role of the dissertation supervisor

Roles and responsibilities of supervisors

Introduction

Knowledge of regulations, policies and procedures
Advice on program of study, research and professional development
Meetings/consultation
Financial assistance
Intellectual property
Publications
Withdrawal of supervisory duties
Accommodation

Introduction

Effective graduate student supervision requires complex interactions between graduate students and their supervisors. The role of a supervisor is threefold: to advise graduate students, monitor their academic progress, and act as a mentor. Supervisors not only provide guidance, instruction and encouragement in the research activities of their students, but also take part in the evaluation and examination of their students’ progress, performance and navigation through the requirements of their academic program with the goal to ensure that their students are successful.

Supervisors are responsible for fostering the intellectual and scholarly development of their students. They also play an important role in providing advice about professional development and both academic and non-academic career opportunities, as they are able, and based upon the student’s career interests.

While these expectations apply to all graduate students, supervising PhD students reflects a longer-term, more substantive commitment. The privilege to supervise PhD students requires that the supervisor hold Approved Doctoral Dissertation Supervisor (ADDS) status. The intent of ADDS policy is to ensure that faculty have the appropriate knowledge to facilitate excellence in PhD supervision.

return to top

Knowledge of regulations, policies and procedures

Effective graduate student supervision requires a knowledge and understanding of the University’s requirements and expectations. To this end, supervisors should:

2.1 Be knowledgeable and remain updated on department, Faculty and University regulations, policies and procedures, and have these protocols guide the supervisors’ decision-making and behaviour as they interact with graduate students. Supervisors are encouraged to take the necessary steps to be well-informed with those Policies identified in section 1.2 .

2.2 Be familiar with the support services available to students and faculty at the University including those articulated in section 1.2 . This information is normally available through department graduate co-ordinators, Faculty Graduate Studies Offices, Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs (GSPA), the Graduate Student Association (GSA) or the University Secretariat.

2.3 Be informed about University of Waterloo policies and procedures that inform academic integrity (Office of Research).

2.4 Be aware of the University of Waterloo and Tri-Agency policies and procedures associated with the conduct of research. Where appropriate, supervisors should be prepared to provide guidance to students on:

The responsible conduct of research, with particular emphasis on the Tri-Agency Framework as defined in the Faculty Association of University of Waterloo (FAUW) /University of Waterloo memorandum of Agreement (Section 14).
The ethical conduct of research (Office of Research) involving animals, animal or human tissues, and human participants

2.5 Have knowledge of the policies and procedures that govern international travel and security that can be found at Waterloo International.

return to top

Advice on program of study, research and professional development

As noted above, supervisors are expected to serve as mentors to their graduate students. To this end, supervisors should be prepared to provide well-informed advice on academics and professional development. More specifically, supervisors should be prepared to advise students on:

2.6 An academic program that is challenging, at the appropriate level for the degree being sought, and that can be accomplished within commonly understood and desirable time and resource expectations of the student and the supervisor.

2.7 The choice of courses and seminars needed to fulfil the degree requirements.

2.8 The development and construct of a research topic and proposal.

2.9 The development of a communication plan with the supervisory/advisory committee as to how the student’s progress will be assessed (including during thesis writing and completion), and the role of advisory committee members in the assessment.

2.10 The availability of internships, practica, co-op or other experiential learning opportunities as part of the program.

2.11 The availability of professional development resources for Waterloo graduate students to help advance the students’ career objectives.

Meetings/consultation

The establishment and communication of common expectations are critical elements to positive experiences for both graduate students and their supervisors. Achieving these outcomes can be facilitated by regular meetings and/or consultation between students, their supervisors, and where appropriate advisory committees. Especially important is timely feedback on students’ written submissions.

The University encourages supervisors to:

2.12 Ensure, especially important in the case of doctoral students, that the student has:

An advisory committee as required.
A program of study consistent with department and Faculty requirements that has been approved by the advisory committee as required.
A research plan that is appropriate in breadth, depth and time to completion (see Milestones in master's and doctoral programs ).

2.13 Arrange for regular (as agreed by the student and supervisor) meetings (which may involve the advisory committee) with students for consultation to ensure steady progress. The frequency of such meetings will depend on the discipline/field of study, type of program, and the student’s progress. At least two, preferably more, meetings should be arranged in each academic term. Supervisors should also be reasonably accessible for meetings requested by their students. The approach to these student meetings should be individualized to reflect the needs of the student. For example, some students may need more support while other may need less.

2.14 Communicate their evaluation of student progress to the department once a year or more often if required. The report should clearly indicate the status of the student’s progress (i.e., satisfactory or unsatisfactory). In the latter case, the report must include a clearly articulated set of conditions that if satisfied will restore the student’s status to satisfactory. Where the supervisor feels that the student will have serious difficulties finishing the program, the supervisor, in consultation with the advisory committee as appropriate, will inform in writing, both the student and the graduate officer of the nature of the problem(s), suggested remedies and may recommend withdrawal from the program. More information on assessing students’ progress can be found in the Graduate Studies Academic Calendar.

2.15 Thoroughly review and provide constructive feedback on all written materials relevant to the thesis or research paper submitted by their students. The supervisor and the student are encouraged to establish in writing expectations on what constitutes timely feedback; a timeframe of two to three weeks depending on the complexity of the document is commonly applied. However, this can vary depending on various circumstances such as travel or vacation. These circumstances should be discussed between the supervisor and student.

2.16 Have knowledge of the guidelines for evaluating students’ progress in a research program (Graduate Studies Academic Calendar).

2.17 Inform students about the broad spectrum of resources available (Writing and Communication Centre) to facilitate development of oral communication and writing skills.

2.18 Be active and supportive in promoting students’ well-being. This may include:

Inquiring about a student’s well-being, as appropriate.
Directing students to appropriate support services , including Mental Health and Wellness resources (Campus Wellness).
Displaying empathy towards the student.

2.19 Complete as appropriate the University requirements for Sexual violence awareness, referral and support training (Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion Office) to understand how to respond to disclosures of sexual violence and refer students to the appropriate supports.

The University recognizes that supervisors will be away from the University for extended periods of time (e.g., sabbatical, satellite campus, visiting professorship). Being physically away from the University does not preclude a supervisor from remaining engaged with their graduate students. In cases where the supervisor will not be available either in person or via electronic communications, the supervisor should:

2.20 Inform students, prospective students and the department of any anticipated extended period where communication will not be occurring. In cases when the absence is for a period of two months or more, supervisors should arrange for suitable communication methods. Interim supervision also must be arranged, for example, using members of advisory committees. Supervisors must inform the student’s department (chair/graduate officer) of the arrangements made for the period of absence, including supervision of laboratory or field work where graduate students continue to work during the absence.

2.21 Ensure students know that in situations where a supervisor works away from campus for two months or more and where their students can accompany the supervisor, the decision to remain on campus or to follow the supervisor rests entirely with the student. Students shall face no pressure (explicit or implicit) or consequences when making this choice and are not required to provide any reason.

As with the departmental representatives, supervisors have responsibility to advance safety. More specifically, supervisors should:

2.22 Ensure a safe working environment both on and off campus (working alone, field work) by assessing hazards and implementing appropriate controls. This must be in accordance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act, Policy 34 (Secretariat) and department and Faculty regulations. All supervisors must complete mandatory health and safety supervisor awareness training (Safety Office) and must ensure that graduate students complete both mandatory and work-specific safety training. More information can be found on the Safety Office website.

2.23 Ensure that students obtain additional training when new safety risks arise and ensure training is kept up to date.

Inherent to graduate education are the dissemination of knowledge and the participation in scholarly activities away from the University campus. Travel (domestic and international) can include fieldwork, conferences, course work and other work related to the thesis. Supervisors are encouraged to support students’ travel to accomplish these important objectives. Supervisors should:

2.24 Follow or encourage students to follow Policy 31 (Secretariat) that governs University-sanctioned travel.

2.25 Categorize and report risk associated with travel. Low risk (Safety Office) are activities for which it is expected that participants will encounter hazards that are no greater than what they encounter in their everyday lives. Examples of significant risk (e.g. industrial sites, remote regions etc.) are noted on the Safety Office website . Travel or field work that involves significant risk must be documented using the Fieldwork Risk Management Form from the Safety Office . For low risk activities off campus, supervisors should:

Provide advice on preparation for pre-departure orientation and planning for any travel and including associated risk, as they are able;

2.26 Document the student(s) location and duration of travel, including personal and emergency contact information. Review the material provided by Waterloo International to understand how to best mitigate risk and ensure safety for international travel.

2.27 Encourage students to register using the Pre-departure Travel Form at Waterloo International .

2.28 Consult the Government of Canada Travel Advice and Advisories web page for the international destination and discuss the mitigation of risk with the students to the destination.

Financial assistance

Supervisors regularly provide financial support for their graduate students. Both the supervisor and the student benefit when a clear understanding exists of the value of funding, and the academic outcomes that should occur from the supported activities. Specifically, supervisors should:

2.29 Be informed about the spectrum of funding opportunities available through the department, Faculty and Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs (GSPA) for students in financial need and to communicate these sources to student.

2.30 Communicate clearly and in writing to their students the terms (e.g., amounts, length of time, conditions) of the financial commitment being made when financial assistance is to be provided from research grants or contracts under the supervisor’s direction.

2.31 Support students’ understanding of their funding, including a consideration of student expenses (primarily tuition and housing) and taxation, if appropriate.

Intellectual property

Increasingly, students and supervisors enter into their academic relationships with previously established intellectual property (IP). Moreover, students and supervisors may have an expectation that their collective work may produce new IP. Best practices include the articulation of students’ and supervisors’ understanding of IP relationships at regular intervals throughout the students’ academic program. More specifically, supervisors should:

2.32 Discuss issues related to intellectual property such as patents, software, copyright, and income from sales and royalties, and inform students of University policies about intellectual property and the conduct of research. It should be recognized that, in accordance with Policy 73 (Secretariat), intellectual property normally is owned by the creators. However, the University retains a royalty-free right to use, for educational and research purposes, any intellectual property created by faculty, staff and students. Ideally, supervisors and students should enter into a written agreement that expresses IP owned by either party prior to beginning the research relationship and the default way in which IP created by the researchers’ joint activities will be owned. A common example is an assumption in the absence of an explicit agreement of joint IP ownership, with each researcher owning an equal share.

2.33 Ensure that students are aware of implications and/or obligations regarding intellectual property of research conducted under contract. If appropriate, discuss with their students and any research partners the protection of intellectual property by patent or copyright. Any significant intellectual contribution by a student must be recognized in the form of co-authorship. Supervisors must convey to students, in advance of publication, whether they intend to recognize the student as co-author for work under contract.

Publications

Academic outputs – in various forms – document and demonstrate ownership of creative research and other scholarly activities. These outputs are important for advancing knowledge and catalyzing additional scholarly activity in these areas and should be encouraged. When supervisors and graduate students work collectively on these academic works, it is important for both that their relative contributions are represented appropriately. To achieve these goals, supervisors should:

2.34 Discuss with their students, at an early stage of their program, authorship practices within the discipline and University policies about publications ( Policy 73 on the Secretariat website).

2.35 Discuss and reach agreement with students, well in advance of publication and ideally at the outset of collaboration, the way in which authorship will be shared, if appropriate, between the supervisor, the student and other contributors for work conducted under contract.

2.36 Encourage the dissemination of students’ research results by publication in scholarly and research journals, presentation at conferences (domestic or international) and seminars;

2.37 Motivate the dissemination of research through non-traditional or non-academic avenues (e.g. Open Access resources, public presentations, and popular media).

Withdrawal of supervisory duties

In rare cases supervisors may determine that they are not prepared or able to continue in a supervisory capacity. When this occurs, the supervisor is required to:

2.38 Follow the guidelines in the Graduate Studies Academic Calendar regarding University Responsibilities Regarding Supervisory Relationships that outlines the steps for dissolution of the supervisory relationship.

Accommodation

The University is eager to establish conditions that maximize graduate students’ likelihood of success. To this end, supervisors:

2.39 Have a duty to engage in accommodations processes with AccessAbility Services , as requested, and to provide appropriate accommodation to the point of undue hardship.

2.40 Remain informed of their roles and responsibilities with respect to accommodations.

<< previous section : Roles and responsibilities of departments, graduate officers and graduate co-ordinators

>> next section : Roles and responsibilities of graduate students

Academic & Employability Skills

Subscribe to academic & employability skills.

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 412 other subscribers.

Email Address

Writing your dissertation - working with your supervisor

Posted in: dissertations

Your supervisor

Before you begin your dissertation, it is highly likely you will be assigned a supervisor to oversee your progress from first steps to completion. Your supervisor will help you formulate ideas and give you guidance on how best to develop your research topic and course of action. But you need to always remember that this is your project, and your supervisor will not provide you with content or additional lessons on a particular topic. Their role is to help you work out your own pathways to success.

Get organised

Lecturers are very busy people, and your dissertation is only a small part of the duties and responsibilities they have to carry out during the summer months. So in order to get the most out of your supervisor and maintain a positive and productive professional relationship with them, you need to get organised.

Here are some important guidelines to follow:

Agree a timetable of meetings at the start of your project and stick to it.
Ensure that each meeting has a focus e.g. “setting a research problem”, “analysing the data”, with a clear set of questions to ask.
your research plan
early results of your data collection
draft chapters.
Arrive on time to each meeting you have arranged. At the end of each supervision meeting agree some action points for you to focus on before the next time you meet.
Keep a record of what you decide in supervision sessions.
Don't bug your supervisor with emails in between your meetings. Save up your questions for your next scheduled appointment.

If you are not happy with an aspect of your supervision, discuss this with your supervisor. If this is too difficult or awkward, your personal tutor may also be able to offer advice.

Navigating the dissertation process: my tips for final years

Imagine for a moment... After months of hard work and research on a topic you're passionate about, the time has finally come to click the 'Submit' button on your dissertation. You've just completed your longest project to date as part...

Vanda Sigel and another HSS student working on laptops.

8 ways to beat procrastination

Whether you’re writing an assignment or revising for exams, getting started can be hard. Fortunately, there’s lots you can do to turn procrastination into action.

A post-it note reading 'Procrastination' surrounded by balls of screwed-up paper

My takeaways on how to write a scientific report

If you’re in your dissertation writing stage or your course includes writing a lot of scientific reports, but you don’t quite know where and how to start, the Skills Centre can help you get started. I recently attended their ‘How...

Person in a lab coat looking into a microscope doing an experiment in a laboratory. There's a row of test tubes on the bench. The person is writing on a clipboard.

Dissertation Advisor 101

How to get the most from the student-supervisor relationship

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Expert Reviewer: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | January 2024

Many students feel a little intimidated by the idea of having to work with a research advisor (or supervisor) to complete their dissertation or thesis. Similarly, many students struggle to “connect” with their advisor and feel that the relationship is somewhat strained or awkward. But this doesn’t need to be the case!

In this post, we’ll share five tried and tested tips to help you get the most from this relationship and pave the way for a smoother dissertation writing process.

Overview: Working With Your Advisor

Clarify everyone’s roles on day one
Establish (and stick to) a regular communication cycle
Develop a clear project plan upfront
Be proactive in engaging with problems
Navigate conflict like a diplomat

1. Clarify roles on day one

Each university will have slightly different expectations, rules and norms in terms of the research advisor’s role. Similarly, each advisor will have their own unique way of doing things. So, it’s always a good idea to begin the engagement process by clearly defining the roles and expectations in your relationship.

In practical terms, we suggest that you initiate a conversation at the very start of the engagement to discuss your goals, their expectations, and how they would like to work with you. Of course, you might not like what you hear in this conversation. However, this sort of candid conversation will help you get on the same page as early as possible and set the stage for a successful partnership.

To help you get started, here are some questions that you might consider asking in your initial conversation:

How often would you like to meet and for how long?
What should I do to prepare for each meeting?
What aspects of my work will you comment on (and what won’t you cover)?
Which key decisions should I seek your approval for beforehand?
What common mistakes should I try to avoid from the outset?
How can I help make this partnership as effective as possible?
My academic goals are… Do you have any suggestions at this stage to help me achieve this?

As you can see, these types of questions help you get a clear idea of how you’ll work together and how to get the most from the relatively limited face time you’ll have.

Need a helping hand?

2. Establish a regular communication cycle

Just like in any relationship, effective communication is crucial to making the student-supervisor relationship work. So, you should aim to establish a regular meeting schedule and stick to it. Don’t cancel or reschedule appointments with your advisor at short notice, or do anything that suggests you don’t value their time. Fragile egos are not uncommon in the academic world, so it’s important to clearly demonstrate that you value and respect your supervisor’s time and effort .

Practically speaking, be sure to prepare for each meeting with a clear agenda , including your progress, challenges, and any questions you have. Be open and honest in your communication, but most importantly, be receptive to your supervisor’s feedback . Ultimately, part of their role is to tell you when you’re missing the mark. So, don’t become upset or defensive when they criticise a specific aspect of your work.

Always remember that your research advisor is criticising your work, not you personally . It’s never easy to take negative feedback, but this is all part of the learning journey that takes place alongside the research journey.

Fragile egos are not uncommon in the academic world, so it’s important to demonstrate that you value and respect your advisor’s time.

3. Have a clear project plan

Few things will impress your supervisor more than a well-articulated, realistic plan of action (aka, a project plan). Investing the time to develop this shows that you take your project (and by extension, the relationship) seriously. It also helps your supervisor understand your intended timeline, which allows the two of you to better align your schedules .

In practical terms, you need to develop a project plan with achievable goals . A detailed Gantt chart can be a great way to do this. Importantly, you’ll need to break down your thesis or dissertation into a collection of practical, manageable steps , and set clear timelines and milestones for each. Once you’ve done that, you should regularly review and adjust this plan with your supervisor to ensure that you remain on track.

Of course, it’s unlikely that you’ll stick to your plan 100% of the time (there are always unexpected twists and turns in a research project. However, this plan will lay a foundation for effective collaboration between yourself and your supervisor. An imperfect plan beats no plan at all.

4. Engage with problems proactively

One surefire way to quickly annoy your advisor is to pester them every time you run into a problem in your dissertation or thesis. Unexpected challenges are par for the course when it comes to research – how you deal with them is what makes the difference.

When you encounter a problem, resist the urge to immediately send a panicked email to your supervisor – no matter how massive the issue may seem (at the time). Instead, take a step back and assess the situation as holistically as possible. Force yourself to sit with the issue for at least a few hours to ensure that you have a clear, accurate assessment of the issue at hand. In most cases, a little time, distance and deep breathing will reveal that the problem is not the existential threat it initially seemed to be.

When contacting your supervisor, you should ideally present both the problem and one or two potential solutions . The latter is the most important part here. In other words, you need to show that you’ve engaged with the issue and applied your mind to finding potential solutions. Granted, your solutions may miss the mark. However, providing some sort of solution beats impulsively throwing the problem at your supervisor and hoping that they’ll save the day.

Simply put, mishaps and mini-crises in your research journey present an opportunity to demonstrate your initiative and problem-solving skills – not a reason to lose your cool and outsource the problem to your supervisor.

5. Navigate conflict like a diplomat

As with any partnership, there’s always the possibility of some level of disagreement or conflict arising within the student-supervisor relationship. Of course, you can drastically reduce the likelihood of this happening by implementing some of the points we mentioned earlier. Neverthless, if a serious disagreement does arise between you and your supervisor, it’s absolutely essential that you approach it with professionalism and respect . Never let it escalate into a shouting contest.

In practical terms, it’s important to communicate your concerns as they arise (don’t let things simmer for too long). Simultaneously, it’s essential that you remain open to understanding your supervisor’s perspective – don’t become entrenched in your position. After all, you are the less experienced researcher within this duo.

Keep in mind that a lot of context is lost in text-based communication , so it can often be a good idea to schedule a short call to discuss your concerns or points of contention, rather than sending a 3000-word email essay. When going this route, be sure to take the time to prepare a clear, cohesive argument beforehand – don’t just “thought vomit” on your supervisor.

In the event that you do have a significant disagreement with your advisor, remember that the goal is to find a solution that serves your project (not your ego). This often requires compromise and flexibility. A “win at all costs” mindset is definitely not suitable here. Ultimately, you need to solve the problem, while still maintaining the relationship .

If you feel that you have already exhausted all possible avenues and still can’t find an acceptable middle ground, you can of course reach out to your university to ask for their assistance. However, this should be the very last resort . Running to your university every time there’s a small disagreement will not serve you well.

Communicate your concerns as they arise and remain open to understanding your supervisor's perspective. They are the expert, after all.

Recap: Key Takeaways

To sum up, a fruitful student-supervisor relationship hinges on clear role definition , effective and regular communication , strategic planning , proactive engagement , and professional conflict resolution .

Remember, your dissertation supervisor is there to help you, but you still need to put in the work . In many cases, they’ll also be the first marker of your work, so it really pays to put in the effort and build a strong, functional relationship with them.

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

You Might Also Like:

Examples of psychology-related dissertations and theses

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Print Friendly

Research article
Open access
Published: 22 August 2019

The journey of thesis supervisors from novice to expert: a grounded theory study

Leila Bazrafkan 1 ,
Alireza Yousefy 2 ,
Mitra Amini 1 &
Nikoo Yamani 2

BMC Medical Education volume 19 , Article number: 320 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

9652 Accesses

6 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

Supervision is a well-defined interpersonal relationship between the thesis supervisors and their students. The purpose of this study was to identify the patterns which can explain the process of expertise attainment by thesis supervisors. We aimed at developing a conceptual framework/model to explain this development based on the experience of both students and supervisors.

We have conducted a qualitative grounded theory study in 20 universities of medical sciences in Iran since 2017 by using purposive, snowball sampling, and theoretical sampling and enrolled 84 participants. The data were gathered through semi-structured interviews. Based on the encoding approach of Strauss and Corbin (1998), the data underwent open, axial, and selective coding by constant comparative analysis. Then, the core variables were selected, and a model was developed.

