Workshop One The Challenges of research Supervision Supervisory Practice Workshop One The Challenges of research Supervision

Learning Outcomes of module L1. In the context of a dynamic relationship between supervisor and student, critically assess the continuing and developing needs of research students. L2. Apply a range of specialised skills and techniques to provide effective feedback to students on their fieldwork, project plans, writing and performance. L3. Effectively negotiate, with other members of the supervisory team, and monitor a programme of supervision for research students. L4. Demonstrate a critical understanding of regulatory frameworks associated with research and development. L5. Understand the role of the supervisor in the preparation of the Doctoral examination.

This session Revise ILO and review participants own Learning outcomes Develop code of practice for supervisory teams roles and responsibilities Assessment Clarification and generate assessment Criteria What Makes an effective Supervisor? What factors impact on research supervision?

Your Intended learning outcomes? What do you hope to learn from this module?

Develop Code of practice for supervisory teams What is your own experience of research supervisory teams? What would be useful in a code of practice for supervisory teams? In your group develop ten bullet points that could form the backbone of such a code of practice.

Assessment tasks Reflective diary which will focus on one research student and will identify the student’s approach to learning, the challenges which this approach poses for supervisors and an account and rationale of the proposed programme of supervision. (weighting 70%) LOs 1, 2 and 3. Group presentation which will focus on the supervisors role in the Doctoral Examination. (weighting 30%) LOs 4 and 5.

Group activity In your group develop the assessment criteria For part A: Reflective diary (Los 1,2 and 3) For Part B: A group presentation on the role of the supervisor in the Doctoral Examination (Los 4 and 5)

Jane’s PhD problem Read through the case study and then discuss and answer the following questions: Team tasks 1. Discuss what advice you would give to Jane and write down the main Points 2. What lessons are there here for Postgraduate research students? For research supervisors? Departments/institutions? Please list them and report back.

Group discussion Your experiences of research supervision.. What factors impact on your own supervisory practice? What do you think of Lee’s ( 2008 ) Framework? Can you relate to any of these? What are the advantages and disadvantages of the various typologies?

A framework for concepts of research supervision Functional Enculturation Critical Thinking Emancipation Relationship Development Supervisors Activity Rational progression through tasks Gatekeeping Master to apprentice Evaluation Challenge Mentoring, supporting constructivism Supervising by experience, developing a relationship Supervisor’s knowledge & skills Directing, project management Diagnosis of deficiencies, coaching Argument, analysis Facilitation, Reflection Managing conflict Emotional intelligence Possible student reaction Organised Obedience Role modelling, Apprentice-ship Constant inquiry, fight or flight Personal growth, reframing A good team member. Emotional intelligence

Some Influences on Supervision Disciplinary pedagogy Departmental practices Conceptual approach of supervisor Codes of practice Employers/funders’ requirements Full or part time students? Experienced or inexperienced students? International or home students? PhD, professional or practitioner doctorate? Supervisor/co-supervisor

Advantages and Disadvantages Functional Enculturation Critical Thinking Emancipation Relationship Development Advantages Clarity Consistency Progress can be monitored Records are available Encourages standards, participation, identity, community formation Rational inquiry, fallacy exposed Personal growth, ability to cope with change Lifelong working partnerships Enhanced self esteem Disadvantages Rigidity when confronted with the creation of original knowledge Low tolerance of internal difference, sexist, ethnicised regulation (Cousin & Deepwell 2005) Denial of creativity, can belittle or depersonalise student Toxic mentoring (Darling 1985) where tutor abuses power Potential for harassment, abandonment or rejection

In your group Take a problem you described earlier, or one of the case studies. Explore how the supervisor could react using each approach to supervision in turn Be prepared to share the group’s findings

Links to conceptions of research (Brew 2001, Lee 2008) Functional DOMINO Enculturation TRADING Critical Thinking LAYER Emancipation JOURNEY Relationship Development IN THE FORE- GROUND IS: Solving problems in a linear fashion Publications, grants, social networks Data is linked together with hidden meanings Personal existential issues, linked to career RESEARCH IS: Process of problem- atising or solving problems A market place for exchanging ideas Discovering hidden meanings A personal transformative journey

Occupational influences , TOPIC occupational fertility UNIVERSITY PROCEDURES recruitment, upgrading, networking financial support SUPERVISOR’S CONCEPTIONS contacts, own PhD experience METHODS OF SUPERVISION department norms, co-supervision, team supervision, group supervision Occupational influences STUDENT previous experience, contacts, knowledge aptitude, skills, financial aims