Module 1, Session 3: Models of supervision

[CPC Admin]

#351

Watch the narrated PowerPoint on models of supervision and then post your thoughts here.

Remember to  click “subscribe” (top right corner) to receive responses to your comments via email.

[Christopher Odhiambo]

#1196

What, in your view, would the roles and responsibilities of the supervisor be within each of the models below?
• Individual, one-on-one supervision: This is a good model though it has a weakness because power is invested in one person. But should be recognised that this single supervisor might not be all rounded in both theory, methodology, content and scholarly writing skills. But if the supervisor is committed and conscientious this works very well. The supervisor acts as a facilitator and guide in the process of supervision.
• Co-supervision: This is a good model because it always provides opportunity for multiple perspectives of expertise. However, it has weaknesses especially where there are ideological conflicts between the two supervisors and as such the candidate becomes just an object in the supremacy contest of the two experts. But it is a very good model when the two supervisors have good working relationship. Again the role here is to facilitate and guide the student in his/her research and in the writing of the thesis.
• Panel supervision, where each person in the panel has a particular role: This can be confusing at times. Too many cooks spoil the broth. Sometimes there is no particular focus and no one to take responsibility.
• Project supervision, where a team of postgraduate scholars and possibly a team of supervisors work together on a related set of research problems: I am not familiar with this.
• Cohort supervision, where groups who enter the programme in a particular year work through the research stages together. This is quite an enriching model when all the students are ready to participate and contribute to the forums for discussions and presentation. But the supervisors’ roles and responsibility to individual students must still be maintained. The supervisor must still play the crucial role of moderator, facilitator, guide and mentor.
How might the model of supervision impact on the following stages of the research process?
• Development of research design: The supervisor should guide that student at this level because if this is not done well, then the whole research will be highly problematic, leading to waste of time and resources. All the models of supervision should have an impact on this element.
• Securing funding: It is important for the supervisors in either one –one or Co- supervision to help the student to write good proposal for finding or if they have research funding bring the student into their research and support them finanacially. The supervisor should also be able to write strong recommendations letters to assist the student secure sponsorship or scholarship. Should also provide students with information about scholarships and research funding bodies, organizations and foundations.
• Feedback on writing: Whichever model of supervisor it is imperative for the supervisor to give prompt, clear and constructive feedback
• Providing subject matter expertise: Whatever the model, the supervisor must assist the student to escalate and enhance their knowledge on the topic or the research area. This is why one qualifies to be called a supervisor or promotor.
• Quality assurance and compliance: Again, it does matter the model, the supervisor must ensure quality and compliance. That is why supervisors append their signatures to confirm that they participated in the construction of the thesis. But in the present digitalized world, the supervisor must ensure that there is no possibility for plagiarism
• Monitoring progress: This is quintessential role of the supervisor regardless of the model of supervision.
• Reporting on progress: Yes, again regardless of the model. It is the supervisor who is guiding the student and should report on the progress.
• Selecting examiners: Should part of a committee that is assigned with the responsibility. Some supervisors do nominate their friends who might not give objective judgement of the thesis. What is sometimes referred as a ‘friendly board of examiners’.

[Marjolein Zweekhorst]

#1261

Dear Christopher thank you so much for your extended reflection on the questions! It shows you have experience with some of the models and gave it a nice thought of not only the roles and responsibilities, but also the pros and cons of these models. Good work!
I agree completely that the success of all models of team supervision depend on how well the team functions, whether their only two supervisors or more… . It would be interesting if the participants can add (next to roles and responsibilities of the supervisors) also the experiences they have with the supervision in these different roles.
Your answer to the question How might the model of supervision impact on the following stages of the research process? This a very good starting point for further discussion on the form. It is a nice description of the tasks. I would like
to ask the other participants to join the discussion on how the different models effect these different tasks of supervision. For example: • Feedback on writing: Whichever model of supervisor it is imperative for the supervisor to give prompt, clear and constructive feedback. My question is with one supervisor this is might be quite straightforward, but if you are with more supervisors. What impact does this have (strenghts and weaknesses) and how could deal with the weaknesses?

[Susan Kilonzo]

#1364

Which model is more applicable to you?

Marjolein, I think this entirely depends. If I am running a research project with students, as you rightly observed and gave an example of the project you are involved in, then project supervision suffices. The implication here is that I will be supervising the students in the project together with colleagues involved. I also have experience of cohort supervision. I teach a course called Qualitative Research Methods for Public Policy and the size of the class ranges from 8-12 students. We often use the intervision sessions and this works well because the students begin thinking about their research projects and proposals as they take their coursework. For about seven years now we have together with some research organization run a course on Advanced Research Design, and the cohorts admitted rely on a group of trainers, and they are from diverse disciplines, in which case I would think that panel supervision applies, but mostly this is at proposal development level, then they do funded research on their own.

This said, in my university set up, co-supervision is common. Though I am not sure of whether the merits are on task-division, it works well in cases where methodological and disciplinary expertise is needed for some students apply inter- intra – and multidisciplinary. As you rightly noted, conflicts among supervisors and conflicting advice to the student is a common challenge if the exercise is not well coordinated (observable also in team supervision). I know of institutions in Kenya that use individual supervisors, and the video you attached to the PPT on power-relations in the instance of one supervisor captures the inherent challenges well. However, this model can offset the problems associated with co- and team supervision if tactfully used.

Thank you. The presentation was great.

[Kefa S]

#1377

The presentation on Models of Supervision presents useful ideas to ponder on. Supervision of postgraduate students, in my situation, continues to present a myriad of challenges that if not acted on, they might wear off many supervisors of my kind! Unlike, the ‘good old days’, the candidates of contemporary times demand much more from their supervisors. Students seek from their supervisors – research problems through to the correction of editorial chores! Certainly, the present day supervisors need collegial effort courtesy of programmes that offer postgraduate supervision pedagogy.