We could obtain three themes and seven related subthemes, the central variable, which explains the process of expertise as the phenomenon of concentration and makes an association among the subthemes, was interactive accountability. The key dimensions during expertise process which generated the supervisors’ competence development in research supervision consisted maturation; also, seven subthemes as curious observation, evaluation of the reality, poorly structured rules, lack of time, reflection in action, reflection on action, and interactive accountability emerged which explain the process of expertise attainment by thesis supervisors.

Conclusions

As the core variable in the expertise process, accountability must be considered in expertise development program planning and decision- making. In other words, efforts must be made to improve responsibility and responsiveness.

Peer Review reports

Supervision is a well-defined term in the interpersonal relationship between thesis supervisors and students. A supervisor is designated to assist the student’s development in terms of their research project [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]. Faculty members supervise the students because qualified supervision leads to success on the part of the student, and it has moral, reputational, and financial outcomes for the institution. Supervisors are expected to train students to gain competence in areas such as specialist skills, generalist skills, self-reliance skills, and group/team skills [ 4 ]. Expertise is derived from the three essential elements of knowledge, experience, and the ability to solve problems in society [ 5 , 6 , 7 ]. .According to Dreyfus, acquisition of expertise or practical wisdom represents a higher level of “self-actualization.” At this point, one reaches a level in which they can flourish in their talents and abilities. This enables the teachers to function in scientific communities and multicultural environments [ 7 ].

Wiscer has identified three stages in the thesis supervision process and describes the duties of the supervisors in each of them [ 8 ]. Pearson and Brew state that maturation in specialist skills, generalist skills, self-reliance skills, and group/team skills are the major areas that need to be promoted in the student. Moreover, these are the generic processes in which the supervisors should be involved for efficacious supervision if they aim to help the students develop in various institutional, disciplinary and professional settings; acquire appropriate expertise and features needed for employment; and make an outline of what might form a flexible professional development program for supervisors in this setting [ 3 ]. Vereijken et al. emphasized novice supervisors’ approaches to reach expertise in supervision and explained the relationship between practice and dilemmas among novice supervisors [ 9 ].

.Despite the importance of expertise in higher education and particularly research supervision, research abilities are not considered as one of the priorities in the employment of the academic staff. Furthermore, the newly employed faculty members are often involved in teaching, administrative tasks, and services in health care; this inhibits them from expertise attainment in other aspects such as research supervision [ 10 , 11 , 12 ]. In this regard, Malekafzali believes that in the area of research activities, the faculty members have serious weaknesses in defining the problem, choosing the appropriate method for research, analyzing the data, interpreting the results, and publishing scientific articles. Besides, there is a lack of coherent and compiled training programs which can enhance their research capabilities [ 13 ].

One of the most important factors contributing to the thesis and research quality is the process of developing expertise in supervisors’ research supervision. Most studies in our country have focused on research abilities during the research, and fewer studies have focused on the process of expertise acquisition in thesis supervision, and no actual model has been proposed for this [ 11 , 12 , 13 ]. The quantitative researches could not explain exactly how and through which process the faculty members, as thesis supervisors, become experts in thesis supervision since the expertise process is multi-factorial and has many unknown aspects. Considering the effective role of qualitative research in clarifying ambiguous and unknown aspects, we chose the grounded theory approach for this study [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. This theory will be used when the investigator intends to determine the patterns of actions and social interactions needed for the development of expertise by specific groups of people in a specific setting [ 17 , 18 ].

In this study, we aimed to identify the themes that explain the expertise development process among thesis supervisors in Iran, and also to develop a conceptual framework/model to explain this development based on the experience of both students and supervisors.

This study was carried out in 20 universities of medical sciences with different ranks in Iran because universities are the places where supervisors and students interact purposefully to discourse the needs of experts on specific occasions and in specific conditions. In these universities, different students study with various disciplines. There are three types of universities in Iran. Type 1 universities are the ones with the most facilities, faculties, research presentations, international collaborations, and scientific outcomes. The second rank belongs to type 2, and the one with the least mentioned qualities is type 3 universities. All three types of universities were included in this study. In all these courses, writing a thesis is one of the requirements with the same role and regulation. The majority of the students in this research project were in the late stages of both undergraduate and postgraduate educational programs within the same function and regulation.

Study design

We conducted this qualitative study based on a grounded theory approach in a systematic form [ 17 , 18 ]. Grounded theory is a symbolic interaction which is derived from systematic data collection during the research process. In this strategy, collecting and analyzing data and the theory derived from the data have a close association [ 17 , 19 ]. The investigator’s purpose in using grounded theory is to describe and clarify a phenomenon in the social condition and to identify the essential processes working within [ 17 ].

Participants

In this study, 84 subjects including 56 faculty members of medical sciences, 20 undergraduate and postgraduate students (medical students, MS of Science, Ph.D. and residents), and eight managers in the field of research supervision participated. Using purposive sampling, snowball sampling with maximum variation, we selected the participants from a variety of academic ranks with different work experiences, as the key informants in thesis supervisors. Then, to continue the sampling, we used theoretical sampling and data saturation. The inclusion criterion was 5 years of work experience in thesis supervision, and the exclusion criterion was the unwillingness to participate in the study. Firstly, we collected data in Shiraz University with the help of a research supervisor who is known for his high quality of supervision and then data gathering was initiated in the university of Isfahan. There were 34 key informants from the two universities and 22 individuals from other universities. Students were selected based on their willingness to participate.

Theoretical sampling was used next to develop the tentative theory. The basis for theoretical sampling was the queries that emerged during data analysis. At this stage, the researcher interviewed the supervisor, administrators, and students. Theoretical sampling facilitated in verifying the supervisors’ responses and credibility of categories and resulted in more conceptual density. Data saturation was obtained when no new data emerged in the last five interviews. Therefore, data gathering by interviews was terminated.

Data collection

We collected the data primarily by semi-structured interviews from September 2017 to September 2018. The participants were recognized with unknown codes based on their field of work and setting, and each participant was interviewed in one or two sessions. Having obtained the participants’ informed consent, we recorded the interviews and they were transcribed verbatim immediately. The interviews began with open-ended general questions such as, “What did you experience during research supervision?” and then the participants were asked to describe their perceptions regarding their expertise process. Leading questions were also used to deeply explore the conditions, processes, and other factors that participants recognized as significant issues. The interview was based mostly on the questions which came up during the interview. On average, each interview lasted for an hour, during which field notes and memos were taken. At the end of each session, the participants were asked to give an opinion on other important topics which did not come up during the interview, followed by data collection and analysis which are simultaneously done in grounded theory; analytic thought and queries that arose from one interview were carried to the next one [ 20 ].

The data were also collected by unstructured observations of the educational atmosphere in the laboratory, and the faculty member and students’ counseling offices. These observations lasted 5 weeks, during which the faculties and students’ interactions and the manner of supervision were closely monitored. The observation was arranged to sample the maximum variety of research supervisor activity for some faculty member who is known to be a good or poor supervisor and detailed organized field notes were kept.

Also, we used the field notes to reflect emergent analytic concepts as a source of three angulations of data, frequently reconsidering the data, and referring to field notes in the context of each participant’s explanation. Analysis of the field notes facilitated in shaping contextual conditions and clarifying variations in the supervisors’ responses in each context. This led to the arrangement of several assumptions in the effect of contexts.

Data analysis

We simultaneously performed data collection and analysis. We read the scripts carefully several times and then entered them into MAXQDA (version10). We collected and analyzed the data practically and simultaneously by using a constant comparative method. Data were analyzed based on the 3-stage coding approach, including open, axial, and selective coding by Strauss and Corbin In the open coding stage, we extracted the basic concepts or meaning units from the gathered information. Then, more general concepts were formed by grouping similar concepts into one theme. The themes became clearer throughout the interviews. Then, the constructs of them were compared with each other to form tentative categories. After that, we conducted axial coding by using the guidelines given in Corbin and Strauss’s (2008) Paradigm Model [ 21 ]. The extracted themes (codes) in the previous (open coding) stage were summarized in 3 main themes during the axial coding stage, and then the core variables were selected in the selective coding stage [ 20 ]. To generate a reasonable theory to the community, a grounded theorist needs to condense the studied happenings a the precise sequence. To check the data against categories, the researcher asks questions related to certain categories and returns to the data to seek evidence. After developing a theory, the researcher is required to confirm the theory by comparing it with existing theories found in the recently available research [ 21 ]. We finalized the model after 5 days; during this time, we explained the relations between subcategories and the core category for realizing theoretical saturation and clarifying the theoretical power of the analysis explained about work as narration.

In terms of accuracy improvement, we used the Lincoln and Guba’s criteria, including credibility, dependability, conformability, and transferability [ 22 , 23 ].

To increase credibility, we collected data from different universities in Iran, and their credibility was also confirmed by three reviewers and experts in qualitative research. Also, some of the participants rechecked the data and the investigators’ description and interpretation of their experiences carefully. Prolonged engagement and tenacious observation facilitated the data credibility. In this way, the process of data collection and analysis took 12 months. Data triangulation and method triangulation also confirmed credibility [ 20 ]. The use of the maximum variation sampling method contributed to the dependability and conformability of data. Furthermore, once the explanation of the phenomenon was full, it was returned for confirmation to 3 participants of each university, and they validated the descriptions. Finally, to attain transferability, we adequately described the data in this article, so that a judgment of transferability can be made by readers.

Ethical considerations

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences (92–6746). The participants were informed about the research aim and interviews. Informed consent for conducting and recording the interview was obtained. The confidentiality of the participants’ information was maintained throughout the study.

In this study, the mean age of the faculty members and students was 44.34 ± 14.60 and 28.54 ± 2.38 years, respectively. All the faculty members and most of the students were married. Only three students were single. Three themes and seven interrelated sub-themes emerged from the data (Table 1 ). The main variable, which explains the process of expertise as the phenomenon of concentration and makes an association among the categories, was interactive accountability. The key dimensions of the expertise process are displayed in a model (Fig. 1 ).

The process of expertise attainment in research supervisor model

Theme 1: engagement

In this theme, the initial phase of expertise, the supervisor starts to observe the others’ behavior in the students’ supervision and guidance based on the practical and cognitive skills previously acquired. They attempt to recognize the different needs based on the amount of their motivation and previous competence so that the models become important for them, and they recognize the scope of the needs based on their importance. Then, they try to understand the needs and values of real thesis supervision in this context. In this theme, two sub-themes, curious observation, and evaluation with reality emerged.

Curious observation

In this sub-theme, several concepts such as personal interest, self-awareness, ability to meet the students’ needs, ability to detect weaknesses in research skills, and observation of role models in this area act as the impellent factors in expertise attainment in research supervision.

Regarding personal interest, a successful faculty member in the area of research supervision said:

“…In my experience, faculties must be selected from those who have curious personalities as well as being good observers, first of all. In this way, they will have the appropriate intrinsic character to acquire knowledge in guidance and supervision)…” (Faculty member N0.3)

According to our participants, the most important intrinsic motivation is the desire to update the content knowledge and skills in research supervision. An experienced professor said:

“ … The knowledge gap between the new and old generations of faculty members is what forced me to update my knowledge...and it has been detected by myself…” (Faculty member N0.3).

Another important intrinsic motivation is the ability to meet the educational and research needs of students. However, usually these needs are combined; one of the faculty members put it:

“…I would like to be an expert in this process (thesis supervision) to meet my students’ needs. Because I have seen and felt this need many times before…” (Faculty member N0.12).

Since the publication of research directly affects the promotion of a faculty, some professors seek skills that are practical in article publication such as several statistical and basic skills for thesis writing. The participants considered the self-awareness and consciousness elements as very important. Through consciousness, one can better understand their needs.

Evaluation with reality

In this sub-theme, in the initial phase maintaining academic dignity and competition motivates the faculty members to obtain expertise in research supervision. At this point, the supervisor evaluates themself and their potentialities considering more precise features and acquired information (or data), so that they can find the distance between the optimal state and the existing conditions. They also evaluate the others’ potentialities in this field realistically and compete. Good supervision is then highlighted for them. Based on the supervisors’ experience, at this stage, they are seriously engaged in evaluation and competition.

Another motivation was obtaining academic and social promotion. Although the number of theses supervised by them can affect the academic promotion of supervisors, this effect is insignificant. The real motivation is maintaining academic dignity and competition amongst peers. A member of the clinical faculties stated:

“ … To enhance academic dignity, a faculty member should master various skills such as patient care, teaching, educational skills, and last but not least, research supervision. I got involved in research and thesis supervision because I felt I should not be left behind…” ( Faculty member N0.17).

At this stage, the junior supervisor tries to increase the cognitive knowledge in research supervision such as increasing specific knowledge of the discipline, planning, directing of a project effectively, and developing good interpersonal skills presented in research supervision.

Theme 2: supervision climate

In this theme, we describe the contextual factor which changes the process of expertise attainment in thesis supervisors. The result of the study reflects some concerns about the relationship between individuals in the context in that they interact purposefully but with barriers. The supervision climate in the thesis supervision process in this theme led to the emergence of two sub-themes, challenging shortcomings and role ambiguity. These challenges include poorly structured rules and regulations which, in turn, can cause confusion and role ambiguity.

Challenging shortcomings

This report shows that contextual factor plays a significant role in promoting the quality of a thesis in a university, but the process is faced with altered challenges such as inadequate resources, inadequate time, and ineffective evaluation and rule and regulation deficit. These challenges include the following. Most faculty members and students have experienced these shortcomings.

Various inadequate resources, such as access to new and online journals, laboratory equipment were one of the challenges for supervisors in certain aspects which required more competency, and the constraints on communication with the other academic centers worldwide undermine the sense of competition and hinder the effort put in to become an expert. One of the students said: “… I see how difficult it is to gain access to a good article or laboratory materials in this situation …we try, but it just isn’t possible...” (Faculty member N0.17).

Based on our results, the sudden changes in personal life, work position, and organizational change can affect the path to expertise. These changes such as marriage, work overload, admission of students over the capacity, new rules and regulation of scholar citizenship, promotion and so on can have both positive and negative impacts, depending on whether they facilitate or restrict the professional development of faculties as supervisors. For instance, an increase in student admission causes work overload, which results in neglecting self-improvement.

“…As you know, we are over- loaded with students (they have increased the number of admissions), which is beyond our capacity. This means that most of our time will be dedicated to teaching. Self-improvement is difficult due to lack of time…” (Faculty member N0.6).

Role ambiguity

Poorly structured supervision can occur where there is an ambiguous context of supervision structure, supervisors and students’ roles. Most participants, as faculty members, managers, and students have experienced some difficulties in this regard, due to poorly structured rules(EDITORS NOTE; do you mean ‘rules and regulations ‘here) and regulations and its impact on the thesis supervision. It is not only the rules themselves but also the way they are implemented. One of the faculty members expressed confusion over the rules related to the dissertation as follows:

“…It should be made clear what I must do exactly. It is obvious regarding supervision on the work of students; there are not the same expectations from an Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and a professor. Most problems occur as a result of the gap in legislation; For example, the rules imply a full Professor does not need a statistical consult, while many supervisors like me do not have enough knowledge and skills in statistical analysis...” (Faculty member N0.1).

Failure to implement the rules also increases the sense of this ambiguity, and there are no specific rules for verifying capability and audits to determine inadequate experts in thesis supervision. The role ambiguity or unclear roles and responsibilities of the supervisor and student in the thesis process were other limitations that were emphasized by the majority of participants. A faculty member stated:

“… Supervisors have different roles during the thesis process. To enhance this process, one must exactly know one’s responsibilities. For instance, in the beginning, the supervisor should guide the students through the process of finding a suitable research topic, but if the teacher's role is unclear, then instead of guiding they may actually choose the topic, and if so, the students will be prevented from exploring, using their creative thinking, and improving their problem-solving abilities…” (Faculty member N0.1).

Various performance

Based on the participants’ experiences, in this situation in which there are inadequate resources and organizational and social problems, some faculty members are well-trained in the field of supervision. One of the senior faculty members said: “It is my honor to mention that despite the existence of many obstacles, I have been able to train well-educated students, who have become researchers and contribute to the development of science in my country.”

One of the most important causes of poor performance is ineffective evaluation. Based on the participants experiences, two main problems can result in ineffective evaluation. First of all is the inadequate feedback from the supervisor which leads to unmotivated learners and the second one is lack of feedback from the stakeholders and educational institutes which in turn diminishes the supervisor’s efforts toward self-improvement. These can lead to poor performance both in students and supervisors.

In one of the Ph.D. student’s words:

“…In this system, there is no supervision on the supervisors; there is no control or evaluation of their work. Also, the supervisors don't get feedback from their students during the research process, and there is no third person who investigates whether the report is real or not…” (student N0. 7).

Evidence from data suggests that an unfair judgment and evaluation of academic theses are other problems in the process of acquiring the merit of teachers. If there isn’t proper evaluation, students and supervisors would not have the right standards to correct their performance.

The professors do not always consider the lack of expertise to be the only cause of poor performance. Many believe that inadequate monitoring can also reduce the motivation for quality performance. This means that supervisors may obtain the necessary expertise, but they are not motivated to enhance their performance since they are not expected to do this. One student had experienced:

“…I was so thrilled that my thesis supervisor was an experienced, older and well-known professor, but unfortunately, I soon found out that not only was his scientific knowledge outdated, but also he lacked the necessary supervision skills, so he let the students do all the work unsupervised. He did not take any responsibility during the process…” (Student N0.4).

Another point which leads to poor performance is the fact that some faculty members do not comprehend the main purpose of the thesis writing process; actually, they do not know the difference between teaching and guiding in the project or thesis supervision. One of the basic science supervisors said: “… Some faculties consider a thesis as research work and not a lesson in which research methodology should be taught...” (Faculty member N0.5).

Performing poorly along with ignoring professional ethics can also lead to increased tension and stress in student-teacher relationships. This can result in despondency and frustration in both students and teachers and create a vicious cycle of inefficient supervisors who will train inefficient students or future supervisors.

One of the students put it this way:

“...I feel the absence of a supervisor in my research; I would have been more successful, and my results would have been better if I had had more guidance.” (Student N0.6).

Theme 3: maturation

In this theme, the secondary phase of expertise, the individual is emotionally involved and feels that success or failure is important. This is a stage in which the learner needs an integrated schedule to be competent, and as a result, success or failure will follow. The supervisors frequently think about personal promotion and takes action in this way. They try out different approaches, and sometimes due to disappointment and embarrassment they fail. Some individuals quit at this stage and never reach competence, or they have what may be called an artificial competence. And this does not mean that they are not considered to be well-known supervisors; rather, they know, as do the students, that they are not competent. At this stage, the supervisor attempts to acquire the identity of a researcher and tries to enhance his availability, and be dutiful, knowledgeable, and enthusiastic in research supervision. Along the lines of this theme, three sub-themes of Reflection in action, Reflection on action, and Interactive accountability emerged.

Reflection in action

In this sub-theme, the patterns of expertise development begin, and self-directed learning, participatory teaching and learning strategies through a hidden curriculum are considered. At this stage, the supervisor tries to follow self-directed learning, and the amount of time allocated to expertise acquirement seems to be one of the most important factors. In this regard, one stated:

“…My success in this case (research supervision) is, first of all, due to self-evaluation and self-effort. For instance, to be in control and take full responsibility, I think about everything related to the guidance of the students, and I felt the need to master every aspect of research, even the statistical skills needed for analysis…” (Faculty member N0.8).

The supervisors’ activities were divided into two groups: self-directed –learning strategy and gaining experience through individual effort. Expertise requires continuous interaction and experience. They evaluate their learning, and by this, they experience the manner of managing and allocating time for effective supervision. According to participants, the amount of time allocation for expertise seems to be one of the most important factors for self-directed learning and expertise acquirement.

The formal training workshops provided an opportunity for supervisors with similar terms and the same problems in terms of learning experiences, environmental features, students, and educational problems to come together in one place. Participants also considered the formal participatory teaching necessary since it can provide an opportunity for the peers to get together and exchange their experiences. As a clinical faculty member put it:

“…Collaborative strategies can be beneficial in many ways. One of them is the facilitation of experience exchanges amongst teachers, peers, and colleagues and modeling the behavior of teachers and teaching workshops that emphasize the importance of their expertise in research supervision…” (Faculty member N0.1).

In our participants’ experience, this self-directed learning is effective if, and only if, it is done accompanied by proper training and participatory teaching. Otherwise, it is a waste of time. As an example, one of the students in this field said:

“…my supervisor was a great teacher and put in a lot of time and effort on my thesis supervision; however, due to his lack of research skills, I had to change my thesis proposal three times. However, after he participated in a training course at the University of Oxford, his progress was unbelievable and impressive…and I saw his expertise…” (Student N0.11).

One of the faculty members also quoted:

“…When the teachers feel a gap in their knowledge or skill, the university must provide a comfortable, appropriate, and easy way for learning them …” (Faculty member N0.10).

Regarding this subject, one of the Managers in this field stated:

“…Another improvement strategy is the use of interpersonal interactions among faculty members, these instructive interpersonal interactions among the faculty members in similar conditions make it possible to benefit from peers’ feedback …” (Manager N0.1).

A hidden curriculum strategy, like learning through trial and error can also affect the expertise process. One of the professors expressed:

“… Learning through trial and error is very effective; through the supervision of each thesis, we learn some of our mistakes and try not to remake them in the next one …” (Faculty member N0.3).

Reflection on action

The learner provides an integrated schedule for their competence and uses all the facilitators and facilities around them for further efficiency and promotion. This stage is named Conditional Self-efficacy by expertise experience. At this stage, the supervisor is considered a competent individual who can guide the students based on the experiences of specialized and non-specialized faculty members.

In this regard, one of the students said:

“…I can acknowledge that my supervisor functioned very impressively in this thesis, but guidance and supervision are not static; rather, it is an active process. To be a good supervisor, the faculty members should try to keep up to date and revise their attitudes, duties, and their specialty and knowledge. …” (Student N0.3).

