stakeholders.

Other examples of engagement activities through local and international networks may include enrichment programs. University wide lectures from expert staff throughout the year, specifically targeting topics about the research journey and supervision may be offered. Topics might include introduction to the research culture, preparation for candidacy, reviewing literature, research methodology, data collection, analysis, thesis write-up/ writing for publication or thesis examination. Some departments may be able to frame events as course content for their higher degree researchers. If research methodology subjects are not offered within courses, then supervisory mentorship may be required. For departments that do offer research methodology subjects, there may be online resources available, or visiting experts providing complementary resources to the support provided to higher degree researchers. Sourcing support beyond the supervisory team needs to be considered and planned for well ahead of time.

Higher Degree Researcher networks or significant interest groups, initiated by supervisors or the researchers, allow researchers to share, learn and support one another through candidature. Networks may include researchers from across a range of related fields, connected by their higher degree by research enrolment. Such groups can allow more advanced higher degree researchers to provide advice on the navigation of candidature to new researchers, and help them in the identification of additional expertise and infrastructure that may inform their progress.

Some other examples of key additional stakeholders include mentors, sponsors, or collaborators who may be found in other areas of the university, beyond the university in industry or government, or perhaps in universities in other countries around the world. The authors of this chapter who are members of PNGUoT Women in Higher Education (WIHE) SIG acknowledge the value and power of their peer-to-peer community of practice.

Case study: Jane and Adam build research networks

The grant was successful and a year later Adam is enrolled in his PhD, on a scholarship, progressing his research. A big hurdle for Adam is that he must present on his project to a panel and provide his literature review and project plan for their comments. The outcome of this presentation will be confirmation of his candidature and scholarship for the next 2 and a half years.

Jane is keen to use this milestone to further develop Adam’s academic writing and presentation skills. As a writer Adam is still struggling to adopt the thesis genre that involves using the literature to support his argument and intended research contribution. His critical thinking skills are growing, but he is finding constant reviews and revisions of his work troubling, unclear why his current drafts are not good enough. Similarly, he is approaching the presentation as a tutorial and not confident about responding to questions from the audience and panel at the conclusion of the presentation.

To address these issues Jane is prompted to create a peer mentoring group. She creates a monthly meeting and invites Adam and her other two students to attend. Two other supervisors and their two higher degree researchers also come along to the meetings.

At each meeting higher degree researchers present, lead discussions, or nominate to present or lead future sessions. There is also time devoted to a round table sharing of researchers’ project progress. Presentations include practice presentations for conference papers and confirmations. Leaders present papers they find interesting and facilitate discussion of their contents. Supervisors are present to support discussion and model good practice in reviewing work and giving constructive feedback.

For Adam and others, meetings provide a valuable way of learning from the experience of others, discovering the standard of work expected at different stages of candidature, and developing critical thinking and reviewing skills.

Checklist for success

The following checklists are provided for supervisors to discuss with their higher degree researcher, accounting for key stakeholder considerations.

Higher Degree Researcher – For the higher degree researcher to complete and discuss with the supervisors:


(Yes or No)

Consider your work and research experience to date, and how it has prepared you for research studies? Honestly consider your strengths and how to ensure a good fit for your background, expertise and interests with a possible project and supervisor. What are the admission requirements and are you able to meet them?
Are your family and friends supportive of your studies, and aware of how it will impact your time and devotion to their needs? Have you discussed your commitments with your supervisor and discussed a study timeline? Have you engaged any scholarly networks or contacts you have who may be able to provide advice on managing your time?
What arrangements can you put in place to travel regularly to campus to meet your supervisor? Do you have access to study related resources? Have you discussed your needs with your supervisory team? Is there a place where you can go to focus on your studies for at least 20 hours a week if you are studying part time and double that if you are studying full time?
Are you aware of the support you can get from your supervisors?  Have you considered with them how you will work together, and accounted for any concerns about professional development or infrastructure needs? Have you explored networks beyond the supervisory team and institution that may be important to you and your studies?
Are their financial considerations to be addressed before you can study?  Have you explored available funding and scholarships with your supervisors?  Have you considered study exchanges or double degrees with overseas universities?
Will you be studying full or part time? Externally or internally?  Have you considered and addressed the implications of your study mode for meetings with supervisors, accessing resources, family and work commitments?
How will you manage work life balance during the term of candidature, that could be up to a decade for part time students.  Carefully consider your goals and motivations. Have you discussed with your supervisors your goals?

