Diffracting the practices of research supervision

There are ever increasing demands and expectations in the research world, related to the quality of research supervision. It can be difficult for an individual research supervisor to recognize their own quality of research supervision. On top of this are the added challenges of trying to improve that quality of research supervision. Reflective practice is consistently identified as a way for developing professional practice in research supervision. This chapter offers a number of frameworks to facilitate reflective practice about research supervision. It does not propose to solve the problem of quality research supervision but to provide ways in which a research supervisor can reflect on this aspect of their professional academic practice and begin to plan ways in which their practice can improve.

Experiencing higher degree research supervision as teaching

This article describes research higher degree supervisors’ experiences of supervision as a teaching and learning practice. While research education is considered central to the HDR experience, comparatively little is known to date of the pedagogical lenses adopted by supervisors as they go about their supervision. We worked with 35 supervisors engaged in discipline-specific and interdisciplinary research across architectural design, science, engineering, computer science, information systems and librarianship. Several of these supervisors conducted projects which interfaced with the social sciences and humanities. The pedagogies, constructed through the discussions and phenomenographic analysis, offer a picture of supervisors’ collective awareness of supervision as a teaching and learning practice. Supervision as a teaching and learning practice was experienced as: Promoting the supervisor’s development, Imparting academic expertise, Upholding academic standards, Promoting learning to research, Drawing upon student expertise, Enabling student development, Venturing into unexplored territory, Forming productive communities, and Contributing to society.

Research supervision of international students in engineering and information technology disciplines (Resources)

This report provides an overview of the results of a collaborative research project titled "A model for research supervision of international students in engineering and information technology disciplines". This project aimed to identify factors influencing the success of culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) higher degree research (HDR) students in the fields of Engineering and Information Technology at three Australian Universities: Queensland University of Technology, The University of Western Australia and Curtin University.

A model for research supervision of international students in engineering and information technology disciplines

A large proportion (over 12 per cent) of international and non-English speaking background (NESB) postgraduate research students enrol in engineering and information technology (IT) programs in Australian universities. They find themselves in an advanced research culture, and are technically and scientifically challenged early in their programs. This is in addition to cultural, social and religious isolation and linguistic barriers they have to contend with. The project team surveyed this cohort at QUT and UWA, on the hypothesis that they face challenges that are more discipline-specific. The results of the survey indicate that existing supervisory frameworks which are limited to linguistic contexts are not fully assisting these students and supervisors to achieve high quality research. The goal of this project is to extend these supervisory frameworks to a holistic model that will address the unique needs and supervisory issues these students face in engineering and IT disciplines. The model will be useable by all other Australian universities.

Antecedent factors of knowledge sharing in research supervision

Today’s economy is a knowledge-based economy in which knowledge is a crucial facilitator to individuals, as well as being an instigator of success. Due to the impact of globalisation, universities face new challenges and opportunities. Accordingly, they ought to be more innovative and have their own competitive advantages. One of the most important goals of universities is the promotion of students as professional knowledge workers. Therefore, knowledge sharing and transfer at the tertiary level between students and supervisors is vital in universities, as it decreases the budget and provides an affordable way to do research. Knowledge-sharing impact factors can be categorised in three groups, namely: organisational, individual, and technical factors. Individual barriers to knowledge sharing include: the lack of time and trust and the lack of communication skills and social networks. IT systems such as elearning, blogs and portals can increase the knowledge-sharing capability. However, it must be stated that IT systems are only tools and not solutions. Individuals are still responsible for sharing information and knowledge. This paper proposes a new research model to examine the effect of individual factors, organisational factors (learning strategy, trust culture, supervisory support) and technological factors on knowledge sharing in the research supervision process.

Learning through writing: Reconceptualising the research supervision process

This paper seeks to re-conceptualize the research supervision relationship. The literature has tended to view doctoral study in four ways: (i) as an exercise in self-management; (ii) as a research experience; (iii) as training for research, or; (iv) as an instance of student-centred learning. Although each of these approaches has their merits, they also suffer from conceptual weaknesses. This paper seeks to harness the merits — and minimize the disadvantages — by re-conceptualizing doctoral research as a ‘writing journey’. The paper utilizes the insights of new rhetoric in linguistic theory to defend a writing-centered conception of supervised research and offers some practical strategies on how it might be put into effect.