According to the participants, at this stage the supervisors have achieved meta-competence and general characteristics or professional value; are able to guide the students and others; and develop characteristics such as acquiring specific knowledge of the discipline, especially well-organized knowledge, planning, directing of a project effectively, having good interpersonal skills, and being dutiful, knowledgeable and enthusiastic in research.

One of the PhD students states: “… My supervisor is typical of an expert. His ingenious inquiries, extraordinary attention to science and his personality have always been admired and he has been a role model for me…” (Student N0.6).

For example, the supervisors attend educational programs on scientific writing and thesis evaluation as well as ethics in research and apply them in team work. Gradually, their competency can enable them to function as a good supervisor for their students. At this stage, the supervisor develops so that they can respond due to discovery and intuition. These responses replace their dubious and unskilled reactions. The supervisor now reflects various stages of supervision and guidance. They take action, and in fact, a part of their reactions are achieved through observation and recognition. In this stage, they not only recognize what should be done but also distinguish how to achieve it with more precise discretion. A competent person does the appropriate task in the most appropriate time using the right platform.

The time period required for training or acquiring expertise varies from one person to another. Some individuals become experts very soon, whilst it takes others longer.. As one of the professors said:

“…In the beginning, I was too concerned with my responsibility as a thesis supervisor and was not sure what I should do. However, after ten years of experience, I have gained a sense of awareness which makes supervision easier for me. Of course, up to date knowledge and skill as to managing a thesis are always necessary. It took me about 12 years to reach where I am today. Furthermore, an individual who is expert at present, will not be so in two years, so I want to say that the expertise in thesis supervision in a continuum, which depends on the supervisor’s reflections on work and activity …” (Faculty member N0.15).

The continuous path of expertise in supervision can be affected by various factors. This has resulted in a range of expertise and performance in supervisors. This range and continuum is a theme that most of our participants agreed with. One of the managers revealed:

“…There is surely a continuum of expertise. We cannot deny the expert supervisors; however, the existence of those with poor supervising skills must also be acknowledged (in thesis supervision). There are those on whose ethics, honesty, and knowledge we can rely on. On the other hand, there are a few who are not as trustworthy as needed.” (Manager N0.1).

The core variable: interactive accountability

As shown in Fig. 1 , through this survey, we found that the core variable in thesis supervision process is the interactive accountability shaped by interactions of supervisors and students in an academic setting, so to enhance the accountability, each group must take responsibility and do his or her job. In this regard, one of the managers claimed:

“…When supervisors find themselves responsible, and the university officials recognize this responsibility, the supervisors are motivated to seek expertise and try to enhance their competencies and acquire learning strategies because of being accountable…” (Manager N0.2)

This means that teachers must be responsive to the needs of students, university and community. Accountability is a mutual interaction between the students and their supervisor, in other words, if the student is responsive to his duties, he creates motivation in his supervisor. One of the participants commented;

“…I've always tried to be a competent thesis supervisor, so that I have the ability to meet the needs of the community and university as well as students. I say to myself when I accept the supervision of a thesis, I should be well accountable for its results…” (Faculty member N0.32)

This study aimed at exploring the processes of expertise among thesis supervisors based on the experience of faculty members, students, and managers of Iranian universities of medical sciences. The section concludes with an explanation of how these themes are a cohesive relationship, which enables the expertise development of supervisors. It seems that the core variable in the expertise process is the concept of interactive accountability and efforts to acquire the capacity to respond to the students and academic needs. This will help them to promote their professional behavior in research supervision. The importance of accountability and various types of ability in thesis supervision has also been emphasized by other studies [ 24 , 25 , 26 ]. It was also mentioned as the major feature of the supervisor in other studies [ 26 , 27 ].

In this study, “accountability” emerged as the behavioral pattern through which the supervisors resolved their main concern of being an expert in being responsive to academic and students’ needs. Supervision training is complex since academic choices in the real world can depend on supervisor characteristics. The results of this study revealed that in the initial phase of supervision, observation, evaluation, and reflection in action and maturation stage in the secondary phase were the major themes that emerged. This result compared with Bandura’s social learning and self-efficacy theory was significant in similarity and difference. Bandura believes that achieving self-efficacy is one of the most important contributors to competence. In his model, he suggested four sources of self-efficacy, including previous accomplishments, vicarious experiences such as having a role model, verbal persuasion such as coaching and evaluative feedback, and emotional arousal [ 28 , 29 ]. Likewise, in this study, we found that the emotional arousals such as personal interest in cooperative learning, peer competition, meeting the needs of students, self-awareness and the need for upgrading are the significant factors for the faculties’ expertise. Also, our participants found that the utilization of previous experiences is the most effective method of achieving personal competence. However, this study indicates conditional expertise, which means if an expert’s information is not up to date and they do not make any effort in this regard, being an expert and having expertise is not a permanent condition.

This study also revealed that self-effort, workshops, and role models, as part of a hidden curriculum, are influential methods of teacher empowerment which agrees with the results of some studies such as those of Britzman et al. and Patel et al. Patel et al. have also suggested the importance of role modeling; they believe that modeling and observing other faculty members behavior is an effective tool for promoting and strengthening the sense of efficacy in learners [ 30 , 31 ].

Based on our study results, among the learning methods used in Iran, the collaborative education and problem-based learning is the widely accepted method which is preferred by most faculties. Therefore, cooperative and collaborative learning strategies can be used in educating the faculty members towards expertise in supervision, as revealed in other studies [ 32 , 33 ].

Lack of time is reported by supervisors to be one of the most common barriers in trying to become an expert and carry out respectable worthy supervision, and taking one’s time is acknowledged as a motivating factor for putting in more effort in thesis supervision [ 34 , 35 , 36 ].

The effect of contextual factors is studied in several surveys [ 36 , 37 , 38 ]. Gillet et al. state that contextual and organizational factors play a key role in the competence of teachers in research supervision [ 36 ]. This study also showed that faculty expertise in thesis supervision was significantly affected by the impact of contextual interventional factors such as sudden changes, structural shortcomings, and educational environment. Based on our and other studies’ results, among the sudden changes, increased workload due to the increase in the student population has greatly affected expertise. Moreover, while an increase in the workload can lead to more experienced faculty members, it is very time-consuming and, therefore, reduces the chance to obtain new information and skills in thesis supervision [ 33 , 37 ].

Similar to our study, other studies such as those of Al-Naggar et al. and Yousefi et al. have also found insufficient monitoring and lack of formative evaluations to be one of the main obstacles in the thesis supervision process. Studies have indicated that to improve the supervision process, careful planning and incentive rules must be applied [ 5 , 34 ]. Similarly, our participants mentioned that rules and regulations which have resulted in the positive effect of research on scholarship and promotion had truly motivated them. Like our study, other studies in Iran have also found that the amount of time allocated to learning is one of the influential factors affecting the faculty members’ expertise [ 13 , 38 ]. A malfunctioning relationship between the student and supervisors can affect both of them negatively; that is, it can compel the students to misbehave and also reduce the teachers’ motivation to develop better skills. This malfunction may be due to the lack of constructive interactions or paternalism leadership in research supervision [ 39 , 40 ]. As shown in Fig. 1 , this study provided a conceptual framework that can be used in policy making and studies of expertise development in research supervision. This framework is based on the perception and experience of the majority of those involved in the thesis process. It also provides teachers with an opportunity to compare and share their experiences.

This model has three fields of experience, which yields a comprehensive gradient of the factors used for the development and progress of thesis supervision quality. In other words, it is a rational structure that makes an effort to cover a comprehensible number of stages, of concept, achievement, and impact or consequence. In other words, this model is a combination of a great number of items that help to recognize the present and future processes of expertise in thesis supervision, and future challenges in this area which predict results and impacts of supervisor’s knowledge, attitude and research supervision. Table one offers the categories and clarifications [ 17 ].

This study is based on our overall model of expertise attainment. This model reveals that specific personal efforts such as observation of prior knowledge, evaluation or self-assessments alongside the university contextual dynamics help to figure out how supervisors select their approaches and engagements, and respond carefully to their task, which in turn impacts the supervisors’ level of expertise and, finally, outcomes such as work and perseverance, which then help them to become an expert. Similar to the social learning theory of Bandura, this model also states that there is a mutual relationship between different parts that can mutually affect one another. For instance, faculty members have shown in various studies how one’s previous academic success and failure can affect the future levels of involvement and motivation. Based on the study aims, we focused on only three of the components of the model: observation, evaluation, and self-efficacy; in terms of motivational processes, we focused on four motivational components. The first is self-efficacy, defined as students’ judgments of supervisor abilities to carry out a task, and their beliefs about their ability to do so show the highest levels of academic achievement and also engagement in academic behaviors promoting learning.

Through the use of this grounded theory, we can begin to understand the supervisors’ challenges and why it may be difficult to become an expert in research supervision in practice. The junior supervisors curiously observe and evaluate their environment by reflection and in action and do their best to attain knowledge and skills in the supervision of the theses, so that they can reach maturation. They are mainly supported by prior knowledge of the research supervision, which they had acquired when they were students. The concept of “interactive accountability” refers to the fact that if the supervisor is responsive to the students’ needs, they can be an expert in supervision. If they cannot overcome the barriers and shortcomings such as lack of time, they will not attain expertise in thesis supervision.

Strengths and limitations of the study

This grounded theory study describes the main dimensions of expertise in research supervision from straight reports of a large qualitative sample ( n = 84) which consists of thesis supervisors, from all Iranian universities in three different data collection phases. Like other qualitative research, the results of this study cannot be generalized; therefore, it is recommended that the researchers conduct further qualitative research in other contexts to support these findings.

Despite the above limitations, we believe that this model can be useful for supervisors in the thesis supervision area, not only in analyzing the supervisors’ experience of supervision and being an expert but also in recognizing the areas of intervention or development of teacher training.

Implications of the study

The findings of the present study will help administrators to choose the supervisor with definite criteria in medical sciences institutes and facilitate the expertise in the supervision process through elimination of the shortcomings and improvement of the educational climate. The supervisor’s interest, talent, and capabilities should be assessed at the beginning of their employment as academic staff. Supervisors should attend educational workshops for updating their knowledge about supervision. It is recommended that collaborative strategies and methods should be used, so that we can contribute to the process of becoming an expert. The assessment of supervisors’ functioning in supervising and provision of feedback can contribute to the process of expertise. Feedback received from students about their supervisors will improve the supervisor’s further expertise and capabilities. For future studies survey on the impact of successful models in thesis supervision, disclosure analysis studies about student and supervisor are recommended.

In this study, we aimed to find out how thesis supervisors achieve expertise in supervision. The results of our study indicated that thesis supervisors achieve expertise in supervision in two stages of engagement and maturation. The emotional need to be responsive towards peers and students is the main motivation for the acquisition of competency at observation and evaluation phase of engagement. Through the evaluation and observation phase, the supervisors reach cognitive competence, such as research skills. Also, in the maturation phases, they reach meta-competence in research supervision such as problem-solving and resolving dilemmas by reflection in and when exposed to dilemmas. Meanwhile, the effects of supervision climate include shortcomings and role ambiguities which should be taken into account. According to this model, when supervisors are exposed to such problems, they apply multiple strategies, such as self-directed and collaborative learning; and learning by trial and error and from the role models. This will help them to promote their professional behavior in research supervision. This study indicated that interactive accountability, as the core variable, can be guaranteed in thesis supervisors by making the role clear, creating a supportive context, and improving the academic competencies of staff in an ongoing fashion. Therefore, this can promote constructive expertise in supervisors and foster a deeper understanding of the supervisor’s expertise in thesis supervision.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets produced and analyzed during the present study are not publicly accessible due to participant confidentiality, but are obtainable from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Harwood N, Petrić B. Adaptive master’s dissertation supervision: a longitudinal case study. Teach High Educ. 2018; https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1541881 .

Hal de Kleijn RA, Meijer PC, Brekelmans M, Pilot A. Adaptive research supervision: exploring expert thesis supervisors’ practical knowledge. High Educ Res Dev. 2015;34(1):117–30.

Article Google Scholar

Pearson M, Brew A. Research training and supervision development. Stud High Educ. 2002;27(2):135–50.

Light, G, Cox R, Calkins S. Learning and teaching in higher education: the reflective professional. 2nd ed. London: Paul Chapman; 2009.

Youseffi A, Bazrafkan L, Yamani N. A qualitative inquiry into the challenges and complexities of research supervision: viewpoints of postgraduate students and faculty members. J Adv Med Educ Prof. 2015;3(3):91.

Google Scholar

Lee AM. Developing effective supervisors: concepts of research supervision. South Afr J High Educ. 2007;21(4):680–93.

Hall-Ellis SD, Grealy DS. The Dreyfus model of skill acquisition: a career development framework for succession planning and management in academic libraries. Coll Res Libr. 2013;74(6):587–603.

Wisker G. The good supervisor: Supervising postgraduate and undergraduate research for doctoral theses and dissertations. 2nd ed. Palgrave Macmillan; 2012.

Vereijken MW, van der Rijst RM, van Driel JH, Dekker FW. Novice supervisors’ practices and dilemmatic space in supervision of student research projects. Teach High Educ. 2018;23(4):522–42.

Haghdoost AA, Ghazi M, Rafiee Z, Afshari M. The trend of governmental support from post-graduated Iranian students in medical fields to study abroad. Iran J Public Health. 2013;42(Suppl 1):141–6.

Malekzadeh R, Mokri A, & , Azarmina P. Medical science and research in Iran. Arch Iran Med (2001)4(1):27–39.

Samari A, Sorkhabi E, Omran S, Geraeenejed. Research and identify the factors contributing to the process of “academic development”. Iran Univ Stud Educ Plann. 2014;2(4):67–100.

Malekafzali H, Majdzadeh S, Fotouhi A, Tavakoli S. Applied research methodology in medical sciences. Tehran: Tehran University of Medical Sciences; 2004.

Creswell JW. Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publication; 2012.

Strauss AJC. Basic of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage Co; 1998.

Jeon Y-H. The application of grounded theory and symbolic interactionism. Scand J Caring Sci. 2004;18(3):249–56.

Denzin NK. The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. 2nd edition. Routledge: Taylor and Francis group; 2017.

Book Google Scholar

Dilley P. Interviews and the philosophy of qualitative research. J High Educ. 2004;75(1):127–32.

Strauss AJC. Basic of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage Co; 2008.

Cho JY, Lee E-H. Reducing confusion about grounded theory and qualitative content analysis: similarities and differences. Qual Rep. 2014;19(32):1–20.

Gioia DACK, Hamilton AL. Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research notes on the Gioia methodology. Organ Res Methods. 2013;16(1):15–31.

Skeith L, Ridinger H, Srinivasan S, Givi B, Youssef N, Harris I. Exploring the thesis experience of master of health professions education graduates: a qualitative study. Int J Med Educ. 2018;9:113.

Yeatman A. Making supervision relationships accountable: graduate student logs. Aust Univ Rev. 1995;38(2):9–11.

Saaban A, Abu B, Jiar YK. Students and supervisors’ roles and responsibilities in doctoral research supervision. Adv Sci Lett. 2018;24(1):66–8.

Carter S, Laurs D, Chant L, Wolfgramm-Foliaki E. Indigenous knowledges and supervision: changing the lens. Innov Educ Teach Int. 2018;55(3):384–93.

Boston P. The three faces of supervision: Individual learning, group learning, and supervisor accountability. In C. Burck and G. Daniel (2010) (Eds.) Mirrors and Reflections Processes of Systemic Supervision. Routledge, Taylor, and Francis; 2010:27–48.

Chapter Google Scholar

Manathunga C. The development of research supervision: “turning the light on a private space”. Int J Acad Dev. 2005;10(1):17–30.

Bandura A. On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. J Manag. 2012;38(1):9–44.

Bandura A. On deconstructing commentaries regarding alternative theories of self-regulation. J Manag. 2015;41(4):1025–44.

Britzman DP. Practice makes practice: A critical study of learning to teach. -State University of New York Press; 2003.

Patel M, Reed D, Smith C, Arora V. Role-modeling cost-conscious care—a national evaluation of perceptions of faculty at teaching hospitals in the United States. J Gen Intern Med. 2015;30(9):1294–8.

Howard M, Steensma HK, Lyles M, Dhanaraj C. Learning to collaborate through collaboration: how allying with expert firms influences collaborative innovation within novice firms. Strateg Manag J. 2015:n/a.

Steinert Y. Faculty development: core concepts and principles. Steinert Y, editor. Faculty development in the health professions. Innovation and change in professional education. 11: Springer Netherlands; 2014. 3–25.

Al-Naggar R, et al. Doctorate international students’ satisfaction and stress on academic supervision in a Malaysian University: a qualitative approach. Educ Res. 2012;3(3):264–9.

Gillet N, Gagné M, Sauvagère S, Fouquereau E. The role of supervisor autonomy support, organizational support, and autonomous and controlled motivation in predicting employees’ satisfaction and turnover intentions. Eur J Work Organ Psy. 2012;22(4):450–60.

Harden RM. AMEE guide no. 14: outcome-based education: part 1-an introduction to outcome-based education. Med Teach. 1999;21(1):7–14.

Bazrafkan L, Shokrpour N, Yousefi A, Yamani N. Management of stress and anxiety among phd students during thesis writing: a qualitative study. Health Care Manag. 2016;35(3):231–40.

Ghadirian L, Sayarifard A, Majdzadeh R, Rajabi F, Yunesian M. Challenges for better thesis supervision. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2014;28:32.

Vehviläinen S, Löfström E. ‘I wish I had a crystal ball’: discourses and potentials for developing academic supervising. Stud High Educ. 2016;41(3):508–24.

Grossman ES. ‘My supervisor is so busy...’ informal spaces for postgraduate learning in the health sciences. South Afr J High Educ. 2016;30(2):94–109.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The researchers would like to thank all research participants of Medical Sciences Universities (faculty, student, and managers) who contributed to the study. The authors would also like to thank the Education Development Center of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences for cooperation in this study and special thanks to Professor Shokrpoour for her editing.

The present article was extracted from the thesis written by Leila Bazrafkan. The design and implementation of the project was financially supported by Esfahan University of Medical Sciences (Grant No. 92–6746).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Clinical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

Leila Bazrafkan & Mitra Amini

Department of Medical Education, Medical Education Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Alireza Yousefy & Nikoo Yamani

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

LB developed the study design, conducted the interviews and analysis, ensured trustworthiness, and drafted the manuscript. AY, as the supervisor participated in the study design, supervised the codes and data analysis process, and revised the manuscripts. NY as research advisor participated in the study and provided guidance during the study and MA revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors’ information

LB is an assistant professor of medical education in Medical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences,

AY is Professor of Medical Education Dept., Medical Education Research Center, University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan

MA is Professor of Medical Education in the Medical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences,

NY Associate Professor of Medical Education Dept., Medical Education Research Center, University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nikoo Yamani .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences (92–6746). The participants were justified about the research aim and interviews. Informed consent for conducting and recording the interview was obtained. The confidentiality of the participants’ information was maintained throughout the study.

Consent for publication

Participants gave printed informed consent for the use of passages for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Bazrafkan, L., Yousefy, A., Amini, M. et al. The journey of thesis supervisors from novice to expert: a grounded theory study. BMC Med Educ 19 , 320 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1739-z

Download citation

Received : 07 February 2019

Accepted : 29 July 2019

Published : 22 August 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1739-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Qualitative research
Medical sciences faculty
Grounded theory
Thesis supervision

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

Submission enquiries: [email protected]
General enquiries: [email protected]

Teaching & Learning

Education Excellence
Professional development
Case studies
Teaching toolkits
MicroCPD-UCL
Assessment resources
Student partnership
Generative AI Hub
Community Engaged Learning
UCL Student Success

Research and project supervision (all levels): an introduction

Supervising projects, dissertations and research at UCL from undergraduate to PhD.

The words Teaching toolkits ucl arena centre on a blue background

1 August 2019

Many academics say supervision is one of their favourite, most challenging and most fulfilling parts of their job.

Supervision can play a vital role in enabling students to fulfil their potential. Helping a student to become an independent researcher is a significant achievement – and can enhance your own teaching and research.

Supervision is also a critical element in achieving UCL’s strategic aim of integrating research and education. As a research-intensive university, we want all students, not just those working towards a PhD, to engage in research.

Successful research needs good supervision.

This guide provides guidance and recommendations on supervising students in their research. It offers general principles and tips for those new to supervision, at PhD, Master’s or undergraduate level and directs you to further support available at UCL.

What supervision means

Typically, a supervisor acts as a guide, mentor, source of information and facilitator to the student as they progress through a research project.

Every supervision will be unique. It will vary depending on the circumstances of the student, the research they plan to do, and the relationship between you and the student. You will have to deal with a range of situations using a sensitive and informed approach.

As a supervisor at UCL, you’ll help create an intellectually challenging and fulfilling learning experience for your students.

This could include helping students to:

formulate their research project and question
decide what methods of research to use
become familiar with the wider research community in their chosen field
evaluate the results of their research
ensure their work meets the necessary standards expected by UCL
keep to deadlines
use feedback to enhance their work
overcome any problems they might have
present their work to other students, academics or interested parties
prepare for the next steps in their career or further study.

At UCL, doctoral students always have at least two supervisors. Some faculties and departments operate a model of thesis committees, which can include people from industry, as well as UCL staff.

Rules and regulations

Phd supervision.

The supervision of doctoral students’ research is governed by regulation. This means that there are some things you must – and must not – do when supervising a PhD.

All the essential information is found in the UCL Code of Practice for Research Degrees .
Full regulations in the UCL Academic Manual .

All staff must complete the online course Introduction to Research Supervision at UCL before beginning doctoral supervision.

