Scholarship PhD candidates do not experience more freedom in their research than employee PhD candidates

PhD candidates writing their dissertations as grant-funded PhD candidates do not have more freedom to conduct their research than those employed as employees. This is according to research by the Dutch PhD Network (PNN). They surveyed 1,601 PhD candidates about their working conditions and experiences in the PNN PhD survey.

Having more freedom to conduct their research is often cited as a major advantage of being a PhD candidate with a grant. This greater freedom supposedly justifies the poorer working conditions: PhD candidates with a grant don't have an employment contract, earn less than employed PhD candidates, don't accrue a pension, and aren't covered by the collective labor agreement. Now that it appears that PhD candidates with a grant don't experience more freedom, this argument is in doubt.

"It's not at all surprising that PhD candidates with a grant don't experience more freedom than employed PhD candidates," says PNN chair Lucille Mattijssen. "In practice, PhD candidates with a grant do the same work as employed PhD candidates and are just as dependent on their supervisors and supervisors. If your supervisor disagrees with something, it's simply very difficult to stick to it."

In its study, PNN also analyzed whether the freedom of PhD scholarship candidates is better at the University of Groningen (RUG), where the PhD Scholarship Experiment is currently underway. Because of the experiment, aspects such as increased freedom might be better regulated there than at universities where the position of PhD scholarship candidates is less institutionalized. However, PhD scholarship candidates do not appear to have more freedom than employed PhD candidates, either at the RUG or elsewhere. This was also previously confirmed by surveys conducted by the University of Groningen itself .

The PNN report also addresses the quality of supervision for PhD students. PhD students are generally satisfied with their supervisors, but 42.9% of PhD students have experienced questionable behavior from a supervisor, such as downplaying workload or contacting them in the evenings or on weekends. Furthermore, 12.9% of PhD students have considered changing supervisors. However, for various reasons, including fear of negative effects on their academic career and bureaucracy, this often proves difficult to implement: only 18% of PhD students who wanted to change supervisors ultimately succeeded.

It also appears that 21.5% of PhD students have a supervisor who is not a supervisor or co-supervisor as their daily supervisor. PNN considers this problematic: not because these supervisors are unsuitable, but because these supervisors ultimately have to do most of the work, yet receive no concrete recognition for it. According to PNN, expanding the Ius Promovendi to include assistant professors and associate professors could offer a solution.

This report is part of a series of publications by PNN based on the results of the PNN PhD Survey. Other reports in this series cover topics such as teaching, inappropriate behavior, and Open Science.