Speaking of supervision: A dialogic approach to building higher degree research supervision capacity in the creative arts

In the emergent field of creative practice higher degrees by research, first generation supervisors have developed new models of supervision for an unprecedented form of research that combines creative practice and written thesis. In a national research project, entitled 'Effective supervision of creative practice higher research degrees', we set out to capture and share early supervisors' insights, strategies and approaches to supporting their creative practice PhD students. From the insights we gained during the early interview process, we expanded our research methods in line with a distributed leadership model and developed a dialogic framework. This led us to unanticipated conclusions and unexpected recommendations. In this study, we primarily draw on philosopher and literary theorist Mikhail Bakhtin's dialogics to explain how giving precedence to the voices of supervisors not only facilitated the articulation of dispersed tacit knowledge, but also led to other 20 discoveries. These include the nature of supervisors' resistance to prescribed models, policies and central academic development programmes; the importance of polyvocality and responsive dialogue in enabling continued innovation in the field; the benefits to supervisors of reflecting, discussing and sharing practices with colleagues; and the value of distributed leadership and dialogue to academic development and supervision capacity building in research education.

Connecting the space between design and research: Explorations in participatory research supervision

In this article we offer a single case study using an action research method for gathering and analysing data offering insights valuable to both design and research supervision practice. We do not attempt to generalise from this single case, but offer it as an instance that can improve our understanding of research supervision practice. We question the conventional ‘dyadic’ models of research supervision and outline a more collaborative model, based on the signature pedagogy of architecture: the design studio. A novel approach to the supervision of creatively oriented post-graduate students is proposed, including new approaches to design methods and participatory supervision that draw on established design studio practices. This model collapses the distance between design and research activities. Our case study involving Research Masters student supervision in the discipline of Architecture, shows how ‘connected learning’ emerges from this approach. This type of learning builds strong elements of creativity and fun, which promote and enhance student engagement. The results of our action research suggests that students learn to research more easily in such an environment and supervisory practices are enhanced when we apply the techniques and characteristics of design studio pedagogy to the more conventional research pedagogies imported from the humanities. We believe that other creative disciplines can apply similar tactics to enrich both the creative practice of research and the supervision of HDR students.

The supervision of doctoral dissertations using a collaborative cohort model

The Collaborative Cohort Model (CCM) for research supervision was developed and piloted as an alternative to the Apprentice Master Model (AMM), which is currently used with most doctoral dissertations. The CCM was developed in response to concerns about completion rates and the quality of research supervision. The feedback from the initial cohort of doctoral students who have experienced the model is presented.

Supervising practice based research

Practice based research appears to have emerged within several Higher Education agendas including the professional doctorates and the teacher as researcher. One way of thinking about this methodological approach is to consider its research paradigm – a practice based epistemology, and from this perspective to consider what special application to research supervision the paradigm invites. Within a “supervision as pedagogy” agenda these applications can be considered as pedagogies. This paper has been written in the style of practice based research, drawing on the author’s own experiences of supervising students undertaking practice based research. It adopts a position that research supervision is pedagogy and draws on the model of ‘Productive Pedagogies” to articulate strategies to help novice research students develop a research proposal.

Graduate research capabilities : a new agenda for research supervisors

There has been a conversation about university graduate employability within the Higher Education literature for some time (Cryer, 1997; Barrie, 2004, 2006, 2007; Murray, 2000; McAlpine, 2005). Within this, and often under the banner of questioning the relevance of the PhD (Murray, 2000), there have been discussions about the employability of research postgraduates. Both the broad discussion of graduate employment and the specific discussion of research degree graduate employment have produced an agenda of graduate research capabilities. Traditionally, assisting research higher degree (RHD) students with their career development has not been an articulated part of the research supervision process. However, the graduate research capabilities agenda has added a new element to the practices of research supervision, in that it brings with it a mandate for research graduates to be aware of the range of capabilities they have acquired through their research degree candidature and how these apply in the workforce. Additionally, there is an emphasis on preparing students for varied career paths rather than a traditional academic route (e.g., in industry or government). Supervisors have a vital role to play in assisting students with these important career development tasks. In this practice application brief we report on a strategy recently used at Queensland University of Technology (QUT) to assist supervisors understand their role in a student’s career development.