Undergraduate and Masters supervision

There are also regulations around Master’s and undergraduate dissertations and projects. Check with the Programme Lead, your Department Graduate Tutor or Departmental Administrator for the latest regulations related to student supervision.

You should attend other training around research supervision.

Supervision training available through UCL Arena .

Doctoral (PhD) supervision: introducing your student to the university

For most doctoral students, you will often be their main point of contact at UCL and as such you are responsible for inducting them into the department and wider community.

Check that your student:

knows their way around the department and about the facilities available to them locally (desk space, common room, support staff)
has attended the Doctoral School induction and has received all relevant documents (including the Handbook and code of practice for graduate research degrees )
has attended any departmental or faculty inductions and has a copy of the departmental handbook.

Make sure your student is aware of:

key central services such as: Student Support and Wellbeing , UCL Students' Union (UCLU) and Careers
opportunities to broaden their skills through UCL’s Doctoral Skills Development Programme
the wider disciplinary culture, including relevant networks, websites and mailing lists.

The UCL Good Supervision Guide (for PhD supervisors)

Establishing an effective relationship

The first few meetings you have with your student are critical and can help to set the tone for the whole supervisory experience for you and your student.

An early discussion about both of your expectations is essential:

Find out your student’s motivations for undertaking the project, their aspirations, academic background and any personal matters they feel might be relevant.
Discuss any gaps in their preparation and consider their individual training needs.
Be clear about who will arrange meetings, how often you’ll meet, how quickly you’ll respond when the student contacts you, what kind of feedback they’ll get, and the norms and standards expected for academic writing.
Set agendas and coordinate any follow-up actions. Minute meetings, perhaps taking it in turns with your student.
For PhD students, hold a meeting with your student’s other supervisor(s) to clarify your expectations, roles, frequency of meetings and approaches.

Styles of supervision

Supervisory styles are often conceptualized on a spectrum from laissez-faire to more contractual or from managerial to supportive. Every supervisor will adopt different approaches to supervision depending on their own preferences, the individual relationship and the stage the student is at in the project.

Be aware of the positive and negative aspects of different approaches and styles.

Reflect on your personal style and what has prompted this – it may be that you are adopting the style of your own supervisor, or wanting to take a certain approach because it is the way that it would work for you.

No one style fits every situation: approaches change and adapt to accommodate the student and the stage of the project.

However, to ensure a smooth and effective supervision process, it is important to align your expectations from the very beginning. Discuss expectations in an early meeting and re-visit them periodically.

Checking the student’s progress

Make sure you help your student break down the work into manageable chunks, agreeing deadlines and asking them to show you work regularly.

Give your student helpful and constructive feedback on the work they submit (see the various assessment and feedback toolkits on the Teaching & Learning Portal ).

Check they are getting the relevant ethical clearance for research and/or risk assessments.

Ask your student for evidence that they are building a wider awareness of the research field.

Encourage your student to meet other research students and read each other’s work or present to each other.

Encourage your student to write early and often.

Checking your own performance

Regularly review progress with your student and any co-supervisors. Discuss any problems you might be having, and whether you need to revise the roles and expectations you agreed at the start.

Make sure you know what students in your department are feeding back to the Student Consultative Committee or in surveys, such as the Postgraduate Research Experience Survey (PRES) .

Responsibility for the student’s research project does not rest solely on you. If you need help, talk to someone more experienced in your department. Whatever the problem is you’re having, the chances are that someone will have experienced it before and will be able to advise you.

Continuing students can often provide the most effective form of support to new students. Supervisors and departments can foster this, for example through organising mentoring, coffee mornings or writing groups.

Be aware that supervision is about helping students carry out independent research – not necessarily about preparing them for a career in academia. In fact, very few PhD students go on to be academics.

Make sure you support your student’s personal and professional development, whatever direction this might take.

Every research supervision can be different – and equally rewarding.

Where to find help and support

Research supervision web pages from the UCL Arena Centre, including details of the compulsory Research Supervision online course.

Appropriate Forms of Supervision Guide from the UCL Academic Manual

the PhD diaries

Good Supervision videos (Requires UCL login)

The UCL Doctoral School

Handbook and code of practice for graduate research degrees

Doctoral Skills Development programme

Student skills support (including academic writing)

Student Support and Wellbeing

UCL Students' Union (UCLU)

UCL Careers

External resources

Vitae: supervising a docorate

UK Council for Graduate Education

Higher Education Academy – supervising international students (pdf)

Becoming a Successful Early Career Researcher , Adrian Eley, Jerry Wellington, Stephanie Pitts and Catherine Biggs (Routledge, 2012) - book available on Amazon

This guide has been produced by the UCL Arena Centre for Research-based Education . You are welcome to use this guide if you are from another educational facility, but you must credit the UCL Arena Centre. 

Further information

More teaching toolkits - back to the toolkits menu

Research supervision at UCL

UCL Education Strategy 2016–21

Connected Curriculum: a framework for research-based education

The Laidlaw research and leadership programme (for undergraduates)

[email protected] : contact the UCL Arena Centre

Download a printable copy of this guide

Case studies : browse related stories from UCL staff and students.

Education events

Funnelback feed: https://search2.ucl.ac.uk/s/search.json?collection=drupal-teaching-learn... Double click the feed URL above to edit

Center for Teaching

Dissertation supervision.

This article was originally published in the Spring 2001 issue of the CFT’s newsletter, Teaching Forum.

By Peggy Thoits, Professor of Sociology

During her career, Peggy Thoits has worked with graduate students at three major universities- Princeton, Indiana, and Vanderbilt- and supervised numerous dissertations. She has also been honored for her effectiveness as a mentor to women at Vanderbilt. Here, she describes her approach to working one-on-one with students during the dissertation process.

Dissertation supervision is one of the most enjoyable forms of one-on-one teaching. Dissertation students are working on interesting questions that really matter, and for me, this makes it intrinsically more enjoyable than other forms of independent study.

Dissertation supervision differs in other ways from other forms of independent study. With other individual study formats, the process is guided by me. I know what happens next. I know what the student should do next. But in the dissertation stage, it’s really much more mutual. Other kinds of individual supervision are graded, so there’s an explicit contract and an explicit product and an explicit process. In contrast, dissertation guidance is absolutely open ended; it depends on the dissertation student. In a way, it’s really student-initiated and student-directed. I provide information and guidance when it truly is missing, but more often I am responding to the next stages that the dissertation student has reached.

In deciding whether or not to supervise a dissertation it’s important for there to be some familiarity between the graduate student and the advisor and some sort of connection between the student’s topic and the advisor’s areas of expertise. Otherwise, I don’t think the supervision goes very well. In my experience, students who’ve never taken a seminar with me and whose interests may or may not fit within my general areas may need to be gently guided to some other potential advisors.

Once the advisor and the student are satisfied they have a good match, the work of the dissertation can begin. Because of my philosophy that dissertation work is largely student-directed and student-initiated, my personal involvement can vary widely and is based on the needs of individual and the phase of the dissertation research itself.

When the graduate student is early on in his or her development of a topic, my involvement varies from weekly meetings to occasional conferences, depending on how far along the student’s thinking has moved. If the topic is coming out of a prior research project, then the topic may be a natural extension of the preliminary work and there’s less need for frequent meetings to hammer out what the dissertation is going to do. If the student is starting cold with a new idea or an area in which she or he hasn’t done a lot of work before, then my advice usually is to have frequent meetings, one a week, until both the advisee and the advisor feel like they’re on the same page in terms of the topic, its importance, and its suitability as a topic for dissertation research.

When the student begins working on a written proposal, there may be a hiatus in the meetings because the graduate goes off to write. Here is an area where the variability on the whole process starts to emerge. There are folks who go away for two months and come back with 35 pages of rough draft that are in reasonable shape and there are people who go off and write five pages and come back and discuss the next section and then go off and write those five pages and return for more discussion.

This is an example of letting the graduate student lead. Whatever he or she needs, at the proposal writing stage, I’ll do. People have different writing styles, different paces, and different needs at that stage and I try to work within that.

Once the proposal is defended, a whole new stage of relationship emerges. The student is off doing the instrumental tasks of the dissertation and I may not see him or her but once a month or once every two months. I might even just get e-mail reports from graduate students at various stages of the data collection process when questions or issues arise that haven’t been anticipated. Sometimes we’ll have a periodic update meeting just to keep me informed of where things are and what decisions are being made in the process of doing the research. But again, that varies from person to person. I accommodate whatever style a person needs, because these needs are really variable. The analytical stage is fun, we end up having conversations more often and talking in more detail. Once the writing begins, my advisees and I often barely see one another. We are communicating through paper. I get a written, hard copy of a chapter, and I give written feedback both in terms of things that need to be fleshed out, and alternative arguments that could be tested and rebutted here. I may suggest redoing the analysis so that the findings may be simpler and easier to present.

For me, the key has been to let the relationship between me and the graduate student ebb and flow with the phases of the dissertation research and the individual needs of that student.

Preparation for both the proposal defense and the dissertation defense is a final area in which the one-on-one teaching relationship can be very helpful. Some faculty may forget that students don’t know what’s going to happen. It’s useful for the advisor and advisee to meet before the dissertation defense (and also the proposal defense), and talk through what the student should expect.

My best advice about both a good dissertation defense and a good proposal defense is that they are the only two times in a person’s career when people will sit around and concentrate on his or her work only. It’s important students know that the committee’s goal is not to stop them or to hurt them or to show them up. Their goal is to help make the student’s research be the best it can possibly be. If the faculty member, the committee, and the dissertation student have done the work they needed to do prior to the defense, it can be an exhilarating capstone experience in the process.

Teaching Guides

Online Course Development Resources
Principles & Frameworks
Pedagogies & Strategies
Reflecting & Assessing
Challenges & Opportunities
Populations & Contexts

Quick Links

Services for Departments and Schools
Examples of Online Instructional Modules

Duties of a thesis supervisor and the supervision plan

The instruction belongs to the following themes.

Supervising theses

Search for degree programme

Open university programmes.

Open university Flag this item

Bachelor's Programmes

Bachelor's Programme for Teachers of Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Agricultural Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Applied Psychology Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Art Studies Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Biology Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Chemistry Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Computer Science (TKT) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Cultural Studies Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Economics Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Class Teacher (KLU, in Swedish) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Class Teacher, Education (LO-KT) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Class Teacher, Educational Psychology (LO-KP) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Craft Teacher Education (KÄ) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Early Education Teacher (SBP) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Early Education Teacher (VO) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: General and Adult Education (PED, in Swedish) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: General and Adult Education (YL and AKT) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Home Economics Teacher (KO) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Special Education (EP) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Environmental and Food Economics Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Environmental Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Food Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Forest Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Geography Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Geosciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in History Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Languages Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Law Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Logopedics Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Mathematical Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Molecular Biosciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Pharmacy Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Philosophy Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Physical Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Politics, Media and Communication Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Psychology Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Science (BSC) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Social Research Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Social Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Society and Change Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in the Languages and Literatures of Finland Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Theology and Religious Studies Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Veterinary Medicine Flag this item

Master's and Licentiate's Programmes

Degree Programme in Dentistry Flag this item
Degree Programme in Medicine Flag this item
Degree Programme in Veterinary Medicine Flag this item
International Masters in Economy, State & Society Flag this item
Master ́s Programme in Development of health care services Flag this item
Master's Programme for Teachers of Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry Flag this item
Master's Programme in Agricultural Sciences Flag this item
Master's Programme in Agricultural, Environmental and Resource Economics Flag this item
Master's Programme in Area and Cultural Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Art Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Atmospheric Sciences (ATM) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Changing Education Flag this item
Master's Programme in Chemistry and Molecular Sciences Flag this item
Master's Programme in Computer Science (CSM) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Contemporary Societies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Cultural Heritage Flag this item
Master's Programme in Culture and Communication (in Swedish) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Data Science Flag this item
Master's Programme in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Flag this item
Master's Programme in Economics Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Class Teacher (KLU, in Swedish) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Class Teacher, Education (LO-KT) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Class Teacher, Educational Psychology (LO-KP) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Craft Teacher Education (KÄ) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Early Education (VAKA) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: General and Adult Education (PED, in Swedish) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: General and Adult Education (YL and AKT) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Home Economics Teacher (KO) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Special Education (EP) Flag this item
Master's Programme in English Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Environmental Change and Global Sustainability Flag this item
Master's Programme in European and Nordic Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Finnish and Finno-Ugrian Languages and Cultures Flag this item
Master's Programme in Food Economy and Consumption Flag this item
Master's Programme in Food Sciences Flag this item
Master's Programme in Forest Sciences Flag this item
Master's Programme in Gender Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Genetics and Molecular Biosciences Flag this item
Master's Programme in Geography Flag this item
Master's Programme in Geology and Geophysics Flag this item
Master's Programme in Global Politics and Communication Flag this item
Master's Programme in History Flag this item
Master's Programme in Human Nutrition and Food-Related Behaviour Flag this item
Master's Programme in Integrative Plant Sciences Flag this item
Master's Programme in Intercultural Encounters Flag this item
Master's Programme in International Business Law Flag this item
Master's Programme in Languages Flag this item
Master's Programme in Law Flag this item
Master's Programme in Life Science Informatics (LSI) Flag this item
Master's programme in Linguistic Diversity and Digital Humanities Flag this item
Master's Programme in Literary Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Logopedics Flag this item
Master's Programme in Materials Research (MATRES) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Mathematics and Statistics (MAST) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Microbiology and Microbial Biotechnology Flag this item
Master's Programme in Neuroscience Flag this item
Master's Programme in Particle Physics and Astrophysical Sciences (PARAS) Flag this item
Master's programme in Pharmaceutical Research, Development and Safety Flag this item
Master's Programme in Pharmacy Flag this item
Master's Programme in Philosophy Flag this item
Master's Programme in Politics, Media and Communication Flag this item
Master's Programme in Psychology Flag this item
Master's Programme in Russian, Eurasian and Eastern European Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Scandinavian Languages and Literature Flag this item
Master's Programme in Social and Health Research and Management Flag this item
Master's Programme in Social Research Flag this item
Master's Programme in Social Sciences (in Swedish) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Society and Change Flag this item
Master's Programme in Theology and Religious Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Theoretical and Computational Methods (TCM) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Translation and Interpreting Flag this item
Master's Programme in Translational Medicine Flag this item
Master's Programme in Urban Studies and Planning (USP) Flag this item
Master’s Programme in Global Governance Law Flag this item
Nordic Master Programme in Environmental Changes at Higher Latitudes (ENCHIL) Flag this item

Doctoral Programmes

Doctoral Programme Brain and Mind Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Atmospheric Sciences (ATM-DP) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Biomedicine (DPBM) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Chemistry and Molecular Sciences (CHEMS) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Clinical Research (KLTO) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Clinical Veterinary Medicine (CVM) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Cognition, Learning, Instruction and Communication (CLIC) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Computer Science (DoCS) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Drug Research (DPDR) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Economics Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Food Chain and Health Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Gender, Culture and Society (SKY) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Geosciences (GeoDoc) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in History and Cultural Heritage Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Human Behaviour (DPHuB) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Integrative Life Science (ILS) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Interdisciplinary Environmental Sciences (DENVI) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Language Studies (HELSLANG) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Law Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Materials Research and Nanoscience (MATRENA) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Mathematics and Statistics (Domast) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Microbiology and Biotechnology Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Oral Sciences (FINDOS) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Particle Physics and Universe Sciences (PAPU) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Philosophy, Arts and Society Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Plant Sciences (DPPS) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Political, Societal and Regional Changes (PYAM) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Population Health (DOCPOP) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in School, Education, Society and Culture Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Social Sciences Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Sustainable Use of Renewable Natural Resources (AGFOREE) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Theology and Religious Studies Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Wildlife Biology (LUOVA) Flag this item

Specialist training programmes

Multidisciplinary studies for class teachers (teaching in Finnish) Flag this item
Multidisciplinary studies for class teachers (teaching in Swedish) Flag this item
Non-degree studies for special education teachers (ELO) Flag this item
Non-degree studies for special education teachers (LEO) Flag this item
Non-degree studies for special education teachers (VEO) Flag this item
Non-degree studies in subject teacher education Flag this item
Specific Training in General Medical Practice Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Clinical Mental Health Psychology Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Neuropsychology Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Environmental Health and Food Control (old) Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Equine Medicine (old) Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Food Production Hygiene Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Infectious Animal Diseases (new) Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Production Animal Medicine (old) Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Small Animal Medicine (old) Flag this item
Specialisation Studies in Community and Hospital Pharmacy (for B.Sc.Pharm.) Flag this item
Specialisation Studies in Community and Hospital Pharmacy (for M.Sc.Pharm.) Flag this item
Specialisation Studies in Industrial Pharmacy (for B.Sc.Pharm.) Flag this item
Specialisation Studies in Industrial Pharmacy (for M.Sc.Pharm.) Flag this item
Specialist Training in Dentistry Flag this item
Specialist Training in Hospital Chemistry Flag this item
Specialist Training in Hospital Microbiology Flag this item
Specialist Training in Medicine, 5-year training Flag this item
Specialist Training in Medicine, 6-year training Flag this item
Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Environmental Health and Food Control Flag this item
Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Equine Medicine (new) Flag this item
Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, general veterinary medicine Flag this item
Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Infectious Animal Diseases (new) Flag this item
Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Production Animal Medicine (new) Flag this item
Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Small Animal Medicine (new) Flag this item
Trainer Training Programme in Integrative Psychotherapy Flag this item
Training Programme for Psychotherapists Flag this item
Language Centre
Open University

Supervision work is closely linked to the intended learning outcomes of the degree and thesis as well as the related grading criteria. In accordance with the Regulations on Degrees and the Protection of Students’ Rights at the University of Helsinki, the student must receive instruction both during their studies and while writing their thesis. See here for instructions on ensuring that your supervision is aligned with the learning outcomes.

The Rector decides on the principles of supervision, including the rights and obligations of the student and the supervisor. The degree programme’s curriculum must contain instructions on how to prepare a personal study plan, along with the practices for approving and updating the plan. Please review the curriculum of your faculty and the thesis grading criteria in order to ensure that your supervision is aligned with the learning outcomes.

In the Rector’s decision, supervision refers to the support provided for the student’s or doctoral candidate’s learning process as they change, gain experience and grow as an expert. As a whole, supervision consists of communication, advice, instruction and special guidance. Supervision and counselling can be organised in a group led by the supervisor, at a seminar, in a peer group of students or doctoral candidates organised by the supervisor or in a personal meeting separately agreed between the supervisor and the student/doctoral candidate. Supervision and counselling can also be provided electronically through, for example, Moodle or other teaching tools available.

Members of the teaching and research staff provide counselling that is related to teaching and research and requires knowledge of the content of different studies and disciplines. This counselling may concern, for example, personal study plans or thesis supervision.

Guidance and counselling are provided in the Finnish and Swedish-language and multilingual degree programmes in Finnish or Swedish depending on the student’s native language or in English or another language as agreed with the student. If the student’s native language is a language other than Finnish or Swedish, guidance and counselling are provided in English or, if agreed with the student, in another language. In English-language master’s programmes and doctoral programmes, guidance can also be provided solely in English.

The degree programme steering group is responsible for ensuring that each student is appointed with a primary supervisor who is responsible for the supervision of their thesis. Additional supervisors may also be appointed. Your supervision plan can be used to agree on the responsibilities related to the supervision.

Supervision as interaction and the supervision plan

Supervision is about interaction with responsibilities that are divided between the different parties of the supervision relationship. Ambiguities related to supervision are often due to the parties’ different expectations regarding the content and responsibilities of the supervision and the fact that the parties are often unaware of the others’ expectations. Below, you can find a table that serves as a great tool for considering the different rights and obligations related to supervision

The policies and practices of supervision should be discussed in the early stages of the thesis process. The supervisor and the student may also prepare a written supervision plan that clarifies the schedule for the supervision and the thesis work as well as the content of the supervision. The plan can also be utilised if any problems arise or you fall behind schedule.

Topics the supervisor should incorporate in the supervision

When supervising a student’s thesis work, remember to pay attention to the following topics:

the responsible conduct of research and avoiding cheating
guiding the student in matters related to data protection
matters related to open access publications and the public availability of theses
inform the student of the general process of thesis examination and approval and the related schedule

Different faculties may have their own decisions and instructions on thesis supervision. Please read the instructions provided by your faculty.

Bachelor’s theses and maturity tests

Thesis and maturity test in master's and licentiate's programmes.

Instructions for students
Notifications for students

National Teaching Fellow 2017

Dissertation supervision.

A dissertation supervisor provides regular guidance and support to a student undertaking a dissertation.

The supervisory relationship is built on clear communication and mutually agreed expectation in terms of progress. Working in partnership with the student a supervisor assists in the definition of a research topic the design of a programme of study and the implementation of this. They also provide expertise at the writing stage and support in the face of deadlines.

The materials published on this page were originally created by the Higher Education Academy.

©Advance HE 2020. Company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales no. 04931031 | Company limited by guarantee registered in Ireland no. 703150 | Registered charity, England and Wales 1101607 | Registered charity, Scotland SC043946 | VAT Registered number GB 152 1219 50. Registered UK Address: Advance HE, Innovation Way, York Science Park, Heslington, York, YO10 5BR, United Kingdom | Registered Ireland Address: Advance HE, First Floor, Penrose 1, Penrose Dock, Cork, T23 Kw81, Ireland.

Professional Work Based Learning
Contingency classification and progression regulations
Coming soon
Exceptional classification and progression regulations
Exceptional regulations: Covid-19
Academic regulations
Personal tutoring, student support and development
Assessment, awards and degree classification
Programme and module design and approval
Concerns, complaints and appeals
Registration and attendance
Research degree policies and guidance
Progression
Supervision
Research programme regulations
Regulations for programmes which are not currently running
Student engagement and representation
Studies away from the University
Recent changes

Responsibilities of the supervisor

This page contains detailed information about the role and responsibilities of a postgraduate supervisor, including research planning and thesis requirements. Its content is relevant to staff and students across all of the UK, China and Malaysia campuses.

