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.

Research supervision and psychotherapeutic theory: bridging the research-practice-gap

Research supervision in the field of counselling and psychotherapy is a fruitful area for investigation in view of the fact that the research supervisory relationship is powerful and highly charged, whether consciously acknowledged or not. Researchers trained as counsellors and psychotherapists possess the skills to facilitate the emergence of, and work creatively with, impasses and crises, both in the research itself and the supervisory relationship, as a result of their training and experience in dealing with crisis and catharsis in clinical work. This paper will demonstrate these points using a case vignette from my work as a supervisor of research dissertations undertaken by students on a Masters in Therapeutic Counselling course. Drawing on narrative analysis, clinical supervision theory and discursive analysis it will look at the strengths and weaknesses of a 'psychotherapeutic' approach to research supervision.

The development of research supervision: 'Turning the light on private space'

Educational development for research supervisors is still a recent phenomenon. Early optional sessions on research supervision have now been replaced, particularly in the UK, continental Europe, and Australasia, by comprehensive and, in some cases, mandatory programs. Yet some of these programs focus solely on the administrative roles and responsibilities of supervisors, attempting to provide technical “fixes” that deny the genuine difficulties and complexities involved in supervision relationships. Some research supervisors resent the intrusion of educational developers into what many of them have regarded as a private pedagogical space. They interpret such programs as further instances of the quality assurance agendas of governments and university administrators, and are justifiably suspicious of what some describe as the colonial underpinnings of educational development. These reactions create tensions for educational developers. This article explores why educational development can be problematic for research supervisors. It then charts some current supervision educational development programs that seek to go beyond administrative interpretations of supervision. Finally, it examines whether the “Compassionate Rigour” supervision program, developed to address these difficulties, manages to respond respectfully and sensitively to supervisors’ educational development needs.

Improving research supervision in nursing

In this paper, four experienced researchers from the UK, China and Australia offer guidance in research supervision based on their experiences and the recent document, Improving standards in postgraduate research degree programmes [Higher Education Funding Council for England, 2003. Improving standards in postgraduate research degree programmes. Formal consultation. Department for Employment and Learning, Northern Ireland, Higher Education Funding Council for England, Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, Scottish Higher Education Funding Council, HEFCE, London]. Supervision is an important aspect of not only the development of the neophyte researcher, but of academic staff and research activity in general. With increased academic accountability, good supervision should be an integral component of a quality research governance framework and resourced as such. Recommendations include: adoption of these standards; rigorous selection of research students and supervisors and development of projects; development of departmental procedures for monitoring, feedback and intellectual property; and transparency, rigour and fairness in examination procedures. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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.