Harding, D and Boyd, P (2024) Generative AI and phd supervision: A covert third wheel or a seat at the table? In: Thomson, C (ed.) Proceedings of 40th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2024, London South Bank University, UK.
Abstract
The advent and adoption of GenAI tools has pedagogical implications for Researcher/Supervisor dynamics both within Construction Management and in the wider academic context. Unless both parties understand these implications, GenAI tools have the potential to disrupt the traditional balance of power and trust between Researcher and Supervisor, potentially impacting both the rigour of PhD training and research outcomes. Rather than exploring the technical competence and reach of GenAI tools, this scoping study explores Researcher/Supervisor relationships pre-and post-GenAI and sets out avenues for further research. Informed by structuration theory, and using reflective ethnography and semi-structured interviews, the research maps changes in agency and structure and identifies several important issues. Findings highlight that fear and suspicion surrounding the use of GenAI confer undue agency on the technology, which further conceals its use. Opportunities to develop critical analytical skills are missed and this can threaten the integrity of research outputs. The study concludes that GenAI tools should be more than a covert “third wheel” in the relationship. Instead, the technology could be openly incorporated into supervision frameworks in a transparent, integrated approach.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | artificial intelligence; chatgpt; pedagogy; phd supervision; relationship dynamics |
| Index terms: | agency, research output, artificial intelligence, dynamics, interview, maps, competence, ethnography, pedagogy, integrity, supervisor, integrated approach, supervision |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, research products and data, qualitative and interpretive research, spatial and geospatial analysis, personnel development, teaching methods, health safety and environment, control systems, data collection methods, sociology, systems engineering, artificial intelligence, practitioner |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Education, Digital Applications, Project Management, Information Management, Human Resources, Research Practice, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here