Search the manual

Note: In addition to the responsibilities detailed in this section, Postgraduate Student Advisors should also see the additional Covid-19 related responsibilities for Heads of Schools, PGR Directors and Supervisors for 2020-21. For more information, please consult the following:

Responsibilities of the Head of School, Supervisor and Director of PGR Programme - Additional guidance for the 2020-21 academic year in response to Covid-19

Supervisors will provide guidance and assistance to PGRs so that they may carry out their research and present their results to the best advantage.

Every supervisor and every PGR will be provided with guidance on their respective roles and responsibilities.

2. Role of the supervisor

The general role of supervisors is to guide and assist PGRs until submission of their thesis and any subsequent period of corrections, until such a point that examiners have reached a final decision on the award of the degree. The roles of supervisor and examiner are quite distinct, and it is not one of the roles of the supervisor to assess the thesis.

The specific roles of supervisors may differ depending on the academic discipline, departmental practice and whether the member of staff is acting as lead, second, assistant, temporary or permanent supervisor. The lead supervisor (or delegate) will also consider requests for annual leave in line with School/Departmental policy.

3. Role of the assistant supervisor

Many postdoctoral research staff, level 4 Research Officers and research technicians make valuable contributions towards the supervision of the University’s PGRs.

The formal appointment of such staff as assistant supervisors as part of a supervisory team is intended to recognise and acknowledge this contribution and to identify the roles and responsibilities of assistant supervisors in order that this is clear to the candidate and all members of the supervisory team.

Assistant supervisors are responsible for:

providing regular support and advice to PGRs. This may include guidance on welfare matters and health and safety.
providing guidance on how to use equipment or specific research techniques and methods.
helping PGRs to resolve difficulties they encounter and/or direct them to others who can assist.
provide PGRs with informal feedback on their written work and/or presentations.
where applicable, contributing to the reporting of progress of PGRs noting that the level of involvement with this will be agreed, in advance, with the lead and co-supervisor(s).
encouraging PGRs to disseminate their research.
engaging with professional development opportunities to develop their supervisory practice including any mandatory training requirements.
ensuring they are familiar with policies and processes applicable to research degrees.

4. Continuing professional development

All supervisors must undertake continuing professional development, so that their work as a supervisor is supported.

Supervisors should take the initiative in updating their knowledge and skills by participating in a range of appropriate activities and sharing good practice.

More information on support for research supervisors can be found here:

Researcher Academy

5. Documentation check

Includes: responsibilities

At the outset the supervisor should check that the candidate has received information sent by the University concerning registration and that they have registered for that session.

Before or at initial registration or, at the latest within four weeks of initial registration, supervisors should check that all their PGRs have received copies of essential documentation relevant to their research studies or have been informed where to locate them on the web. As a minimum, this should include: information about registration and services, the School Handbook, and any relevant safety advice.

For more information about registration, please consult the following:

Student Services - registration

6. Research plan

Includes: assistance; designing a programme of research; for full-time doctoral students

Supervisors will assist their PGRs to plan their research studies, including helping them to define their research topic, to identify schemes and specific tasks, to identify the relevant research literature, databases and other relevant sources, and to be aware of the standards in the discipline.

The supervisor and candidate should design a programme of research in which (subject to research progress and taking into account special cases) all or much of the thesis will have been written up by the candidate by the end of their period of registered study. The design of the programme of research should not at the outset plan to include any period of thesis pending that the candidate is entitled to.

For full-time doctoral candidates on a three year programme, it is expected that the completion of the entire doctoral examination process is completed within four years. The PGR may need to register for some taught modules or attend research training courses - the supervisor will advise them how to do this.

7. Advising on regulations

Includes: understanding and knowledge; responsibilities

Supervisors should have a reasonable knowledge and understanding of the University's regulations governing research study and the University, Faculty and departmental procedures governing research study and supervision.

They are required to advise their PGRs on these regulations and procedures or, if they feel a question is outside their knowledge, to direct their PGR to other sources such as Student Services (or Central Administration at UNM and the Graduate School at UNNC).

Supervisors also have a responsibility to ensure that other members of the supervisory team are kept informed of the candidate’s progress, and any issues which may be having an impact on their programme.

8. Advising on services and facilities

Includes: responsibilities; review of PGR needs

Supervisors should have a reasonable knowledge of and be able to advise their PGRs on the availability of the University's academic services and facilities (for example library and computing facilities) and how to make use of them.

The supervisors in conjunction with the PGR should keep under review the facilities which are required in order to carry out the research and make these needs known to the Head of School.

9. Minimum number of supervisions

Includes: responsibility to provide appropriate and regular supervision; requirements for part-time PGRs

Supervisors are responsible for providing appropriate and regular supervision for their PGRs until submission of their thesis and any subsequent period of corrections, until such a point that examiners have reached a final decision on the award of the degree. They are also responsible for being accessible at mutually convenient times to listen and offer advice.

Students and supervisors are jointly responsible for arranging the supervision meetings.

Supervisors must provide their part-time candidates with a minimum of six recorded supervisions a year and their full-time candidates with a minimum of twelve recorded supervisions a year.

These supervisory meetings must be at least monthly for full time candidates and two-monthly for part time candidates. This is based on calendar months. Note, it is expected that in many cases the actual number of meetings between supervisors and candidates may exceed these minima.

If it is not possible for a meeting to take place as scheduled, the meeting should be re-arranged for the next available opportunity.

If no meetings are possible in any given month (or two months for part time students), the supervisor is responsible to ensure that the reason for the missed meeting is recorded appropriately. These reports should be regularly monitored by the School. University staff will review the missed meeting reports on a case by case basis, particularly for PGRs are at risk of breaching visa and immigration requirements, to see if any additional support is required. These requirements may also be modified under the rules for supervising students working off-site.

For students who are missing meetings, or who are not meeting the meeting minima requirements, the regulations governing attendance and engagement should be reviewed:

10. Format for supervisions

Includes: definition; purpose

A 'supervision meeting' is considered to be a any simultaneous contact between the supervisor(s) and PGR candidate for an academic purpose. It is important that at the supervision meetings the PGR’s progress to date and/or the future direction of their research or thesis writing is discussed. It is also necessary that these discussions must be summarised in writing so that they are available if required, for example for audit purposes, or to aid student wellbeing or support. These written reports must meet the minimum number requirements as detailed earlier.

There is no specified format for these meetings. For example, a daily chat at the lab bench and/or a pre-scheduled sit down meeting would meet these criteria, as long as a monthly report with a progress overview is still submitted. Group meetings of PGRs and/or seminars would be acceptable as long as the PGR’s progress to date and/or the future direction of their research or thesis writing is discussed.

A supervision meeting should typically take place as a face-to-face meeting, but can also include meetings conducted online, such as on Microsoft Teams. The exception to this is where the PGR is in the UK on a student visa, unless the student has been given formal permission to study at a different location, supervision meetings must be face-to-face and on campus.

11. Supervision record

Includes: reporting needs; annual review of PGRs

In order that proper audit of supervision provision can be carried out, so that supervisors may undertake continuous monitoring of their PGR’s progress, and records of this progress monitoring are available for formal Progression Review, supervisors are required to ensure the maintenance of a supervision record of at least the minimum number and frequency of supervision meetings a year (see Section 9 above).

Supervisors should advise their PGRs on the procedures for monitoring their progress which are described in the section of this Quality Manual entitled Progression Review of research students.

These include:

(i) Supervision Records - attendance at supervision sessions and completion of supervision records;

(ii) Progression Review - formal review of progress towards meeting the required outcomes, and assessment of whether the outcomes will be met in the required time. Completion of the Progression Review forms.

(iii) MPhil and doctoral registration - procedures for upgrading or downgrading candidates and for confirming MPhil or doctoral registration.

Supervisors may, from time to time, be required to provide reports on their PGR’s progress for other purposes and to other agencies, for example, the Research Councils and other sponsors. Such reports should be provided within the required deadline to ensure, in particular, that the continuation of candidate’s funding by outside agencies is not compromised.

For more information about the Progression Review of research students, please consult the following:

Progression Review of research students

12. Training needs

Includes: discussing personal, academic and professional skills; PGR training programme; research ethics; Code of research conduct and research ethics

The supervisor should discuss with the PGR what personal, academic and professional skills training they require in order to complete their research degree and to provide a skills base for a future career.

The supervisor should agree with the candidate a research training programme which is compatible with the PGRs needs and which is achievable in relation to the research commitments within the limits of their registered period of study, making it clear where attendance at training courses is compulsory or voluntary. This programme should be reviewed each year.

The supervisors should take reasonable steps to ensure that the PGR’s training needs are met - normally such training will be delivered within the University and the supervisor should, therefore, be aware of any research training offered through the Researcher Academy, the Doctoral Training Centre/Programme, the Faculty and the School.

The supervisor should also ensure that the PGR receives adequate training in research ethics and is given assistance in applying for ethical approval if appropriate.

For more information, please consult the following:

Code of research conduct and research ethics

Includes: correct procedures; seeking advice

14. Meetings, conferences and publication

The supervisor(s) should encourage and facilitate the PGR to engage with relevant academics that will support their doctoral research and future career development.

This could be through encouraging attendance at seminars, meetings and conferences; introducing them to relevant individuals and professional networks and encouraging them to publish the results of their research.

Where appropriate supervisors should also support the PGRs to participate in public and policy engagement activities or undertake placements and internships that will enable them to develop their broader research experiences.

15. Written work

16. supervision during thesis pending period.

Includes: minimum number of meetings; the role of proof readers

During the thesis pending period and any period of corrections or thesis re-submission, supervisors and PGRs should continue to meet regularly (as described above).

Supervisors will also read and comment on one draft of the candidate’s thesis prior to each submission (as appropriate) when submitted within the required timeframes for feedback to be given.

The Role of Proof Readers

A proof-reader may only ensure that the meaning of the author is not misrepresented due to the quality and standard of the English used. This can include correcting spelling and basic grammar errors.

Inaccuracies in academic content should not be corrected nor should the structure of the piece of work be changed; doing so may result in a charge of plagiarism.

17. Thesis presentation

Supervisors should advise candidate’s on the timing, construction and form of presentation of their thesis and should check that they receive a copy of the University's guidance on presenting a thesis, from Student Services (or Central Administration at University of Nottingham Malaysia (UNM) or Graduate School at University of Nottingham Ningbo China (UNNC).

18. Examination of Thesis

19. submission of data, additional information.

Includes: PGR supervision record document; Research supervisor resources

Research supervisor resources

Students studying in outside organisations

UNUK students

Student services, unnc students .

UNM students

Staff , related content.

Portland Building, University of Nottingham University Park Nottingham, NG7 2RD

Legal information

Terms and conditions
Posting rules
Accessibility
Freedom of information
Charity gateway
Cookie policy

Connect with the University of Nottingham through social media and our blogs .

Browser does not support script.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

A Supervisor's Roles for Successful Thesis and Dissertation

2013, Online Submission

Related Papers

Acta Commercii

Ansie Lessing

South African higher institutions of learning are engaged in rapid transformation processes. Some of the consequences are that an increasing proportion of the postgraduate student body is from previously disadvantaged backgrounds and that the body of academic staff has also been transformed. In general, students have limited experience of independent research work as well as using library and other research facilities. However, quality research needs to be maintained. It is of great importance that academics should have the knowledge and skills to supervise research. However, preliminary research indicates that very little is done to equip academic staff in the skills of supervising research. A literature study is done to determine the nature of postgraduate supervision as well as the role of the supervisor and the student. From this investigation an interview schedule, consisting of open-ended questions, was composed to use in focus group interviews with academics from various loca...

European Journal of Education Studies

Lam Thi Ngoc Trang B1909431

In Vietnam, scientific research is no longer just the work of scientists, graduate students, scholars, or lecturers; tertiary students are also encouraged to conduct scientific research. Therefore, the scientific research work of students receives more attention from educators. The research on carrying out scientific research of students is also therefore increasing. However, researchers do not seem to have paid enough attention to the role of supervisors during the supervision process. The evidence is that there are few studies on supervisors in Vietnam. Therefore, this study was conducted to learn about the role of supervisors from the student's perspective and expectations. Specifically, this study was conducted quantitatively with the use of a questionnaire consisting of 49 questions with a 5-point Likert scale. A total of 100 English-major students at a university in Southwest Vietnam participated in this study by answering the questionnaire. The results from the questionna...

School of Education, Faculty of Social Science and Humanities, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

Hassan Aliyu

In 2010, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) has become one of the Research University in Malaysia. Since then, UTM becomes a graduate-focused university with more innovative research-based postgraduate programmes offered. Undeniably, the role of the supervisor is critical in guiding graduate students to finish their study. Effective supervision is essential for supporting graduate research students towards the completion of their thesis. However, a previous study has found a high proportion of PhD students who fail to complete their studies in Malaysia. This study addresses the following research question: (1) What are the issue arises among postgraduate students during supervision? (2) What are the factors affecting a relationship between supervisor and postgraduate students? This study aims to identify the best practice relevant to effective supervision of graduate research students at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. A meta-analys is research synthesis method was used in this study. Findings from this study provide critical data between postgraduate students and their supervisor during supervision. This study concludes that, academic incompetence, language, Malaysian culture, topic selection, monitoring progress, time management, scientific writing skills, emotional support and stress by supervisory system are the graduate students’ problems that usually delay their study or prevent them to completing. A few suggestions were also submitted to assist the graduate and supervisor in managing their affiliation and also on the improvement for future research.

BMC Medical Education

Nikoo Yamani

Innovative Higher Education

tricia vilkinas

Rebeca E Tapia

Creative Education

Kazım Çelik

In this study, it was aimed to analyze supervisor-student relationship in the doctoral education based on views of students. For this reason, research assistants having completed doctoral education and got PhD title were asked what the contributions of their supervisors were and what kind of problems they experienced in doctoral education. Considering academic advising process, it was intended to shed a light on both formal and information sides of supervisor-student relationship. As a design of the study, qualitative case study method was used. In the light of the aim of the study, “semi-structured data collection form”, one of the qualitative data collection tools, was used to collect the data. The data gained from 19 research assistants having completed their PhD degrees in the past 36 months were analyzed with content analysis. The past/ongoing contribution of supervisors to their students’ education were classified under the themes of contribution to their personal development, contribution to academic development, contribution to professional development, and contribution to intellectual development. The students, being in intimate relationship with their supervisors, emphasize positive contributions of supervisors. However, the students, not being in an intimate relationship, underline the negative characteristics of their supervisors. Few of the participants utter ongoing contribution of supervisors. This study analyzes dimensions for the contribution of supervisors to students in doctoral education, and the experiences of students in these dimensions. In this regard, academicians who are supervisors or will be supervisors are expected to benefit from the study.

Peace Kiguwa

The doctoral thesis constitutes both a negotiation of the supervision relationship as well as mastery and skill in participating in a specific community of practice. Two models of supervision are discussed: the technical rationality model with its emphasis on technical aspects of supervision, and the negotiated order model with an emphasis on negotiation of the supervision process. We discuss some of the challenges and experiences that we experienced as doctoral candidates, and the significance of these experiences for cultivating professional selfhood. More significantly, we discuss these processes in relation to the even more subtle and crucial process of mastering one’s discursive community of practice. This mastery of one’s community of practice constitutes a part of a broader process of ‘enculturation’ signalling the beginning (and not the end) of active participation in the broader discursive community.

Steven Krauss

Despite the plethora of studies that have been conducted on PhD supervision, little qualitative investigation has been conducted with a diverse, non-Western sample of doctoral students in an attempt to understand how the supervisory relationship is experienced. In response, eighteen students from diverse, non-Western backgrounds studying at one Malaysian research university were interviewed. Results illuminated the theme of “management” of the supervisory experience and included two streams:(a) acceptance of the situation, and (b) response to the situation so as to optimize their experience. The two major themes further included four sub-themes that included managing personal relations, time and accessibility constraints, academic compatibility, and expectations. Implications for the development of international research universities where PhD supervision of a diverse student body is a critical factor for university success and development are discussed.

sahil agnihotri

RELATED PAPERS

Raimonda Vaščilienė

Tatiana Silva

Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

Bernd Pohlmann-Eden

Research on Chemical Intermediates

Yegane Davoodbeygi

Routledge eBooks

Hannah Quirk

Materials Science and Engineering: C

Luminita Marin

Scientific Reports

Samin Tajik

1：1制作西澳大学毕业证文凭证书 uwa毕业证

Agata Russo

Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena

Michele Tumminello

International Journal of Molecular Sciences

Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science

Mandoli Manjo

Journal of Youth and Adolescence

Sebastian Hanstein

Elias Palti

Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis

Vladimír Konečný

winbuzz bets

Sofia Afonso Lopes

Journal of Stored Products Research

Pranitha Dawlal

The Supervisor of Undergraduate Dissertations in a Web-Based Context: How Much Support and How to Give it?

Najib Bouhout Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University, Fes, Morocco https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8638-2534
Aziz Askitou Multidisciplinary Faculty of Nador, Nador, Morocco

The provision of support has always been central to the role of the undergraduate dissertation (UD) supervisor, but little research has been done on its contextual determinants in web-facilitated contexts. Beyond the general recognition of the importance of institutional support for the development of supervisors’ technological and pedagogical knowledge and the importance of technology and pedagogy in maximizing the impact of supervisors’ support for students, the effect of technology tools and students’ prior skills on the type and level of supervisors’ support is not well understood. Drawing partially on the Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, the present work uses Partial-Least Square Structural Equation Modelling to examine the effect of supervisors’ Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), their perception of students’ soft skills, and the technology tools they use (face-to-face, social media or a learning management system) on the level of educational and motivational support they provide. The results indicate that institutional support to UD supervisors positively affects their TPK, which in turn positively affects their educational and motivational support to students. However, supervisors’ educational and motivational support is inversely related to their perception of students’ soft skills and is also affected by the technological tools used. In short, supervision styles are not static since different contextual factors affect the management of the process of supervision. The implications for UD supervision are discussed, and some recommendations are proposed in the article.

Author Biographies

Najib bouhout, sidi mohamed ben abdellah university, fes, morocco, aziz askitou, multidisciplinary faculty of nador, nador, morocco.

Akyol, Z., & Garrison, R. (2008). The development of a community of inquiry over time in an online course: understanding the progression and integration of social, cognitive and teaching presence. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(3), 3–22.

Al-Busaidi, K. A., & Al-Shihi, H. (2012). Key factors to instructors’ satisfaction of learning management systems in blended learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 24(1), 18–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-011-9051-x

Alkhawaja, M. I., Halim, M. S. A., & Afthanorhan, A. (2021). Technology anxiety and its impact on e-Learning system actual use in Jordan public universities during the coronavirus disease pandemic. European Journal of Educational Research, 10(4), 1639-1647. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.10.4.1639

Augustsson, G., & Jaldemark, J. (2014). Online supervision: A theory of supervisors’ strategic communicative influence on student dissertations. Higher Education, 67(1), 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9638-4

Bouziane, A., & Elaasri, R. (2019). Morocco e-readiness assessment: University contribution. English Studies at NBU, 5(2), 203–219. https://doi.org/10.33919/esnbu.19.2.2

Chamorro‐Premuzic, T., Arteche, A., Bremner, A. J., Greven, C., & Furnham, A. (2010). Soft skills in higher education: Importance and improvement ratings as a function of individual differences and academic performance. Educational Psychology, 30(2), 221–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410903560278

Cox, S. (2008). A Conceptual analysis of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Theses and Dissertations. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/1482

CSEFRS. (2018). L’enseignement supérieur au Maroc: Efficacité et efficience du système universitaire à accès ouvert [Sectoral report]. Instance Nationale d’Évaluation auprès du Conseil Supérieur de l’Éducation, de la Formation et de la Recherche Scientifique. https://www.csefrs.ma/publications/lenseignement-superieur-au-maroc/?lang=fr

Del Río, M. L., Díaz-Vázquez, R., & Maside Sanfiz, J. M. (2018). Satisfaction with the supervision of undergraduate dissertations. Active Learning in Higher Education, 19(2), 159–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787417721365

Deuchar, R. (2008). Facilitator, director or critical friend?: Contradiction and congruence in doctoral supervision styles. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(4), 489–500. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510802193905

dos Santos, H. L., & Cechinel, C. (2019). The final year project supervision in online distance learning: Assessing students and faculty perceptions about communication tools. Behaviour and Information Technology, 38(1), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2018.1514423

Elmouhtarim, S. (2018). Integrating critical thinking skills in reading courses at the university level: the case of faculty of letters and humanities, Beni-Mellal, Morocco. Arab World English Journal, 9(3), 331–344. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol9no3.22

Feather, D., Anchor, J. R., & Cowton, C. J. (2014). Supervisors’ perceptions of the value of the undergraduate dissertation. International Journal of Management Education, 12(1), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2013.06.002

Gibb, S. (2014). Soft skills assessment: Theory development and the research agenda. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 33(4), 455–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2013.867546

Gray, M. A., & Crosta, L. (2018). New perspectives in online doctoral supervision: A systematic literature review. Studies in Continuing Education, 41(2), 173–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2018.1532405

Hair, J., Hult, T., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (Second edition). Sage.

Hénard, F. (2010). Learning our lesson: Review of quality teaching in higher education. OECD Publications.

Hénard, F., & Roseveare, D. (2012). Fostering quality teaching in higher education: Policies and Practices. OECD. www.oecd.org/edu/imhe

Jaldemark, J., & Lindberg, J. O. (2013). Technology-mediated supervision of undergraduate students’ dissertations. Studies in Higher Education, 38(9), 1382–1392. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.626851

Jamieson, S., & Gray, C. (2006). The supervision of undergraduate research students: Expectations of student and supervisor. Practice and Evidence of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 1(1), 37–59.

