This paper will take the form of a conversation between a doctoral research supervisor (John Elliott) and seven of his supervisees. The conversation will be constructed from e-mail correspondence and tape-recorded face-to-face meetings with the supervisor. As it develops, the supervisees are given an opportunity to react to each other's comments and views on at least two occasions. This conversation piece, for the purpose of presentation at the ECER, will be structured around the major themes and issues that emerged in the course of its construction.The supervisee group will represent a range and variety of contexts for doctoral research in the field of education. It is hoped to include the following:- a headteacher in the UK (middle years) doing doctoral research in his school on a part- time basis- a former teacher in the UK doing research on a part-time basis in a variety of secondary school contexts- a Malaysian academic who undertook full-time doctoral research based on fieldwork carried out in a secondary school in Malaysia- an academic member of staff within the supervisor's own Faculty doing part-time doctoral research- Two teacher educators in a tertiary institution in Hong Kong doing part-time doctoral research in Hong Kong schools- A Hong Kong government official responsible for managing support for curriculum change in primary schools, and doing doctoral research on a part-time basis.The conversation, as it proceeds, will initially focus on three broad questions:1 What do you think you are doing in researching your topic?2 What does the academic institution you are enrolled with expect you to be doing in your research?3 What does your supervisor expect from you?It is anticipated that certain issues will emerge from these responses to provide an initial structure for subsequent conversation, namely:Whether doctoral students view themselves to be engaged in an act of discovery or an act of creation? Where do they set the boundaries between research viewed as a science and viewed as an art? Do they see themselves to be engaged in the discovery of new facts/truths in the field of education or in re-weaving their webs of belief (Rorty), and thereby in redescribing and repositioning themselves in relation to their fields of study? To what extent does the academic institution, through its procedures and policies, support or undermine what the students find to be of value in doing their research? What role does the supervisor play at the interface between the academic and personal contexts of educational inquiry at the doctoral level?