Topic – For the supervisory team to complete and discuss with the higher degree researcher:


(Yes or No)

Is the proposed project topic well aligned with the available infrastructure and expertise? If not, who can assist you to address needs locally or globally?
Does the higher degree researcher’s academic and research record reflect the capacity required to conduct the research? If not, what are the options in terms of variation to topic or additional pathway courses to better prepare the researcher?
Do the supervisor’s theoretical and methodological approaches align well in supporting the student and their project? If not consider where additional support may come from, or how accounting for existing areas of strength may help better align the topic with supervisory capacity.
What are the possible outcomes of the research (e.g., journals, books, patents, or reports to government) and what role can the supervisors play in supporting their achievement? What expertise and expectations does the Higher Degree Researcher bring and are those accounted for in the outcomes planned? What other experts may be useful stakeholders to invite onto the supervision panel or contact for support?
What are the research integrity considerations to be agreed on and understood (e.g., authorship, intellectual property, ethics, and data management) and does the supervisor’s range of expertise and experience mean they can support this work? What policy, guidelines, online resource, or external expert can you call on to guide you in ensuring the research is conducted appropriately?
Will supervisors’ research be used to inform or be informed by working with the higher degree researcher on a topic led and owned by the higher degree researcher? Are appropriate arrangements in place to ensure all authors will be credited on work generated? Is there a need to explore how to set such arrangements in place, and if so, what appropriate resources can be accessed?

Supervisor – Supervisors along with their higher degree researchers to discuss supervisory approaches available to them (See also Chapter 1):


(Yes or No)

Can supervisors establish an enduring relationship with the higher degree researcher in this context? If working across communities or countries – have you set up time to share and discuss contextual considerations?
Can supervisors negotiate meeting arrangements and ways of providing feedback that are suitable for all concerned? Can realistic expectations be set with higher degree researchers about timelines based on access to internet and postal services, and time required to prepare for meetings? Negotiate and explore options if timeframes are not reasonable.
Can supervisors champion the higher degree researcher’s research by introducing them to a range of networks, providing one to one support and guidance, and being a research role model?

Institution For supervisors and their higher degree researcher to discuss the resources available to them:


(Yes or No)

Can supervisors confirm that required infrastructure can be made available to the higher degree researcher? Have concerns or constraints been discussed? Are Plan Bs in place to account for any concerns?
Can supervisors ensure the higher degree researcher is aware of and can make good use of resources available? Have concerns or constraints been discussed? Are Plan Bs in place to account for any concerns?
Who are the key stakeholders within the university the supervisors should liaise with or introduce the higher degree researcher to in order to provide sufficient administrative support and guidance? Who within the broader community may be able to assist including alumni, university networks and researcher development organisations?

Networks – What additional resources are available? Have the following factors been considered?


(Yes or No)

What library resources, professional development offerings and infrastructure will be accessed beyond the institution and how?
What supervisor and higher degree researcher networks beyond the university can be used to inform the higher degree researcher’s progress?
Can higher degree researchers networks at the institution, or with higher degree researchers and alumni beyond the institution provide added support for the higher degree researcher?
What internal and external scholarships, grants or resource providers can supervisors and the higher degree researcher identify to enhance access to resources?
What sources of emotional and practical support are available? How can supervisors and the higher degree researcher access these more readily?

Evidence your practice

Can you identify a topic that is well aligned with your research interests and expertise? Can you identify a potential applicant to discuss this topic with? Are their interests, skills, and experience well aligned to the topic?