Kechagias, K. (Ed.). (2011). Teaching and assessing soft skills. Thessaloniki. http://research.education.nmsu.edu/files/2014/01/396_MASS-wp4-final-report-part-1.pdf

Kyllonen, P. C. (2013). Soft skills for the workplace. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 45(6), 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2013.841516

Macqual, S. M., Mohd Salleh, U. K., & Zulnaidi, H. (2021). Assessing prospective teachers’ soft skills curriculum implementation: Effects on teaching practicum success. South African Journal of Education, 41(3), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v41n3a1915

Maor, D. (2017). Using TPACK to develop digital pedagogues: A higher education experience. Journal of Computers in Education, 4(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-016-0055-4

Mårtensson, K., Roxå, T., & Olsson, T. (2011). Developing a quality culture through the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2011.536972

McMichael, P. (1992). Tales of the unexpected: Supervisors’ and students’ perspectives on short‐term projects and dissertations. Educational Studies, 18(3), 299–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305569920180304

MESRSI. (2022). Le plan d’accélération de la transformation de l’écosystème d’enseignement supérieur, de la recherche scientifique et de l’innovation (PACTE ESRI 2030). https://pactesri.enssup.gov.ma/

Ouajdouni, A., Chafik, K., & Boubker, O. (2021). Measuring e-learning systems success: Data from students of higher education institutions in Morocco. Data in Brief, 35, 106807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2021.106807

Ouyang, F., & Scharber, C. (2018). Adapting the TPACK framework for online teaching within higher education: International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 8(1), 42–59. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJOPCD.2018010104

Pedro, N. S., & Kumar, S. (2020). Institutional support for online teaching in quality assurance frameworks. Online Learning, 24(3). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i3.2309

Pituch, K. A., & Stevens, J. (2016). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences: Analyses with SAS and IBM’s SPSS (6th edition). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Roberts, L. D., & Seaman, K. (2018). Good undergraduate dissertation supervision: Perspectives of supervisors and dissertation coordinators. International Journal for Academic Development, 23(1), 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2017.1412971

Scagnoli, N. I., Buki, L. P., & Johnson, S. D. (2019). The influence of online teaching on face-to-face teaching practices. Online Learning, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v13i2.1671

Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544

Simon, E. (2012). The impact of online teaching on higher education faculty’s professional identity and the role of technology: The coming of age of the virtual teacher [PhD, ATLAS Institute]. https://www.colorado.edu/atlas/sites/default/files/attached-files/the_impact_of_online_teaching_on_higher_education_faculty.pdf

Sloan, D., Porter, E., Robins, K., & McCourt, K. (2014). Using e-learning to support international students’ dissertation preparation. Education and Training, 56(2), 122–140. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-10-2012-0103

Smith, K., Todd, M., & Waldman, J. (2009). Doing your undergraduate social science dissertation. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203881262

Strebel, F., Gürtler, S., Hulliger, B., & Lindeque, J. (2019). Laissez-faire or guidance? Effective supervision of bachelor theses. Studies in Higher Education, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1659762

Sun, Z., Lin, C., Wu, M., Zhou, J., & Luo, L. (2018). A tale of two communication tools: Discussion-forum and mobile instant-messaging apps in collaborative learning. Br. J. Educ. Technol. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12571

Tai, H.-C., Pan, M.-Y., & Lee, B.-O. (2015). Applying technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) model to develop an online English writing course for nursing students. Nurse Education

Today, 35(6), 782–788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2015.02.016

Tang, Y., & Hew, K. F. (2020). Does mobile instant messaging facilitate social presence in online communication? A two-stage study of higher education students. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00188-0

Tseng, H., Yi, X., & Yeh, H.-T. (2019). Learning-related soft skills among online business students in higher education: Grade level and managerial role differences in self-regulation, motivation, and social skill. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 179–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.035

Vehviläinen, S., & Löfström, E. (2016). ‘I wish I had a crystal ball’: Discourses and potentials for developing academic supervising. Studies in Higher Education, 41(3), 508–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.942272

Vera, J., & Briones, E. (2015). Students’ perspectives on the processes of supervision and assessment of undergraduate dissertations. Cultura y Educacion, 27(4), 726–765. https://doi.org/10.1080/11356405.2015.1089391

Vermunt, J. D., & Verloop, N. (1999). Congruence and friction between learning and teaching. Learning and Instruction, 9(3), 257–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(98)00028-0

Zeddari, I. (2018). The end-of-study project in english department in Morocco: The supervisor’s perspective. Journal of Applied Language and Culture Studies, 1, 81–103.

Zuvic-Butorac, M., & Nebic, Z. (2009). Institutional support for e-learning implementation in higher education practice: A case report of University of Rijeka, Croatia. Proceedings of the ITI 2009 31st International Conference on Information Technology Interfaces, 479–484. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITI.2009.5196130

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License .

As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.

Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions

The DOAJ Seal is awarded to journals that demonstrate best practice in open access publishing

OLC Membership

OLC Research Center

Information

For Readers
For Authors
For Librarians

Alumni and supporters
Our departments
Visiting us
Academic Partnerships Handbook
Approval and Revision of Taught Modules and Programmes Handbook
Assessment, Progression and Awarding: Taught Programmes Handbook
Credit and Qualifications Framework
Exceptional Circumstances Handbook
External Examining Handbook
1 - Provision of information by Faculties to students
2 - Faculty Management of Education: Code of Good Practice
3 - Evaluating teaching: guidelines and good practice
4 - Generic University Assessment Criteria for Taught Programmes: Guidance Notes for Staff
5 - Teaching and Research
6 - Guidelines for constructing a code of practice in teaching and learning
7 - Periods of Study and Changes to registration status for taught postgraduate students: statement of procedures
8 - Academic personal tutoring: code of good practice

9 - Dissertation or project supervision/tuition for the degree of masters (excluding MPhil programmes): code of good practice

10 - Peer and self assessment in student work: principles and criteria
11 - Taught student/staff liaison committees: code of good practice
12 - Student absence
13 - Procedures for the interruption and voluntary withdrawal of taught students
14 - Temporary Visa Interruption and Withdrawal
15 - Unsatisfactory Student Progress and Engagement
16 - Accreditation of Prior Learning
17 - NOT IN USE
18 - Student placements
19 - Study and work experience abroad
20 - University Prizes
21 - Part-time teachers
22 - Exeter Learning Environment
23 - English Language Support for International Students: statement of procedures
24 - NOT IN USE
25 - Student Pregnancy, Maternity, Paternity and Adoption Policy
26 – Inclusive Practice within Learning & Teaching
27 – Registration
28 – Guidance for Group Work
29 – Taught Student Attendance and Engagement Policy
30 - Reading Lists Policy
31 - Employment of postgraduate students
Postgraduate Research Handbook
Quality Review & Enhancement Framework
Student Cases Handbook
Special Provisions for Online Programmes (including those offered in partnership with Keypath Education)
Special Provisions for Healthcare Programmes
Special Provisions for Degree Apprenticeships
Special Provisions for Programmes with Accreditation Licenced by the Engineering Council

Chapter 9 - Dissertation or project supervision/tuition for the degree of masters (excluding MPhil programmes): Code of good practice

1 Responsibilities of dissertation supervisors/tutors 2 Responsibilites of students 3 Responsibilities of the Faculty

This code sets out the generic requirements of students, dissertation supervisors/tutors and the Faculty (or delegated School) in the completion of dissertation assessment items. It is supplemented by individual Faculty (or delegated School) codes approved by the Education Board. The University recognises that dissertation practice varies between departments and therefore this Code cannot set out prescriptive requirements for matters such as the level of contact which should be maintained between student and dissertation supervisor/tutor.

This code applies to both part-time and full-time taught postgraduate students completing dissertation or project assessment items.

This code should be read in conjunction with the University Regulations governing Taught Masters programmes and with other codes of good practice affecting postgraduate taught students, particularly those on the Personal Tutor System , the Duration of Taught Modules , the Handbook for Assessment, Progression and Awarding; Taught Programmes .

Where students are not content with any aspect of their tuition they are encouraged to address problems as soon as possible through discussions with their dissertation supervisor/tutor, personal tutor or programme director. If necessary they should pursue a complaint through the University's formal student complaints procedure .

During the period of supervision/tuition from the time of the assignment of a dissertation supervisor/tutor until the submission of the dissertation, responsibilities and obligations are as set out below.

To give guidance about the nature of the dissertation enquiry and the standard of work to be expected.
To advise students about the planning of the dissertation and to discuss a timetable if applicable and to give advice on the necessary completion dates of successive stages of the work so that the dissertation may be submitted within the scheduled time.
To direct the student to attend supplementary courses if necessary.
To encourage students to acquire and maintain familiarity with relevant developments in their subject.
To give advice about requisite techniques and arrange for instruction where necessary and, if appropriate, to advise students to undertake instruction in written/spoken English.
To maintain contact through dissertation meetings in accordance with Faculty (or delegated School) policy and in the light of any agreement reached with the student. The frequency and nature of these sessions will vary depending on the characteristics of the topic and the requirements of the discipline.
To be accessible to the student at other appropriate and reasonable times when advice may be needed.
In the event of being granted study leave or absence, proposing adequate arrangements for supervision/tuition of the student.
To arrange as appropriate, for the student to talk about his or her work at internal or external seminars/presentations.
To ensure that the student is made aware if the standard of work is below that expected.
To advise the Programme Director and the student, as soon as it is recognised that there is a problem, if in his or her opinion, there is significant likelihood that the student is likely to fail the dissertation. Dissertation supervisors/tutors are not required to indicate the standard of the work in progress as it is only the final submission which is formally assessed.
To give advice on the preparation of a dissertation and advise the student if the standard of English is inadequate.
Dissertation supervisors/tutors would normally comment on the structure of the dissertation, the balance of the sections and the content of various sections.
The dissertation supervisor/tutor will take the opportunity to read through and annotate (with the use of indicative comments), where the student needs to make changes.
Dissertation supervisors/tutors are not responsible for the in-depth checking and criticism of Masters dissertations.
To agree with the dissertation supervisor/tutor a suitable topic for research and work on that topic.
To agree with the dissertation supervisor/tutor a schedule of meetings, arrange these meetings, attend these meetings and inform the dissertation supervisor/tutor how they can be contacted. Supervisors are not responsible for chasing students who fail to arrange or attend meetings. Students should be aware that members of staff may be away from the campus outside of University terms and contact arrangements should be agreed between student and dissertation supervisor/tutor well in advance of this time.
To undertake work in accordance with a schedule agreed with the dissertation supervisor/tutor before proceeding to the next stage of the project.
To take the initiative in raising problems or difficulties with the dissertation supervisor/tutor, however elementary they may seem.
To attend formal instruction or presentations as required.
To familiarise themselves with guidelines issued by individual Faculty (or delegated School) on dissertation projects.
To discuss with the dissertation supervisor/tutor the preparation and completion of the dissertation and to take due account of advice from the dissertation supervisor/tutor.
To keep dissertation supervisors/tutors updated with the progress of their dissertation.
To provide the dissertation supervisor/tutor with an initial draft section (please refer to Faculty (or delegated School) specific guidelines on the size of the section), of their dissertation in good time before the submission date (as determined by the Faculty (or delegated School)). Dissertation supervisors/tutors are only required to look at a draft section of the dissertation once. Therefore every effort should be made to ensure that the draft section is sufficiently developed. The quality of the final submission rests with the student.
To make necessary amendments to their dissertation as indicated by their dissertation supervisor/tutor before submission and to proof read the final draft.
To submit a dissertation within the time allowed by the regulations. Dissertation supervisors/tutors are not responsible for chasing students to submit on time.
To ensure that students are assigned a dissertation supervisor/tutor at the start of their dissertation module (normally at the start of Semester Two for full time students), who will act for the duration of their dissertation.
To provide students with information and guidance on the on the Faculty (or delegated School), and University regulations and to make students aware of relevant regulations and legal issues including, but not limited to, plagiarism, copyright, data protection, health and safety, and any ethical issues that might arise in the course of dissertation research.
To ensure that students are informed of sources of independent advice should the student/dissertation supervisor/tutor relationship breakdown.
To provide students with dissertation module templates which (in addition to other Faculty (or delegated School) guidance), should detail the number of hours of dissertation supervision contact students should expect.
To facilitate extensions to dissertation assessments, noting that the extension length should be commensurate with the reason for the request, with a maximum extension period of three weeks. Any longer periods will require the approval of the Dean for Taught Students.
To monitor workloads for dissertation supervisors/tutors. Programme Directors may find it necessary to reassign students if workloads are excessive.

Last reviewed Sept 2022

Last updated Sept 2023

ARJESS JOURNAL

African Research Journal of Education and Social Sciences

A Review of the Roles of Dissertation Supervisors as Mentors

Authors: Betty. M. Macharia

Department of Research and Evaluation Faculty of Education The Catholic University of Eastern Africa P. O. Box 62157, Nairobi, Kenya Corresponding Author Email: [email protected]

This paper is a review of the roles of dissertation supervisors as mentors. Primarily, research and enquiry skills are important for doctoral students. Doctoral supervisors should therefore become mentors to assist their students in developing a theory-driven and a research-based approach. The model that dissertation supervisors embed in their students encompasses different approaches that encourage doctoral students to participate in functional thinking, critical thinking, relationship development and emancipation. Effectively, dissertation supervisors should pursue mentorship strategies that will provide their students with a framework for writing to integrate different research approaches in reviewing relevant research and literature in the completion of their doctoral projects. The benefit of mentorship for doctoral students is that it creates an opportunity to develop requisite skills for academic development to conduct an enquiry based learning process. The review content is divided into subsections which explore the relationship between dissertation mentors and doctoral students with a view of assessing whether the involvement of dissertation supervisors as mentors can lower doctoral attrition rates and increase dissertation completion times. The implication and the conclusion of the paper is to urge postgraduate faculties to create a framework where dissertation supervisors act as student mentors.

Keywords: Dissertation supervisors, doctoral students, dissertation mentors, doctoral projects supervision, mentorship strategies, doctoral attrition rates, doctoral student mentors, doctoral student supervision, doctoral student mentorship

Introduction

Taylor, Kiley & Humphrey (2017) argue that numerous studies have been conducted to demonstrate the importance of dissertation supervisors in playing a mentorship role. In spite of the view that doctoral research students exercise a sense of independence, there is need for mentorship from dissertation supervisors. Taylor et. al. (2017) reiterate that the focus of supervision and mentorship is to instruct students in appropriate learning methodology and proper research methods. These may include various activities of mentorship such as sponsoring, coaching and assisting students in developing reflective practices in the research process. Kamler & Thomson, (2014) observe that supervisors who oversee the work of doctoral students could develop a research framework to assist students in improving their academic research skills. Orellana, Darder, Pérez, & Salinas, (2016) outline that effective mentorship by dissertation supervisors lies in proofreading and guiding students on the research methods that are appropriate in the doctoral research process.

Dissertation supervision is essential since it assists students in understanding how they should approach the writing process at every stage of their research work. Dissertation supervisors who act as mentors can help doctoral students to fill grant application forms. The supervisors could also assist doctoral students in upgrading their papers by providing feedback on the selected thesis for the writing process. Erichsen, Bolliger, & Halupa, (2014) argue that dissertation supervisors who act as mentors resolve problems associated with conceptual thinking which teaches the process of synthesising research material to assist doctoral students in completing their projects in good time. Granted, mentorship by dissertation supervisors is an integral part of the learning process as it enables doctoral students to complete their projects within the scheduled time. Bitchener, (2016) posits that mentorship in doctoral writing is crucial as it creates a supervisory framework to implement different approaches designed to assist students in completing their research projects. Therefore, the study is intended to determine the role of dissertation supervisors as mentors to explore the benefits to students when dissertation supervisors become mentors. Furthermore, the study will seek to establish the relationship between dissertation mentors and doctoral students with a view of assessing whether the involvement of dissertation supervisors as mentors can lower doctoral attrition rates and increase dissertation completion times.

The Role of Dissertation Supervisors as Mentors

Basturkmen, East, & Bitchener, (2014) observe that dissertation supervisors should adopt the role of mentors to assist doctoral students pursuing various disciplines. Dissertation supervisors have several roles in supporting doctoral students in completing their research projects. One of the principal roles that dissertation supervisors perform is a functional role where they help students in managing their projects. Pyhältö, Vekkaila, & Keskinen, (2015) have demonstrated that dissertation supervisors perform the role of assisting students to be critical thinkers where they assist students in analyzing their work critically. Dissertation supervisors should strive to develop an interpersonal relationship with students. As a matter of fact, supervisors perform the role of emancipation where they challenge students to question their knowledge base and to review it before they present a full review. Holloway & Brown, (2016) demonstrate that mentorship is essential to assess the abilities of doctoral students to be inspired to perform an elaborate research process and to complete the project. Dissertation supervisors are also preferred since they are more acceptable to students and they assist them in understanding how they should conduct the research process.

Hakkarainen, Hytönen, Makkonen, & Lehtinen, (2016) argue that writing tasks are considered to be a significant part of the completion of the doctoral project. Dissertation supervisors who are mentors assist doctoral students in completing their research projects and in assessing the root cause of their research problems that they are writing about. Rogers, Zawacki, & Baker, (2016) argue that mentors should also encourage doctoral students to attend seminars and workshops to assist them in the research process. Devos, Boudrenghien, Van der Linden, Azzi, Frenay, Galand, & Klein, (2017) make the case that the process of mentorship is essential to assist students to develop writing skills in the project completion process. Accordingly, mentors are important as they assist students in understanding the different purposes of writing that exist with the intention of helping them in formulating ideas and in developing their research projects. The establishment of a research framework is necessary to demonstrate how effective writing strategies should be improved. Lim, Loi, Hashim, & Liu, (2015) demonstrate that dissertation supervisors who play the role of mentors play a critical role in assisting doctoral students in developing a conceptual approach which facilitates the process of collecting information from different sources to complete their research projects. Parker-Jenkins, (2018) highlights that mentorship for doctoral students is important as it enables them to focus on different academic approaches instead of working on a limited scope of the research.

Tangen & Borders, (2016) observe that the experiences dissertation supervisors posses enable them to act as mentors to doctoral students through an efficient system of self-assessment. To a large extent, doctoral supervisors play a pivotal role in assisting their students in developing their writing skills and in facilitating the creation of joint learning support groups that provide a framework to assist students in receiving the writing support that they require. According to Aitchison (2015), dissertation supervisors can also assist doctoral students in focussing on areas where they formulate practical solutions to improve on their areas of weakness. The success of dissertation supervisors is increased by mentoring doctoral students and assisting them in brainstorming, drafting and editing their research projects. Lepp, Remmik, Leijen, & Leijen, (2016) argue that academic mentors should assist students in developing a conceptual understanding of how each stage of research should be tackled with a goal of completing the project according to preset schedules and according to set requirements (Aitchison, 2015). At any rate, dissertation supervisors should assist doctoral students in performing research which is holistic and integrates core research ideas.

The Benefits of Dissertation Supervisors Becoming Mentors

Taylor et al. (2017) outline that dissertation supervisors should also act as mentors to doctoral students to provide psychosocial mentorship where students are assisted in articulating their research ideas. Alternatively, dissertation supervisors could also be career mentors who assist the doctoral students in developing appropriate research channels. Pakdaman, Shafranske, & Falender, (2015) have shown that elements of role modelling, friendship and counselling should be adopted in the mentorship process. A review of the relationship between doctoral students and faculty members should be improved through mentorship and academic supervision. Mehr, Ladany, & Caskie, (2015) state that dissertation supervisors who take the role of mentors enhance their effectiveness by instructing students on the most effective research methodology to improve the quality of doctoral education that is offered. Kyiv & Thune, (2015) suggest that mentorship is important as it provides doctoral students with an opportunity of receiving helpful academic advice. It is crucial for dissertation supervisors to mentor doctoral students. Taylor et al. (2017) further demonstrate that mentorship creates a positive environment in the academic faculty thereby leading to successful socialisation between the department and students pursuing doctoral programs. Blessinger & Stockley, (2016) reiterate that doctoral mentorship is critical in promoting psychological health and propagating student development to assist doctoral students to complete their degree programs on a timely basis. Dissertation supervisors should also act as mentors to guarantee professional development, productivity and identity development immediately after graduation.

The relationship between dissertation supervisors and doctoral students should transition from being a primary academic mentorship role of providing supervision to a new role in providing mentorship (Taylor et. al, 2017). Another objective of mentorship is to assist students in identifying job opportunities in the market and available research opportunities in the field. Carter-Veale, Tull, Rutledge, & Joseph (2016) suggest that mentors could also perform the role of advising students on upcoming conferences and give them advice on how they should balance their personal and academic life. Academic mentors who are dissertation supervisors have also assisted their students in writing grant proposals, preparing presentations and publications and assisting them in accessing research resources. Carter & Kumar, (2017) attest to the fact that dissertation supervisors should be relied upon as mentors to help doctoral students to attain requisite skills and to assist them in executing administrative tasks in their professional life. Mehr, Ladany and Caskie (2015), on the other hand state that academic mentors who are dissertation supervisors can integrate reflective teaching methods in a manner that encourages academic modelling and the coaching of doctoral students. Woo, Jang, & Henfield, (2015) argue that doctoral students who are under mentorship can improve their communication skills as they engage with their fellow students and other members of the academia to receive assistance in completing their research projects.

One of the significant challenges that have affected doctoral students is a lack of sufficient pedagogical preparation (Nethsinghe & Southcott, 2015). Dissertation supervisors who act as mentors have a supervisory role that includes educational mentoring activities which enable students to prepare for a teaching career that they may choose to pursue after completing their research projects. Ghosh, Chauhan, & Rai, (2015) insist that apprenticeship is considered to be critical in assisting students in seeking relevant courses to encourage doctoral students to liaise with their advisors to pursue a teaching career. Dissertation supervisors who act as mentors facilitate their students to gain pedagogical skills by observing them, teaching them and advising them. Berman & Smyth, (2015) conclusively state that the intention of teaching mentorship is to assist doctoral students in satisfying the academic requirements set by institutions.

