In an action-research process, the objective is twofold: to transform reality and to produce knowledge about the transformations themselves.Thus the seminars are both a product of the action-research project "Linguistics and Research Practices" and its main setting. During the seminars, we analyze participants' needs, we test the acceptability of novel practices or ideas, and we assess the possibility of proposing innovations.  Progressively participants get further involved and eventually accept the new ideas presented.

Focusing on « real work situations »  

Much of the originality of our programme lies in that we are not dealing with prescribed work but with real work situations, which allows to explore all the dimensions of the relationship – intellectual as well as human- and to reflect on and discuss the practices of the scientific environment – close and remote.

Eventually, we demonstrate that Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) and Ethics are not a complete and finalized body of knowledge, but that ethical issues need to be discussed, explored and debated and that all researchers have a responsibility to move the discussion forward; so that RCR and ethics are built in the training.

Researchers – supervisors and PhD students – are placed in real work situations: their own research projects are discussed, critically analyzed and debated with the group in the creativity workshops.

« Deconstruction » followed by « displacement » paves the way for critical analysis  

Each project is discussed for 4 to 5 hours, most of the time in two successive sessions, separated by a period of reflection when the pair – supervisor and student – can analyze the many different suggestions made by the group. “Deconstruction” and “reframing” activities are conducted with brainstorming methods and tools.

Linking the two « poles » of scientific activity: project conception and communication of results

Writing workshops come as a reinforcement of creativity workshops with critical reading and analysis of abstracts ( of scientific papers, posters, etc), of introductions to scientific papers or to work progress reports produced by participants in real work situations and not as simulated exercises ; with rewriting activities to guide participants in enhancing scientific reasoning through meaningful constructions and semantic choices.

Choosing to work on the student’s research project in close collaboration with his/her supervisor, together with a group of « resource persons », facilitators and researchers with different scientific backgrounds  :

Researchers must demonstrate communication and interpersonal skills; they must be able to solve complex problems and make decisions according to their perception of their role in society ; briefly, they must be able to construct for themselves transferable knowledge and skills.

Constructivism emphasizes the fact that learners engage in a process of knowledge construction when they set themselves goals, look for solutions to complex problems, or design or make products; briefly when they engage in a learning process which is full of meaning for them. It is well known that project building and problem solving are effective ways to start such learning processes.

When placed in authentic learning situations, PhD students are confronted to abundant information and various problems, which helps them make connections between concepts, change their initial structure of ideas and start a good reflection while confronting their ideas with those of others: thus they not only develop collaboration skills, but also develop an ability to transform information into knowledge.

Role of participants – supervisor-student pairs and facilitators  :

Partners in a learning process : as they discuss projects, confront ideas, participants discover the rules of their profession. These rules are not always known or explicit, they are revealed in the process.

Critics: they instantly provide feedback, allowing for knowledge construction

Experts  : from time to time, participants are invited to act as experts, to make a short presentation on a specific topic. Such a presentation MUST be relevant to the overall approach developed by the student; in other words, it must answer a well identified need and correspond to the objectives he/she has set him/herself. The presentations can’t be self-sufficient

Mind maps as intermediary objects

Research activity is organized around a number of communication situations which produce a variety of “intermediary objects”- scientific papers, posters, abstracts, projects, etc. (Vinck, D. 2002 ) We support the idea that the production of these objects form an integral part of the research and of the conceptualization processes, and that the research object is built while speech is produced. This is why the mind mapping technique is at the centre of the method used to monitor the progress of discussion and to convert the products of the collective brainstorming sessions into structured written and oral papers.
Mind maps act as mediators of socio-cognitive processes, keeping track of the project building process. They support reflection in- and on action while participants in the process offer feedback and critical analysis. They provide a collective framework which will support action and contribute to structuring the participants’ activities.
Mind maps support and help structure dialogue; they enhance mutual understanding. They are born from discussions most of the time informal and spontaneous, which allows for multiple adjustments among participants and their viewpoints; they are loci of cooperation and contribute to regulating exchanges – emotional and intellectual

• Seminars are grounded in theoretical and practical research on supervision, young researchers’ training and quality in research
• They aim to promote good practice in supervision as described in the French Thesis Charter ( http://cdt.jeunes-chercheurs.org/ ) and promoted by INRA in its policy towards PhDs. (http://www.inra.fr/drh/doctorants/)
• They encourage dialogue among disciplines and collective learning
• They enhance the development of competences which are clearly identified in certificates delivered to participants who have attended the seminars; PhD students are encouraged to identify the competences they are developing in the course of activities during their PhD.
• Each workshop gathers 4 pairs of supervisors and students, and is facilitated by 2 researchers who have been specially trained in communication and facilitation to ensure quality of the process.
• The facilitators regularly get together for training – at least 40 hours per year: they reflect about their practices, engage in pedagogical and strategic reflection and contribute to innovations.
• They have designed pedagogical tools which describe their practices and guarantee comparability.
• They share a good practice code ensuring confidentiality of the debates, and ethics of practice: hence throughout years of practice, they have acquired professional legitimacy thanks to the trust of participants.

The programme and planning of the seminars clearly reflect our objectives: the week’s work is divided between creativity and group work on the research project - “creativity workshops”- and “communication workshops” where the standards and practices of communication are discussed, and participants’ written productions (abstracts, introductions of papers etc) are critically analysed by the group. Communication skills are particularly emphasized: postgraduate students and young researchers in general tend to be focused on their disciplines, so they need assistance in appreciating the enormous value they have both inside and outside their disciplines and to communicate this to a general audience. Thus writing skills are treated as an integral part of critical thinking. Specific workshops on "How to formulate one's competences" have been buit in the seminars for participants to reflect on their experience during the week and to reinforce the dialogue between supervisor and PhD student.