Assessment of the influence of cultural barriers to HDR supervision of non-English speaking background (NESD) students in engineering and information technology (IT) disciplines

The paper details the results of the first phase of an on-going research into the sociocultural factors that influence the supervision of higher degrees research (HDR) engineering students in the Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering (BEE) and Faculty of Science and Technology (FaST) at Queensland University of Technology. A quantitative analysis was performed on the results from an online survey that was administered to 179 engineering students. The study reveals that cultural barriers impact their progression and developing confidence in their research programs. We argue that in order to assist international and non-English speaking background (NESB) research students to triumph over such culturally embedded challenges in engineering research, it is important for supervisors to understand this cohort's unique pedagogical needs and develop intercultural sensitivity in their pedagogical practice in postgraduate research supervision. To facilitate this, the governing body (Office of Research) can play a vital role in not only creating the required support structures but also their uniform implementation across the board.

Dialogical mindfulness in supervision role-play

Aims: This exploratory pilot study investigated Mindfulness-based Role-play (MBRP) supervision to find out how therapists would experience the approach, and to what extent they would find it useful, particularly in relation to empathy toward clients. Method: Thirteen therapists participated in a workshop, introducing mindfulness and MBRP supervision, and subsequently had one individual MBRP supervision session. Data collection and analysis: Qualitative data were collected by means of semi-structured interviews and analysed with regard to participants' supervision experiences by means of a modified version of the Consensual Qualitative Research method. Findings: Participants predominantly had positive emotional and cognitive responses to their supervision experiences. The main supervision outcomes were empathy with the client's emotional experience, enhanced awareness of functioning as a therapist, and thoughts about how to proceed in therapy. A subset of participants also reported observed effects in therapy with clients. Conclusions: Even taking into account the methodological limitations of the study, these findings are promising and suggest that further research into the MBRP supervision approach is warranted.

Pedagogy of feedback on student academic writing : research supervisor practices for the end of the research degree candidature

All academic writing is advanced with the benefit of feedback about the writing. In the case of the academic writing genres of the research proposal and the dissertation, feedback is usually provided by the research supervisor. Given that academic writing development is a process, and in the case of the research proposal and dissertation, writing which develops over time, it seems likely that the nature of feedback on drafts written early in the candidature may be different from feedback provided by the research supervisor later in a student’s candidature. ----- ----- When a research supervisor has been reading a student’s writing over a period of time, their own familiarity with the writing generates a risk to their ability to provide critical and objective feedback. Particularly by the end of a student’s candidature, the research supervisor’s familiarity with the work may cause them to miss elements of writing improvement. ----- ----- The author, as a research supervisor, has developed a feedback grid to facilitate feedback on the final drafts of a dissertation. This feedback grid is generated by the embedded promises in the early sections of the dissertation, which are then used to audit the content of the final sections of the dissertation to ascertain whether promises made have been fulfilled. This provides a strategy for the research supervisor to step back from the work and read the dissertation with the agenda of a dissertation examiner. ----- ----- The grid is one strategy within a broader pedagogy of providing feedback on writing samples.

Chaos or complex systems? Identifying factors influencing the success of international and NESB graduate research students in Engineering and Information Technology Fields

The paper explores the results an on-going research project to identify factors influencing the success of international and non-English speaking background (NESB) gradúate students in the fields of Engineering and IT at three Australian universities: the Queensland University of Technology (QUT), the University of Western Australia (UWA), and Curtin University (CU). While the larger study explores the influence of factors from both sides of the supervision equation (e.g., students and supervisors), this paper focusses primarily on the results of an online survey involving 227 international and/or NESB graduate students in the areas of Engineering and IT at the three universities. The study reveals cross-cultural differences in perceptions of student and supervisor roles, as well as differences in the understanding of the requirements of graduate study within the Australian Higher Education context. We argue that in order to assist international and NESB research students to overcome such culturally embedded challenges, it is important to develop a model which recognizes the complex interactions of factors from both sides of the supervision relationship, in order to understand this cohort‟s unique pedagogical needs and develop intercultural sensitivity within postgraduate research supervision.