The Relationship between Dissertation Mentors and Doctoral Students

The role of a dissertation supervisor who becomes a mentor is to create an environment for career preparation suitable for doctoral students. Academic mentors have the responsibility of preparing PhD students to become skilled researchers in their field of study. According to Tribe & Tunariu, (2016) mentorship can be achieved by ensuring that students receive appropriate training which ensures that they can function according to the regulations set by the academic faculty. Kumar & Coe, (2017) note that a good mentorship program provides an opportunity for socialisation by instructing doctoral students on the intricacies of academic life. In this manner, doctoral students work within a framework which enables them to understand research theories and the teaching methodology that is employed in academia as well as the functioning of different universities. Anderson, (2017) outlines that the dissertation supervisor who is perceived as a mentor guides students to achieve their academic objectives.

The creation of formalised mentoring structures is essential to facilitate idea sharing and to allow students to experiment with their ideas to gain confidence before presenting in public forums. The primary focus of mentorship should be on research and career preparation. Stockman, (2015) has shown that students who associate with the career path of their mentors are also provided with an opportunity to emulate the personalised elements of their mentors. The career path of the mentor could also create a framework which doctoral students can follow and relate to. Mehr et al. (2015) demonstrate that the desire to emulate a mentor’s career path is a critical objective in promoting career advancement and in ensuring that the competence of doctoral students is considerably improved. Mentorship relationships between dissertation supervisors and doctoral students are also considered to be critical in assisting doctoral students in achieving capability and in carving out their identity in the academic sphere Aitchison, (2015) has shown that doctoral mentors can assist doctoral students in presenting their ideas coherently.

Dissertation supervisors who become mentors play a critical role in assisting students in achieving academic competence. Dissertation mentorship is made possible through asynchronous communication where feedback is provided, and doctoral students can integrate the feedback received in completing their research projects. Taylor et al. (2017) demonstrate that mutually beneficial relationships that exist between mentors and their doctoral students are considered to be beneficial and motivating than the one-sided relationships that exist between dissertation supervisors and doctoral students. Pakdaman et al. (2015) suggest that doctoral students who benefit from mentorship programs can improve their managerial, social, cognitive and communication competences.

The Involvement of Dissertation Supervisors as Mentors to Lower Doctoral Attrition Rates and Increase Dissertation Completion Times

In doctoral mentorship, students are presented with opportunities that positively engage them in using alternative research methodologies to develop their research projects even as they use appropriate research methods to complete their projects. Pakdaman et al. (2015) posit that mentorship is critical for doctoral students as it ensures that a dissertation supervisor assists doctoral students in achieving research competence and in increasing their skills and knowledge levels. Cognitive capability in the completion of doctoral projects is also considered to be critical as it is necessary for providing doctoral students with expert knowledge which they can use in disseminating knowledge. Stockman (2015) exemplifies the fact that the benefits of a mentor relationship are assessed by measuring the satisfaction level, the competence level and the academic opinions of the learner.

Taylor et al. (2017) point out to the fact that dissertation supervision and mentorship is necessary to reduce the level of doctoral student attrition which is considered to be a severe problem among students in pursuing doctoral programs. By using mentors in academic research, it is possible for the competence of doctoral students to be enhanced as they will be able to attain self-efficacy in research and expertise in their fields of study. Pakdaman et al. (2015) reiterate that mentorship is critical to encourage doctoral students to get involved in professional organisations and to increase their contribution to academic research processes. In further analysis, Taylor et al. (2017) designate that mentorship also assists doctoral dissertation students to exhibit a high level of commitment, personal responsibility and motivation. As a matter of fact, effective mentorship can help doctoral students in undertaking complex tasks and in ensuring that they have access to professional guidance. Mehr et al. (2015) have shown that when students are demotivated due to the challenges they face, mentorship at the doctoral stage can assist them in regaining their motivational levels and in developing a system of self-regulation. Additionally the role of a doctoral mentor lies in assisting learners to set their goals, analyse their tasks and to monitor the development of projects in completing their dissertation.

Institutions of higher learning are required to create elaborate mechanisms to support doctoral students to complete their research projects. There should be more mentorship programs for doctoral students to establish systems to develop their cognitive abilities, their research skills and their presentation skills. The creation of mentorship programs and the role of dissertation supervisors as mentors remain critical as it enables doctoral students to acquire pedagogical skills to prepare them to teach undergraduate and graduate courses. Further research should be done to evaluate how mentors can assist doctoral students in completing their projects within the scheduled time to achieve their research objectives.

In the increasingly complex academic environment within which doctoral students operate, it is necessary for dissertation supervisors to become mentors. This is an objective that is achievable if academic supervisors adopt a holistic approach to assist doctoral students by providing them with critical support in the research process. By utilizing the role of a mentor, doctoral supervisors assist students in presenting their research in a timely fashion. Dissertation supervisors who act as mentors also create a supervisory framework to assist students in writing papers which are holistic and conceptually sound. The use of a mentorship approach is helpful to a doctoral student who faces difficulties to complete their research projects by using integrated and varied approaches. Dissertation supervisors who act as mentors are also relevant as they assist students in completing their research projects. There is a need for further research to be conducted to establish critical factors which prevent doctoral students from completing their PhD dissertations. New research is required to determine how dissertation supervisors can become mentors to assist students in achieving their PhD programs according to pre-agreed time frames.

Going forward, there is a need to review the current set up where most dissertation supervisors are not mentors to doctoral students. This review intends to increase doctoral completion rates to ensure that doctoral students complete their dissertations rates within the scheduled time. Since doctoral programs have a high workload, dissertation supervisors who act as mentors guide doctoral students to ensure that they have the requisite skills to complete their dissertations according to preset research methodologies to meet set research objectives. It is also essential for dissertation supervisors to act as mentors to reduce doctoral students’ attrition rates.

Aitchison, C. (2015). Writing the practice/practise the writing: Writing challenges and pedagogies for creative practice supervisors and researchers. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 47(12), 1291-1303.

Anderson, T. (2017). The doctoral gaze: Foreign PhD students’ internal and external academic discourse socialization. Linguistics and Education , 37 , 1-10.

Basturkmen, H., East, M., & Bitchener, J. (2014). Supervisors’ on-script feedback comments on drafts of dissertations: socialising students into the academic discourse community. Teaching in Higher Education , 19 (4), 432-445.

Berman, J., & Smyth, R. (2015). Conceptual frameworks in the doctoral research process: a pedagogical model. Innovations in Education and Teaching International , 52 (2), 125-136.

Bitchener, J. (2016). The content feedback practices of Applied Linguistics doctoral supervisors in New Zealand and Australian universities. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics , 39 (2), 105-121.

Blessinger, P., & Stockley, D. (Eds.). (2016). Emerging directions in doctoral education. Emerald Group Publishing.

Carter, S., & Kumar, V. (2017). ‘Ignoring me is part of learning’: Supervisory feedback on doctoral writing. Innovations in Education and Teaching International , 54 (1), 68-75.

Carter-Veale, W. Y., Tull, R. G., Rutledge, J. C., & Joseph, L. N. (2016). The dissertation house model: Doctoral student experiences coping and writing in a shared knowledge community. CBE—Life Sciences Education , 15 (3), ar34.

Devos, C., Boudrenghien, G., Van der Linden, N., Azzi, A., Frenay, M., Galand, B., & Klein, O. (2017). Doctoral students’ experiences leading to completion or attrition: a matter of sense, progress and distress. European journal of psychology of education , 32 (1), 61-77.

Emmioglu, E., McAlpine, L., & Amundsen, C. (2017). Doctoral students’ experiences of feeling (or not) like an academic. International Journal of Doctoral Studies , 12 , 73-91.

Erichsen, E. A., Bolliger, D. U., & Halupa, C. (2014). Student satisfaction with graduate supervision in doctoral programs primarily delivered in distance education settings. Studies in Higher education , 39 (2), 321-338.

Ghosh, P., Chauhan, R., & Rai, A. (2015). Supervisor support in transfer of training: Looking back at past research. Industrial and Commercial Training , 47 (4), 201-207.

Hakkarainen, K., Hytönen, K., Makkonen, J., & Lehtinen, E. (2016). Extending collective practices of doctoral education from natural to educational sciences. Studies in Higher Education , 41 (1), 63-78.

Holloway, I., & Brown, L. (2016). Essentials of a qualitative doctorate . Routledge.

Kamler, B., & Thomson, P. (2014). Helping doctoral students write: Pedagogies for supervision . Routledge.

Kumar, S., & Coe, C. (2017). Mentoring and student support in online doctoral programs. American Journal of Distance Education , 31 (2), 128-142.

Kyvik, S., & Thune, T. (2015). Assessing the quality of PhD dissertations. A survey of external committee members. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education , 40 (5), 768-782.

Lepp, L., Remmik, M., Leijen, Ä., & Leijen, D. A. (2016). Doctoral students’ research stall: Supervisors’ perceptions and intervention strategies. SAGE Open , 6 (3), 2158244016659116.

Lim, J. M. H., Loi, C. K., Hashim, A., & Liu, M. S. M. (2015). Purpose statements in experimental doctoral dissertations submitted to US universities: An inquiry into doctoral students’ communicative resources in language education. Journal of English for Academic Purposes , 20 , 69-89.

Mehr, K. E., Ladany, N., & Caskie, G. I. (2015). Factors influencing trainee willingness to disclose in supervision. Training and Education in Professional Psychology , 9 (1), 44.

Nethsinghe, R., & Southcott, J. (2015). A juggling act: Supervisor/candidate partnership in a doctoral thesis by publication. International Journal of Doctoral Studies , 10 , 167-185.

Orellana, M. L., Darder, A., Pérez, A., & Salinas, J. (2016). Improving doctoral success by matching PhD students with supervisors. International Journal of Doctoral Studies , 11 , 87-103.

Pakdaman, S., Shafranske, E., & Falender, C. (2015). Ethics in supervision: Consideration of the supervisory alliance and countertransference management of psychology doctoral students. Ethics & Behavior , 25 (5), 427-441.

Parker-Jenkins, M. (2018). Mind the gap: developing the roles, expectations and boundaries in the doctoral supervisor–supervisee relationship. Studies in Higher Education , 43 (1), 57-71.

Pyhältö, K., Vekkaila, J., & Keskinen, J. (2015). Fit matters in the supervisory relationship: doctoral students and supervisors perceptions about the supervisory activities. Innovations in Education and Teaching International , 52 (1), 4-16.

Rogers, P., Zawacki, T., & Baker, S. (2016). Uncovering challenges and pedagogical complications in dissertation writing and supervisory practices: A multi-method study of doctoral student advisors. Supporting graduate student writers: Research, curriculum, and program design, 52-77.

Stockman, C. (2015). Achieving a doctorate through mixed methods research. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods , 13 (2), 74.

Tangen, J. L., & Borders, D. (2016). The supervisory relationship: A conceptual and psychometric review of measures. Counselor Education and Supervision , 55 (3), 159-181.

Taylor, S., Kiley, M., & Humphrey, R. (2017). A handbook for doctoral supervisors . Routledge.

Tribe, R., & Tunariu, A. (2016). Turning your dissertation into a publishable journal article. Counselling Psychology Review , 31 (1), 50-58.

Woo, H., Jang, Y. J., & Henfield, M. S. (2015). International doctoral students in counselor education: coping strategies in supervision training . Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development , 43 (4), 288-304.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Supervisors’ emotion regulation in research supervision: navigating dilemmas in an accountability-based context

Open access
Published: 18 May 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

Jiying Han 1 ,
Lei Jin 1 &
Hongbiao Yin ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5424-587X 2

294 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Given the complexity and high demands of research supervision and the intricate emotional experiences of supervisors, there is a need to explore how they regulate their emotions, particularly across various disciplinary backgrounds. The current study explored the emotion regulation strategies employed by research supervisors during the process of supervising graduate students. Based on data collected through semi-structured interviews, observations, and documentation from six research supervisors in different institutions in China, seven emotion regulation strategies employed by research supervisors were identified and further categorized into two groups, that is, antecedent-focused (prevention, intervention, reinterpretation, reconcentration, and detachment) and response-focused (suppression and expression) emotion regulation strategies. The findings shed light on the dilemmas faced by supervisors and the paradox aroused from the context-dependent and non-standardized nature of research supervision within an accountability-based managerial context. The implications for supervisors’ emotion regulation in authentic supervisory situations are discussed, and insights for universities’ policy-making are offered.

Is Empathy the Key to Effective Teaching? A Systematic Review of Its Association with Teacher-Student Interactions and Student Outcomes

Teacher stress and burnout in Australia: examining the role of intrapersonal and environmental factors

Compassion Fatigue, Secondary Traumatic Stress, and Vicarious Traumatization: a Qualitative Review and Research Agenda

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Since the 1990s, educational research has undergone an “affective turn” as a result of the critique of the long-standing Cartesian dualism between emotionality and rationality (Zembylas, 2021 ). Over the following three decades, the dynamic and complex nature of teacher emotion has been explored from various perspectives and approaches (Agudo, 2018 ). Since emotion can significantly impact various stages of the teaching process, either facilitating or hindering it (Yin, 2016a , 2016b ), opportunities for emotion regulation can be identified in educational contexts at any time (Taxer & Gross, 2018 ). In higher education, although emotion regulation has been proven significant to teacher development and well-being (Xie, 2021 ), the majority of research has been conducted within the context of classroom instruction (Tao et al., 2022 ), leaving that of research supervision in graduate education unexplored.

In graduate education, emotion plays an important role in the supervisory process and relationship building which involves a series of emotional interactions essential for both supervisors and graduate students. The existing research has demonstrated an increasing need for supervisors to develop emotion regulation skills to cope with the challenges and provide emotional support in research supervision (Wollast et al., 2023 ). On the one hand, supervisors need to employ emotion regulation strategies in the challenging supervisory contexts, as accountability-based policies and the blurring of personal and academic relationships between supervisors and graduate students may trigger complex emotional experiences such as anxiety and worry for supervisors (Xu, 2021 ). On the other hand, the provision of support from supervisors is strongly linked to the emotional well-being and research success of graduate students (Janssen & Vuuren, 2021 ; Wollast et al., 2023 ). Specifically, supervisors’ emotion regulation plays a crucial role in providing emotional support to graduate students, which in turn has a positive impact on graduate students’ well-being and their belief about their further academic pursuits (Han & Xu, 2023 ; Wollast et al., 2023 ).

Of the limited research on emotion in graduate education, much has been conducted to investigate the influence of graduate students’ emotion regulation on their mental health and academic engagement (Saleem et al., 2022 ). However, there is a paucity of studies which have researched supervisors’ emotions and emotion regulation during the supervisory process. With the aim of unpacking how research supervisors employ emotion regulation strategies in real supervisory scenarios to effectively fulfill their roles, and to gain insights into the nature of research supervision, this qualitative study explores the emotion regulation strategies used by supervisors in the process of research supervision.

Literature review

Teacher emotion and emotion regulation.

Emotion, once considered inferior to cognition, has gained increasing attention in the social sciences, including in educational research (Han & Xu, 2023 ). The current recognition of the intricate interplay between emotion and cognition in teaching and learning highlights the importance of emphasizing teacher emotion in both teacher development and teacher well-being (Chen & Cheng, 2022 ). Emotion is complex and difficult to define (Chen & Cheng, 2022 ), and the connotation of emotion has shifted from an intrapersonal perspective to a relational one, emphasizing interactions between individuals and their environment during emotion generation (Campos et al., 2011 ).

Under the relational view of emotion, individuals can achieve social goals in most jobs involving interpersonal interactions through emotion regulation (Brotheridge & Grandey, 2002 ). Emotion regulation refers to “the processes by which individuals influence which emotions they have, when they have them, and how they experienced and expressed their emotions” (Gross, 1998 , p. 275). In the educational field, a growing interest of research in emotion regulation has emerged since the 1990s (Yin, 2016a , 2016b ; Zembylas, 2021 ), as teaching has been viewed as “an emotional practice” (Hargreaves, 1998 , p. 835). Due to the importance of emotion in teachers’ professional lives, it is crucial for teachers to regulate their emotions to achieve improved teaching and learning outcomes. Specifically, enhancing positive emotions can foster better teacher-student relationships, promote creativity in teaching, and strengthen students’ learning motivation; inappropriately managed negative emotions can have adverse effects on these aspects (Hargreaves, 1998 ). Although teachers’ emotion regulation has been widely examined (e.g., Taxer & Frenzel, 2015 ; Yin, 2015 , 2016a , 2016b ; Yin et al., 2018 ) most studies, influenced by the concept of emotional labor, have mainly focused on two types of emotion regulation strategies: deep acting (the act of internalizing a desired emotion, matching expressed emotion with felt emotion) and surface acting (the act of altering emotional expression without regulating inner feelings) (Grandey, 2000 ; Hochschild, 1983 ). Comparatively, Gross’s ( 1998 ) process model of emotion regulation provides a more nuanced framework to examine teachers’ employment of a wider range of emotion regulation strategies. According to Gross ( 1998 , 2015 ), emotion regulation could be achieved through two main approaches: the antecedent-focused and response-focused approach. The former entails strategies that seek to avoid or regulate emotions by modifying the factors triggering emotion generation, which include situation selection, situation modification, attention deployment, and cognitive changes. The latter modifies an individual’s expressions and responses after the emotions have fully manifested, directly influencing physiological, experiential, or behavioral responses.

In recent years, the predominant focus of studies, guided by Gross’s ( 1998 ) process model, has been on investigating the motivations, strategies, and outcomes of teachers’ intrapersonal emotion regulation (e.g., Taxer & Gross, 2018 ; To & Yin, 2021 ; Xu, 2021 ). Teachers’ motivations for emotional regulation stem from their diverse teaching goals, including managing the impressions that various parties have of them, adapting to intensive educational reforms for survival, and enhancing students’ concentration levels (Hosotani, 2011 ; Xu, 2021 ). As for emotion regulation strategies, the existing literature has mainly been conducted under Gross’s ( 2015 ) model, and revealed a series of antecedent-focused (e.g., situation selection, attention deployment, and cognitive change) and response-focused strategies (e.g., suppression, relaxation, and avoidance) to cope with the ambivalent demands and enormous workload faced by teachers. Remarkably, certain strategies that reflect the unique nature of teachers’ work, such as genuine expression (Yin, 2015 ; Yin, 2016a , 2016b ) and interpersonal strategies (To & Yin, 2021 ), have been identified. Regarding outcomes of emotion regulation, genuine expression of emotion and cognitive appraisal strategies were found helpful to improve the effectiveness of classroom teaching and to maintain a balance between teachers’ professional and personal dimensions of their identities (Yin, 2016a , 2016b ). In contrast, suppressing, pretending, and restraining emotions may cause emotional dissonance and less received social support (Yin, 2015 ).

Emotion regulation and research supervision

In graduate education, supervisors’ emotional experiences are triggered by the complexity and high demands of research supervision (Han & Xu, 2023 ). The conflicting roles of taking responsibility for both supporter and supervisor simultaneously, the contradiction between supervisors’ high expectations of students’ learning autonomy and graduate students’ unsatisfactory performance, and the blurred boundaries between supervisory relationship and friendship (Han & Xu, 2023 ; Parker-Jenkins, 2018 ) are major challenges encountered by research supervisors. These challenges lead to various emotional experiences on the part of supervisors, including positive emotions, such as joy and love (Halse & Malfroy, 2010 ), and more prevalent negative emotions, such as anger, and disappointment (Sambrook et al., 2008 ). Given the diverse range of emotions that emerge during the supervision process, it is necessary for supervisors to employ various emotion regulation strategies to accomplish effective research supervision.

According to literature, emotion regulation is strongly associated with research supervision in three areas. First, effective research supervision requires a constructive and supportive supervisory relationship, which is facilitated by supervisors’ emotion regulation. As poorly managed supervision relationships contribute to low academic completion rates, supervisors are required to establish a respectful and caring relationship with their students (Halse & Malfroy, 2010 ). However, creating and maintaining such relationships can be challenging. Specifically, during the interactions with graduate students, supervisors are expected to offer emotional supports, including encouragement, motivation, and recognition based on students’ individual needs while ensuring that any critical feedback is delivered constructively (Lee, 2008 ). However, excessive emotional engagement or close relationships with students may hinder their ability to provide constructive criticism (Lee, 2008 ). As such, supervisors must strike a balance between offering emotional support and providing constructive feedback, thereby developing a successful educational partnership with their students.

Second, the emotional support provided by supervisors plays a positive role in facilitating graduate students’ research productivity and emotional well-being (Han & Wang, 2024 ; Wollast et al., 2023 ). In terms of research success, supervisors who encourage critical thinking and support constructive controversies tend to produce higher achievement and retention rates than those who adopt a directive and authoritarian approach (Johnson, 2001 ). Furthermore, emotional support from supervisors has been linked to higher levels of research self-efficacy and emotional well-being among graduate students (Diekman et al., 2011 ). Specifically, structure and autonomy support strongly influence graduate students’ feelings and expectations about their future academic success. Thus, in academic settings, supervisors should adopt effective emotion regulation strategies, offering constructive feedback, close guidance, and attentiveness to maintain graduate students’ motivation and mental well-being.

Third, effective emotion regulation is also critical for the well-being of research supervisors themselves. When faced with repeated frustrating events such as a lack of student progress and demanding requirements in accountability-based supervisory contexts, supervisors may experience feelings of exhaustion, particularly when they perceive their supportive efforts as being ineffective (Xu, 2021 ). Failing to regulate these negative emotions with effective strategies can lead to the accumulation and intensification of undesirable feelings, resulting in detrimental effects on supervisors’ well-being and job satisfaction, which may ultimately lead to their emotional burnout and disengagement (To & Yin, 2021 ).

