Models of Postgraduate Supervision This session encompasses pages 36 to 39 of old participant guide. Begin by going through this PPT (which is referred to at top of page 36) and then move onto the tasks as per pages 36 to 39 as time permits. Models of Postgraduate Supervision

Roles, models and styles How are roles, approaches/styles and models of PG supervision distinguished in the literature? Possible understandings: roles (the various tasks a supervisor must accomplish), styles or approaches (the ways in which a supervisor interacts with the student) models (the particular structure of supervision – whether singular, project based, co-supervision etc) How do they affect each other?

Models of supervision One-on-one Supervisor and co-supervisor Panel supervision Project supervision Doctoral Programme/School Other?

Supervision models APPROACHES CHARACTERISTICS Traditional Isolation (Manathunga 2005) Limited numbers, distance, diversity (Wisker et al. 2007) ‘Atlas complex’ and power (Pearson & Kayrooz 2004) Coaching and mentor roles (Gardner 2008; Kamler 2008) Candidate groups (Cohort model?) Interaction relates to quality (Lovitts 2008) Sense of community (Malfroy 2005) Enculturation and doctoral identity formation (Samara 2006) Distributed power (Guilfoyle 2006) Supervisory teams/ panels Experience mix (Nulty et al. 2009) Flexibility (Croussard 2008) Delegation and acquiring supervisory skills (Lee 2009) Distributed management challenges (Bitzer & Albertyn 2011) ‘Mixed’ approach Variation in supervisory roles and responsibilities (Wisker et al. 2009) Developing supervisor planning frameworks (Bitzer & Albertyn 2011)

Different kinds of supervisor – different kinds of supervision Disciplinary pedagogy Departmental practices Supervisor / co-supervisor Institutional processes PhD/ Masters Funders’ requirements How does each of the following affect supervision? Full time/ P/T

Two kinds of approach to supervision (Wisker 2005) Technical-rationality -emphasizes technique Negotiated order -emphasizes changes in process

Typology of Disciplines (Muller, 2008: 12) Abstract, strong ‘classification’ Practical, real world Biglan (1973) Hard pure Soft pure Hard applied Soft applied Kolb (1981) Abstract reflective Concrete Reflective active Examples Natural sciences Social sciences Science-based professions Social professions Agreement on problem identification and methodology Range of possible problems and methodologies

Cultural Style of Tribes (Muller 2008: 12) Hard pure Hard applied Soft pure Soft applied Competitive, gregarious, politically well-organised, task oriented, high publication rate Entrepreneurial, cosmopolitan, role oriented, patents rather than publications, contract work Individualistic, loosely organised, person oriented, low publication rate, funding less important Status anxiety, prey to intellectual fashions, power oriented, low publication rate, vulnerable to funding pressures

Cognitive style of Tribes (Muller 2008:13) Hard pure Hard applied Soft pure Soft applied Cumulative, iterative; Atomistic; Pursuit of universals; Quantities and simplification; Discovery/ explanation. Purposive; Pragmatic; Know-how via hard knowledge; Mastery of environment; Products/ techniques. Reiterative; Holistic; Pursuit of particulars; Qualities and complication; Understanding/ interpretation. Functional; Utilitarian; Know-how via soft knowledge; Enhancement of practice; Protocols/ procedures.

Implications for supervision (Muller 2008, Boughey 2010) Because the ‘hards’ enjoy more social connectedness, teaching tends to be more collaborative and what is taught tends not to be contentious. As a result, ‘hards’ have more time to devote to research. Research and supervision in ‘hard’ disciplines tends to be highly integrated. This means that less time is spent on supervision (Smelby 1996, 2000) -‘hards’ spend less than a quarter of the time spent by ‘softs’ on supervision. Extent of ‘identity work’ a factor in supervision process (Harrison 2010)

Approaches to Supervision Anne Lee (2008) Functional Enculturation Critical Thinking Emancipation Relationship Development Supervisor’s 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

What does a supervisor do? If you had to represent a supervisor in a picture, what would she look like? Think about the multiple roles of the supervisor Are these all included in your institution's policy on supervision?

Selection and Appointment of Supervisors Who chooses the supervisor? When and how are they officially appointed? What model of supervision is preferred in your department / faculty / discipline? What support is provided to supervisors? Now move to pages 36 to 39