What are your current practices as a supervisor in building student skills? Based on your review of this chapter, are there other new practices that would be more effective? Articulate these.

Consider your research networks. How can you apply these to develop a sustainable research education environment for you and your higher degree researcher?


PNG supervisors and higher degree researchers face many challenges and have access to many opportunities as they navigate a doctoral candidature together. As noted by Papoutsaki & Rooney (2006) they include:

  • building a research culture through continuity of staffing
  • designing curriculum in response to the needs of PNGs diverse communities
  • creating new knowledge building on locally based fieldwork
  • using senior academics to mentor new researchers in required research skills
  • nurturing academic networks across the Asia Pacific region.

The learnings and lived experience shared by authors in this chapter provide unique, informing insights aimed at enhancing collaboration and supervisory practices. Institution support and appropriate guidelines are important in administering graduate research school programs. Where the institution is less research intensive it may be an opportunity for the active research community to contribute to development of resources, perhaps drawing on the expertise of their scholarly networks and trusted online resources. The priority is to ensure that PNG and its wealth of promising researchers and research contexts are brought into the frame of global research activity. PNG has much to offer in terms of unique resources and varied social cultural perspectives. Being aware of their own research strengths, access to resources and expectations and plans will help supervisors to make best use of higher degree researchers’ strengths and capacity.  Continuing to build relationships with networks globally is a vital strategy employed by even the highest-ranking universities. Building on strengths, being innovative and creative in approaching challenges and being inclusive in research practice will always serve the PNG researcher and those in the global research community well.


Additional Resources

While most of these sources and additional readings are freely available, some are not. The lock icon beside an entry indicates that the source may be available from your library.

Babcock, L., Recalde, M. P., & Vesterlund, L. (2018). Why women volunteer for tasks that don’t lead to promotions. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2018/07/why-women-volunteer-for-tasks-that-dont-lead-to-promotions

Baird, J., & Kula-Semos, M. A. (2018). Internationalisation and Indigenisation in Papua New Guinea’s universities: Promoting authentic agency. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 40(6), 550–565. https://doi.org/doi/full/10.1080/1360080X.2018.1529116

Cotterall, S. (2015). The rich get richer: International doctoral candidates and scholarly identity. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 52(4), 360-370. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.839124

Noland, M. (2015). Comment on “Determinants of international research collaboration: Evidence from international co-inventions in Asia and major OECD countries”. Asian Economic Policy Review, 10(1), 122-123. https://doi.org/10.1111/aepr.12089

Papoutsaki, E., & Rooney, D. (2006). Colonial legacies and neo-colonial practices in Papua New Guinean higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 25(4), 421–433.

Payumo, J., Sutton, T., Brown, D., Nordquist, D., Evans, M., Moore, D., & Arasu, P. (2017). Input–output analysis of international research collaborations: A case study of five U.S. universities. Scientometrics, 111(3), 1657-1671. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2313-2

Seeberg, V., & Qiang, H. (2012). Sustainable international cross-cultural collaboration: Transcending “brain drain” In K. Mundy & Q. Zha (Eds.), Education and global cultural dialogue. International and development education. PalgraveMacmillan.

Tight, M. (2021). Globalization and internationalization as frameworks for higher education research. Research Papers in Education, 36(1), 52-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2019.1633560

Wagner, C., Whetsell, T., & Mukherjee, S. (2019). International research collaboration: Novelty, conventionality, and atypicality in knowledge recombination. Research Policy, 48(5), 1260–1270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.01.002

Wenger, E. (1996). How we learn. Communities of practice. The social fabric of a learning organization. The Healthcare Forum Journal, 39(4), 20-26.




Icon for the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

Confident Supervisors: Creating Independent Researchers Copyright © 2023 by Dora Jimela Kialo; Frieda Siaguru; Imelda Ambelye; Jillian Blacker; Lydia Yalambing; Mirzi Betasolo; Rachel Aisoli-Orake; Sogoing Denano; Susan Gasson; and Veronica Bue is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.