1. Introductory discussion
Think about any experience you have had where you felt completely included and comfortable What were the factors that contributed to that feeling?

2. Introductory discussion
Now think of the opposite kind of experience where you felt excluded, alienated and uncomfortable? What led to or contributed to that feeling?

3. Understanding Social Inclusion and exclusion
Small group task – in groups of no more that 5, complete the discussion task in your participant guide.
Go through task on page 11 of old Participant Guide and through the first few slides of this PPT – up to slide 11 – to begin discussion about social inclusion (half hour maximum). Then move onto the Intervision session (was session 3) on page 13 – the rest of this PPT (slides 11 to 23) will take you through the process which is written out as pages 13 to 14 of old Participant guide.

4. Ensuring social justice in the supervisory process

5. Social Exclusion
The concept allows one to consider the multiple ways in which groups are included or excluded, and the often subtle forms of privilege that embrace some and distance others.
Focuses on intersections of power relations
The concept emerged in the late 1980s/early 1990s in critical feminist race studies (and continued having strong emphasis in studies on race-gender relations); It was introduced by black (USA) & migrant (UK) feminists. The first focus was on the intersection of different identities (multiple, fragmented, conflictual) and resulting identity politics (individual’s and group’s subjective identities and experiences).
Then the focus shifted to the intersections of power relations and social structure of domination (Collins, 1990): intersectionality of different forms and practices of exclusion, discrimination, of different social disadvantages and hierarchies, of different systems of privilege.

6. Different manifestations of social exclusion
Social exclusion with regard to:
Poverty
Unemployment
Education
Social protection systems
Public Health services
Housing
Discrimination

7. Why is social justice a concern for PG supervision in SA?
Powerful knowledge – who gets access to this? What happens if certain groups are excluded from this?
Wheelahan (2010:145) tells us that ‘access to theoretical knowledge is an issue of distributional justice because society uses [such knowledge] to conduct its conversations about what it should be like…’

8. Access to powerful knowledge
Morrow (2009) points out that ensuring wider physical access to education is insufficient to ensure social justice. What is needed is to ensure ‘epistemological access’, that is ‘learning how to become a successful participant in an academic practice.’ (2009: 78)
Mbembe (2015) challenges us to ask ‘Whose knowledge?’

9. Epistemological Access: Whose responsibility?
‘Epistemological access cannot be supplied or ‘delivered’ or ‘done’ to the learner; nor can it be ‘automatically’ transmitted to those who pay their fees, or even to those who also collect the handouts and attend classes regularly… In the same way in which no one else can do my running for me, no one else can do my learning for me.’ (Morrow 2009: 78)
Does the successful acquisition of the necessary research practices therefore remain the responsibility of the postgraduate?

10. Epistemological Access: Whose responsibility?
Morrow (2009) warns us not to exaggerate the agency of students. Historical and institutional conditions constrain and/or enable epistemological access.
The supervision process is a key enablement or constraint in the successful acquisition of the necessary research practices.

11. Making sense of context
PG education is not just about the skills of the supervisor and the capacity of the student.
PG education happens within a specific context. This context includes current events in the higher education sector, institutional culture, disciplinary norms and so on.
In groups, draw a mind map of the multiple factors and issues pertaining to PG supervision that fall beyond the histories and characteristics of the supervisor and PG scholar.

12. Mamdani argues that part of the political work of decolonisation “is to rethink the institutional legacy of colonialism, and thus to challenge the idea that we must define political identity, political rights, and political justice first and foremost in relation to indigeneity. Let us reconsider the colonial legacy that each of us is either a native or a settler. It is with that compass in hand that we must fashion our political world” (Mamdani 2005: 17). This is critical work, neither easy nor simple, and requires us not only to shift what and how we know, but also perhaps who we are.

13. Mignolo claims that “it is not enough to change the content of the conversation” but also “that it is of the essence to change the terms of the conversation” in which “it is necessary to focus on the knower rather than on the known” (Mignolo 2009: 4). These are key ideas that can shape how we supervise and think about supervision.

14. What does it mean to take our colonial and apartheid heritage into account in postgraduate education? Is the notion of Africanisation of the curriculum pertinent to postgraduate level study? Is Africanisation of the curriculum pertinent to your discipline’s content, pedagogy, assessment, structure? How and why?

15. References
Please take a look at Corrine Knowles’ Points to Ponder on the course site.