[Shonisani]

#1383

Which model is more applicable?

Thank you for the good presentations, I have leant a lot. According to my understanding all models are very good. Each model has advantages and disadvantages. It depend on dedication, hard work, commitment and the professional relationship that the supervisor and supervisee will engage in. Research supervision under each model has some supervisee who are not committed or supervisors who are always busy. If this behavior occur, it lead to poor research supervision relationship. for example one-on-one supervision is a good model but individual supervisor might not all rounded in some important research concepts. This will delay the students to complete the research project.Supervision is a complex social encounter which involves two or more parties with both converging and diverging interests. Therefore, balancing these model interests is very crucial to the successful supervision of postgraduate research projects

[Marjolein Zweekhorst]

#1386

I am pleased to read that you appreciate the presentation and that it gives food for thought. Insights in the pros and cons of each of the models helps, but I completely agree Shonisani that dedication hard work, commitment and the professional relationship are crucial. Susan thank you for sharing your example of the cohort supervision. Your example also implies the start of the project or proposal development. Also in my experience this phase (and the writing phase) is (are) highly suitable for cohort supervision. And Kefa I completely agree that supervision of postgraduate students is challenging, maybe the more you know about it the more complex it becomes :)..

[Esther Kiaritha]

#1423

There is no model that is perfect. It depends on the situation. Therefore, one-on-one can also be good when the situation is right.

[Esther Kiaritha]

#1424

The models gives an insight on ways to improve supervision and increase the graduation rates. I have in along time glorified individual and co-supervision. But over the recent past, I have began trying cohort supervision and blended supervision which has been giving more success especially on peer learning, peer motivation and faster progress.

On the question of which is the best model, as the presenter said from the beginning, it depends on a number of factors such as discipline, novice vs experienced supervisors, gender of supervisor and supervise, personalities, age of both parties, physical distances, among many other variables. A supervisor need not to be reserved in trying any of the models but need to carefully consider factors that may play for or against the supervision practice. The bottom line is, (as we have learnt in the previous topic), in whatever model of choice, has the ways of operating in the ‘new world’ of academia been effectively been made clear to the student?

[Yakub]

#1575

Models and Tasks of supervision

This is a great presentation and surely got me thinking. It has critically demonstrated the various models as relevant to specific research situations. I have gone through Co-supervision as a novice supervisor and learnt a great deal from the experienced supervisor even as we supervised our postgraduate student. To harvest the best of knowledge I had to employ the skills of listening, observation, patience and action. I have undertaken individual supervision of Masters by Project offered in some the communications department in Maseno university, Kenya. It has its own challenges!!It would be quite interesting to explore the other forms of supervision e.g. Cohort, panel etc.

The tasks of supervision are surely enormous and call for expert balancing to ensure supervision brings out the best out of the student and the final document. It takes lots of
focus from a supervisor to be, for example, a critic, friend, teacher and examiner of his/her student. What this means is that each task has its place and time in the journey of supervision to completion. Thanks a lot Marjolein.

[Damiannah Kieti]

#1633

Having gone through the presentation, I feel that each supervision model may apply depending of several factors, for instance, the discipline/field of study, the design of the postgraduate programme, institution’s policy on postgraduate supervision among others. However, the underlying principle in the success of each model is the “supervisor-student relationship” and the ability of the supervisor to handle the various attributes of the relationship to achieve positive outcomes for all the parties.
For instance, over the period I have supervised postgraduate students, I have largely engaged in co-supervision, either as the 1st supervisor or 2nd supervisor. Often, I find co-supervision very rewarding, enriching and complementary in nature, since each supervisor brings onboard different expertise and approaches. However, in few instances, the co-supervision arrangement has turned out to be very distressing, particularly when some socio-cultural dimensions, particularly ethnic differences come into play and disrupts/destabilizes the “supervisor-student-supervisor relationships” or when one of the supervisors does not have any relevance in the topic but required to supervise as part of their academic duty. This compromises the supervision process, particularly, the quality control aspects.

[Damiannah Kieti]

#1634

Kefa, this is a good observation. Why do you think collegial effort- which may point to ‘team supervision model’ is the best option?

[Damiannah Kieti]

#1646

Very true Esther.The presentation provides useful insights and challenges the models some of us have ‘glorified’ over the years. I personally do not have an experience working in team supervision- something I would wish to try.

[Jethro]

#1647

The role of the supervisor in a one on one supervision process is to ask questions rather than to judge the student. The supervisor because of being knowledgeable in the area should be in a better position to probe and challenge the student to read wider and be in a position to defend his or her position. The co-supervisor is there to do quality checks as well as pointing out areas that the main supervisor and student would not have considered. However, the challenge is more on the personality issues whereby there could be clashes of opinions and views which are more on substantive against procedural issues

[Amos]

#2016

Individual supervision to me has some challenges. Sometimes it may lead to students doing project titles which are of the supervisors origin hence the student is denied the opportunity of free thought. In addition if personal conflicts do arise in the process, then the student is disadvantaged since he/she has no plan B to turn to. Furthermore, in one on one supervision, the student is denied the chance to access or learn from other scholars in the area of interest.

Co supervision, Panel supervision, Project supervision and Cohort supervision brings on board a mosaic of ideas from the beginning of the project tittle conception. This has an advantage in that the student will get a chance to view the project title/topic from different perspectives which is useful in shaping the students future thinking.

In particular, panel supervision can be of great benefit to the student since each supervisor has a particular role to play and none has an overarching role. This reduces conflicts among the supervisors. In fact iam a product of such a model of supervision and i greatly benefited from it.

[Author]

Posts