1. 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

2. 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?

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

4. 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)

5. 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

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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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.

10. 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)

11. 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

12. 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?

13. 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