Co-Supervision in Kazakhstan PhD Programs: The Kazakhstani + International Co-Supervisor Model
This study aims to examine the experience of international co-supervision among Kazakhstani and international co-supervisors. There is a lack of systematic data in the scientific literature on international co-supervision, including the influence of institutional and cultural contexts on its productivity. Exploring the unique Kazakhstani experience allows us to offer new analytical perspectives that clarify interpretations of international co-supervision and complement the existing discourse in the field of doctoral training.
In Kazakhstan, over the past two decades, the “Kazakhstani + international co-supervisor” model has been implemented, which involves collaboration between two co-supervisors, one of whom is a local scientist, and the other is an international one. This practice is unique among Central Asian countries, replacing the two-stage Soviet model, which included postgraduate studies (candidate of sciences) and doctoral studies (doctor of sciences). The main idea behind the implementation of this model was to ensure the integration of Kazakhstani science into the global research space. However, the practical implementation of international co-supervision remains insufficiently studied.
The qualitative study was conducted using the case study research approach and thematic analysis to interpret the interview data. Kazakhstani (n=11) and international (n=7) co-supervisors participated in the study. Two key findings and five themes were identified to describe the co-supervisors’ experiences.
The study contributes to the understanding of international co-supervision by examining the non-Western context of doctoral education. It identifies barriers to the implementation of the “Kazakhstani + international co-supervisor” model related to shortcomings in the institutional organization of co-supervisors’ interactions, language difficulties, cultural characteristics, and differences in research traditions. At the same time, it shows how individual co-supervisors transformed the experience of limited or formal interactions into targeted research collaboration strategies.
Two key findings are highlighted: (1) institutional organization determines the nature of the interaction between the Kazakhstani co-supervisor and the international co-supervisor; and (2) intercultural factors, such as differences in cultural and academic traditions, research approaches, and professional expectations, as well as language competencies, influence the productivity of international co-supervising.
The study results can be used by universities to develop transparent and effective regulations for interaction between co-supervisors.
The authors recommend that researchers conduct longitudinal and experimental studies to comprehensively understand the conditions under which the “Kazakhstani + international co-supervisor” model becomes a driver for integrating local and international research practices, combining resources to pre-pare competitive doctoral students. Researchers should also examine risks that require systemic correction.
The results of the study may provide information on how to adjust international co-supervision policies to produce more competent, flexible, and competitive researchers capable of solving complex interdisciplinary and applied problems. In turn, this will strengthen the innovative and socio-economic development of the country.
Four directions for future research on co-supervision are proposed.
Back