So far, the very limited research on research supervisors’ emotion regulation in medical and scientific disciplines found that although supervisors use instructional strategy modification (e.g., directly pointing out students’ writing deficiencies), cognitive change (e.g., reappraising the relationship between students’ underachievement and their supervision), and response regulation (e.g., lowering their voice to calm themselves) to deal with negative emotions (Han & Xu, 2023 ), they still have difficulties in stepping out of negative emotions (Sambrook et al., 2008 ). Meanwhile, supervisors from different disciplines may use different emotion regulation strategies due to disciplinary differences in occupational challenges, societal expectations, and specific work environments (Veniger & Kočar, 2018 ). Therefore, it is necessary for researchers to investigate the emotion regulation of supervisors with different disciplinary backgrounds.

Based on the literature, underpinned by Gross’s ( 2015 ) process model, the present qualitative multi-case study aims to investigate the emotion regulation strategies employed by research supervisors from different disciplinary backgrounds. Specifically, the study seeks to answer this core research question: What strategies do research supervisors use to regulate their emotions during the supervision process?

As the in-depth understanding of supervisors’ emotion regulation strategies relies on the narratives of their journey of research supervision, we used narrative inquiry to explore supervisors’ lived experiences in supervising graduate students. Narrative inquiry emphasizes the co-construction of specific experiences by the researcher and participants (Friedensen et al., 2024 ; Riessman, 2008 ), which allows us to co-construct the meaning of emotion regulation with participants through qualitative data including interviews, observations, and documents.

Research context: Emphasizing the accountability of research supervision

The Chinese research supervision system has its roots in the nineteenth century, evolving alongside the development of graduate education (Xie & Zhu, 2008 ). Within this system, research supervisors play a crucial role in research-based master’s and doctoral education. In 1961, a supervisor accountability system was formalized, placing the responsibility on supervisors for overseeing students in research projects, journal publications, and dissertation completion. Under the guidance of supervisors, students engage in specialized courses, master the latest advancements in a specific field, and conduct research (Peng, 2015 ).

In recent years, with the rapid growth of graduate education in China, both supervisors and graduate students have expressed concerns about the quality of research supervision (Xu & Liu, 2023 ). Thus, national policies have been introduced to stipulate supervisors’ responsibilities and enhance the overall supervision quality, with a particular emphasis on the accountability of research supervisors. In 2020, the Accountability Measures for Educational Supervision, released by China’s Ministry of Education ( 2020 ), outlined a code of conduct for supervisors, emphasizing that supervisors bear the primary responsibility for cultivating postgraduate students. Specifically, supervisors are held accountable for various aspects of graduate students’ academic progress, including the quality of dissertations, academic conduct, and the appropriate utilization of research funds. Failure to fulfill these responsibilities may result in serious consequences, such as disqualification from supervising students or the revocation of teaching credentials.

Participants

To explore a wide range of emotional experiences and emotion regulation strategies that arise when supervising students at various stages of their academic journey, participants were purposively selected based on the following three criteria: (1) doctoral supervisors with the qualifications to oversee research-based master’s students and PhD candidates were considered, which allows us to gain insights into their emotions in supervising students at different academic stages; (2) supervisors with a minimum of 5 years of supervision were selected, as their long-term experience would provide a comprehensive understanding of the depth and evolution of emotion regulation strategies; (3) supervisors of both hard and soft disciplines were involved, as disciplinary features may significantly shape supervisors’ styles, potentially leading to their diverse emotions and emotion regulation strategies. Finally, six doctoral supervisors from four universities in China agreed to participate in the study voluntarily and were informed of the research purpose and ethical principles before the study. Table 1 provides a summary of the demographic information for all participants.

Data collection

The positionality statement is essential as the authors’ roles may influence the data collection process. Specifically, two authors are doctoral supervisors with rich experience in research supervision, and one author is a doctoral student. Participants for this study were recruited from the authors’ colleagues or recommendations from friends. In the spirit of self-reflexivity, we acknowledge our positions in research supervision and recognize that our relationships with participants may impact our collection and interpretations of the data. However, the authors had attempted to minimize the possible influence through continuous reflection, crosscheck, and discussions during the data analysis and interpretation.

To produce convincing qualitative accounts, collecting data from multiple sources including semi-structured interviews, observations, and documentation was employed in the current study from November 2022 to April 2023.

The primary source of data was individual interviews with each participant. To gather participants’ narratives of critical events in their research supervision, an interview protocol was designed according to our research purpose, but the interview questions were sufficiently flexible to enable the interviewer to adapt the content according to the specific interview situation. The interviews lasted between 120 and 150 min, during which the participants were asked to describe critical events in their research supervision, their emotional experiences, and whether and how they regulated their emotions. Follow-up questions were asked to gain a more profound understanding of their emotion regulation strategies when they provided surprising and ambiguous responses. Sample interview questions included “What emotions do you typically experience as a research supervisor?” and “Do you regulate your emotions induced by research supervision? If so, how?” All interview questions were presented in Chinese, the participants’ first language, and were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim.

Observation was used to complement the data obtained from interviews. Before the observation, all supervisors and their students were informed about the research purpose and ethical principles. Then non-participant observation during their group and individual meetings proceeded only with their voluntary participation. Supervisors’ supervisory methods, activities, meeting atmosphere, and emotions of meeting members were recorded to supplement and validate the data collected through the interview. A short follow-up interview was then conducted with supervisors, focusing on their reflections on emotional events that occurred during the observed group and individual meetings.

Documentation was also used as a supplementary method. With the consent of the participants and their students, supervisors’ annotations and feedback on graduate students’ manuscripts, unofficial posts about supervision on social media (e.g., WeChat moments sharing), and chat logs between supervisors and students were collected to obtain additional information about the participants’ emotional experiences and supervisory practices. Table 2 presents the interview durations, the total minutes recorded during observations, the length of follow-up interviews, and the specific number and types of documents reviewed by both supervisors and students.

Data analysis

The analysis involved a three-level coding process (Yin, 2016a , 2016b ). First, interview transcripts were repeatedly read to label data excerpts that addressed the research questions. Initial codes were based on participants’ original perspectives and then iteratively refined and combined. Second, the coding system was organized according to Gross’s ( 2015 ) process model of emotional regulation, which distinguishes between antecedent-focused and response-focused strategies. Meanwhile, the study also remained open to other emotion regulation strategies that were evident in the empirical data. Third, the coding system was distilled to capture the nature of the identified strategies, resulting in three types of emotion regulation strategies. During the analysis process, the data were classified and organized using the NVivo software.

To strengthen the credibility of the data analysis, the interview transcripts were carefully examined multiple times to ensure that the data were accurately reflected in the coding scheme. Moreover, the coding scheme was collaboratively developed by the authors, and any discrepancies in classification were thoroughly deliberated to achieve mutual agreement. The final coding system, along with sub-categories and patterns, is presented in Table 3 .

In sum, seven emotion regulation strategies in research supervision emerged from the empirical data, which can be grouped into two categories, namely, antecedent-focused strategies and response-focused strategies.

Antecedent-focused strategies

Supervisors used antecedent-focused strategies to regulate the external situation and their internal cognition before the emotions were generated.

Prevention involves the prediction and avoidance of situations that may lead to undesirable emotional experiences during supervision prior to the generation of emotions. Prevention strategies were frequently utilized in the graduate student recruitment process and early stages of supervision, as a means of avoiding undesirable situations. On the former occasion, supervisors identified multiple recruitment indicators, such as research experiences and GPA, to avoid supervisory situations that may lead to negative emotions. This is commonly related to their former supervisory experience: “It was frustrating to supervise a student who was not invested in her work, so I have to implement a rigorous recruitment process to prioritize candidates who are truly interested in research, rather than rashly recruiting students” (P1-interview).

Supervisors remain vigilant once a supervisory relationship was established, as they are required by accountability-based policies to be responsible for students’ research performance and safety. Many supervisors stressed the significance of “establishing rules and regulations” (P4-interview) in the early stages of supervision to avoid infuriation and disappointment with students’ academic misconduct. Therefore, establishing an academic code of conduct is an effective prevention strategy for supervisors: “I’m frustrated by academic misconduct among students, as discovering data falsification in student-published articles holds me accountable, risking serious consequences for my academic career. So I frequently emphasize the need for high academic honesty and integrity standards” (P2-interview, observation).

Another concern that worried supervisors, especially those of science and technology, is student safety: “Whenever I hear about a laboratory explosion that causes student injuries, it makes me very nervous” (P3-interview, documentation). It is crucial for the institutions and supervisors to establish comprehensive laboratory safety rules and educate students on safety protocols before conducting experiments: “I told my graduate students: Failure to obey laboratory rules and lack of safety awareness can lead to immediate accidents that not only affect yourself but also pose a risk to other students” (P3-interview).

Intervention

Intervention is the most commonly employed strategy by supervisors to enhance the effectiveness of their supervision once a supervisory relationship is established. They employed various intervention strategies to improve students’ academic attitude and develop their academic ability.

Specifically, supervisors improved their students’ engagement and altered procrastination either by scaffolding their research or enforcing discipline and prohibitions. On the one hand, our participants acknowledged the importance of instructional scaffolding in the supervisory process.

We need to cultivate students’ interest so that they can actively engage in research. For instance, I often demonstrate interesting phenomena between the English and Chinese languages to generate my students’ curiosity. Then I am delighted to see their willingness to immerse themselves in linguistic research. (P5-interview)

On the other hand, some supervisors emphasized the enforcement of discipline in supervision. One supervisor expressed disappointment and dissatisfaction with the lackadaisical research atmosphere within the entire research group. In response, she implemented strict discipline and prohibitions to restrict students from engaging in activities unrelated to research in the office (P2-observation).

Finding a student watching a movie in the office angered me as it may disturb other students trying to focus on their studies. So, activities like watching movies and listening to music are not allowed in our office. By rigorously enforcing these rules, our research group was able to collaborate more effectively and ultimately achieve satisfactory results. (P2-interview)

Furthermore, intervention strategies were also used to enhance graduate students’ academic competency. Modifying supervisory activities was considered as a useful method. One supervisor shared: “We used to read literature in our group meeting together, but it was not effective. I felt frustrated and decided to change our meeting activities this semester.” As a result, the supervisor organized students to provide feedback on each other’s manuscripts in weekly group meetings, because “it was very effective in improving their writing abilities” (P1-interview, observation).

Interestingly, some supervisors opted to micromanage students’ research processes when they were disappointed with their research performance

At first, I encouraged students to independently identify research topics, but I later realized with disappointment that it was challenging for them to identify gaps in the existing literature. To make things more efficient, I started assigning research projects directly to help them complete their dissertation and meet the graduation requirements. (P5-interview)

Reinterpretation

Reinterpretation refers to the process of cognitively reappraising a supervisory situation from different perspectives to change its emotional impact. Supervising a graduate student who lacks interest in research was described as a “prolonged and painful undertaking” (P4-interview). However, one supervisor noted that: “Dwelling on negative emotions can be unproductive as it does not necessarily solve problems. Despite the challenging experience, I have gained valuable insights and will be better equipped to handle such situation” (P4-interview).

In addition to explaining the meaning of the situations from supervisors’ viewpoints, they reconsidered the events from graduate students’ perspectives to rationalize their unsatisfactory performance and procrastination. For example, supervisors understood students’ time arrangements when they procrastinated: “I used to become annoyed when students failed to submit assignments punctually… Now I know that students need a balance between work and rest. They need adequate time for rest” (P5-interview).

On occasion, supervisors reappraised the connection between students’ misbehaviors and the effort they invested from the perspective of the teacher-student relationship.

I felt angry when things happened, but I wouldn’t let that emotion affect my life. I see myself as a supervisor to students, not a parent, so I don’t hold high expectations for them. If students choose not to follow my guidance, it’s not my concern anymore. (P6-interview)

Reconcentration

Reconcentration is the strategy by which supervisors focus on another aspect of supervision or divert attention away from supervision with the intent of changing emotional consequences. Specifically, during the supervisory process, supervisors prepared themselves to be optimistic by reminding themselves of their students’ strengths: “I was anxious about a student who always made slow progress in research. But when I later realized that his incremental results were consistently good, indicating that he was very meticulous, I felt much better” (P2-interview, observation).

Apart from diverting attention during supervision in working environments, the participants highlighted the importance of balancing personal and professional life to manage negative emotions that may arise during supervision.

After giving birth, I realized that caring for a child demands a considerable amount of time and energy. Then I redirected my attention from supervising students to my family. Thankfully, my family provides a supportive environment, and the pleasant moments shared with my family members helped me overcome negative emotions associated with work. (P4-interview)

Detachment refers to the act of separating from or terminating the supervisory relationship to disengage from negative emotions. This strategy was often employed when intervention, reinterpretation, and reconcentration strategies were ineffective. When supervisors found that various proactive measures failed to resolve the challenges in research supervision, they experienced enduring feelings of helplessness, confusion, and distress. One supervisor expressed deep frustration, stating, “I’ve exhausted all efforts—careful communication with her and her parents, and providing my support during her experiments. Yet, she continued to resist making progress with her experiments and dissertation. I felt lost in supervising this student” (P4-interview). As a result, they have to release themselves from the emotionally harmful supervisory relationships.

Some supervisors chose to disengage, meaning they no longer actively push the student: “Continuing to push a student who refused to participate in research despite all my efforts would only increase my frustration. I have decided to let him go and will no longer push him” (P5-interview).

In some extreme cases that evoke negative emotions, supervisors even terminated the supervisory relationship.

Supervising this student was a painful experience as his inaction negatively affected the entire research team. Other students started following his behavior and avoided conducting experiments. It made me feel suffocated. I had to terminate my supervision to avoid any further negative impact on the team and myself… I felt relieved after he left. (P3-interview)

Response-focused strategies

Response-focused emotion regulation involves the use of strategies after an emotion has already been generated.

Suppression

Suppression involves consciously attempting to inhibit behavioral and verbal emotional responses. Although supervisors experienced negative moods during research supervision, some refrained from expressing these emotions to students. Certain supervisors believed that criticism hinders problem-solving. One participant explained, “While interacting with students, I found some are genuinely fearful of supervisor authority. In such cases, venting emotions on students only heightens their fear, makes them hesitant to express themselves or their confusion in research, and ultimately hinders their progress” (P1-interview). In addition, some supervisors believed that expressing anger or disappointment toward students could harm their self-efficacy in research. One supervisor stated, “Obtaining a master’s degree is a challenging journey, especially for novice researchers. Confidence is crucial for their success. As a supervisor, I refrain from expressing negative emotions as it can hurt students’ feelings and even damage their confidence” (P3-interview).

As mentioned by the supervisors above, expressing anger and disappointment to graduate students may not resolve issues but damage their self-efficacy. In challenging situations where negative emotions were hard to suppress, supervisors opted to temporarily suspend supervision activities or introduce new tasks to regain composure: “Sometimes revising students’ manuscripts can be a painful task. To avoid the risk of expressing negative emotions to them, I often temporarily suspend the revision. Sometimes I take a walk until I feel calmer and more collected” (P1-interview).

In supervision, expressing emotion is another effective strategy for regulating supervisors’ emotions. Although supervisors were aware that expressing negative emotions may sometimes negatively affect students’ feelings, the importance of their own emotional well-being was emphasized, as “expressing feelings helped me recover from negative moods faster” (P6-interview). However, supervisors had different expressive styles when interacting with their students.

Some supervisors expressed their anger and dissatisfaction to their students directly, through behavioral or verbal emotional responses. A supervisor recounted an incident, “During a phone call with her, I lost my temper because of her terrible attitude, and ended up throwing my phone” (P4-interview).

Interestingly, given that “graduate students are all adults” (P6-interview), some supervisors expressed their emotions more tactfully, taking care not to lose their temper and cause distress to their students. One supervisor “felt angry with a student’s poor writing.” However, instead of scolding the student directly, he made a joke during a one-to-one meeting, saying “It’s not that you wrote poorly. It’s that I am not clever enough to comprehend your writing.” The student laughed, and then the supervision was conducted in a relaxed atmosphere. The supervisor explained: “I do not hide my emotions but prefer to avoid losing my temper and instead use humor to guide my students better” (P5-interview, observation).

This study contributes to the existing literature on emotion regulation by providing detailed insights into how emotion regulation strategies were utilized by research supervisors. It also sheds light on the dilemmas supervisors encounter and the paradox between the context-dependent nature of research supervision and the accountability-based managerial context.

Supervisors’ dilemmas in research supervision

Our study demonstrated supervisors’ capacity to proactively employ diverse emotion regulation strategies when coping with difficulties in research supervision. It also revealed some paradoxical phenomena within the supervisors’ utilization of these emotion regulation strategies, highlighting the dilemmas they encountered in the context of research supervision.

In general, supervisors in our study demonstrated a higher tendency to employ antecedent-focused strategies for emotion regulation rather than response-focused strategies, which can alleviate their emotional burnout and enhance their well-being. Specifically, participants utilized intervention strategies as antecedent-focused strategies to improve the effectiveness of research supervision, rather than seeking consolation to alleviate generated emotions. Previous research has indicated that antecedent-focused strategies were associated with increased life satisfaction (Feinberg et al., 2012 ). By intervening in the emotion generation process at an early stage, these strategies can potentially alter the emotional trajectory, contributing to improved well-being among supervisors (Gross & John, 2003 ).

While supervisors displayed a strong inclination to utilize diverse strategies to enhance the effectiveness of their supervision, our findings unveiled two paradoxical phenomena in their emotion regulation strategies, indicating the dilemmas that supervisors faced in authentic supervisory situations. First, in antecedent-focused strategies aimed at modifying situations that may trigger negative emotions, numerous interventions and detachments highlighted the conflicts supervisors encountered as they strived to balance adequate assistance and excessive interference. Specifically, while participants in our study “inspired students through scaffolding” or “encouraged students’ autonomous learning,” they also “micromanaged students’ research process” or “enforced discipline” to enhance supervision efficiency. This pedagogical paradox concerning the choice between intervening and non-intervening approaches has generated ongoing debate in existing research (Janssen & Vuuren, 2021 ). Both approaches have the potential to evoke negative emotional experiences for supervisors and graduate students. Research found that a highly intervening approach has negative implications for both supervisors and graduate students (Lee, 2020 ). Students who have encountered autonomy-exploitative behavior from their supervisors, such as being restricted to specific research topics and methodologies, have reported experiencing negative emotions (Cheng & Leung, 2022 ). For supervisors, the burden of an intervening approach, the dissonance between supervisors’ expectations and students’ actual research progress, as well as students deviating from conventional practices (Han & Xu, 2023 ), all contribute to feelings of frustration, sadness, and exhaustion. Nevertheless, non-intervening approaches do not always fulfill the expectations of both parties either. Supervisors who encouraged graduate students’ autonomous action acknowledged the value of promoting their independent thinking, which has been identified as a significant predictor of students’ research self-efficacy (Gruzdev et al., 2020 ). However, students who initially expected their supervisors to play a leadership role felt dissatisfied and disappointed when supervisors were reluctant to offer explicit guidance (Janssen & Vuuren, 2021 ). This misunderstanding of supervisors’ intentions can ultimately generate negative effects on supervisors’ emotional experiences (Xu, 2021 ).

Another evident paradoxical phenomenon arises in the response-focused strategies employed after emotions have already been triggered. Although supervisors opted to suppress their negative emotional expression to safeguard the confidence and self-esteem of mature learners, there were instances when they outpoured their disappointment and anger to students, aiming to swiftly step out of their negative moods. The act of expressing and suppressing emotions highlights the dilemma of cultivating a mutually beneficial relationship that promotes emotional well-being for both supervisors and students. On the one hand, the existing literature emphasizes the importance of supervisors being sensitive to students’ emotional experiences (Bastalich, 2017 ). The inherent power imbalance in supervisor-student relationships may create a sense of student dependency on their supervisors (Friedensen et al., 2024 ; Janssen & Vuuren, 2021 ). Excessive criticism from supervisors can potentially lead to feelings of loss, and alienation throughout students’ academic journey, which highlights supervisors’ responsibility to manage their emotional criticism in supervisory interactions (Parker-Jenkins, 2018 ). On the other hand, although pursuing a research degree is a challenging journey for graduate students, it is important to acknowledge the vulnerability of research supervisors and their need for support (Parker-Jenkins, 2018 ). Power dynamics within supervisory relationships, particularly when students challenge or disregard supervisors’ advice, can lead to repression and disengagement for supervisors if negative emotions are not effectively regulated (Xu, 2021 ). Thus, recognizing supervisors’ needs and allowing for emotional expressions are also essential in developing a relationship that is mutually beneficial and conducive to the well-being of both parties (Parker-Jenkins, 2018 ).

The conflicts between research supervision and institutional policies

The dilemmas present in supervisors’ emotion regulation strategies inherently illustrate the context-dependent and non-standardized nature of research supervision. However, as modern higher education institutions move toward implementing accountability-based policies that aim to standardize and quantify research supervision (Jedemark & Londos, 2021 ), conflicts between the nature of supervision and these institutional policies not only place an emotional burden on supervisors, but also endanger the quality of graduate education.

The dilemmas observed in supervisors’ emotion regulation strategies highlight the divergent understandings between supervisors and graduate students regarding their respective responsibilities and the boundaries of the supervisor-student relationship. This divergence is influenced by context-dependent factors in research supervision, including the beliefs, motivations, and initiatives of the individuals involved (Denis et al., 2018 ). Due to the difficulty in achieving a perfect agreement on these context-dependent factors, it becomes challenging to establish a standard for what constitutes an ideal beneficial research supervision (Bøgelund, 2015 ). In authentic supervisory situations, the relationships between supervisors and graduate students can range from formal and distant to informal and intimate in both academic and social interactions (Parker-Jenkins, 2018 ). Therefore, research supervision is a highly context-dependent and non-standardized practice that relies on the capabilities of supervisors and students, which are shaped by their individual experiences and personalities.

This nature of research supervision underscores the significance of avoiding standardization and a “one size fits all” approach. However, as higher education institutions move toward a corporate managerial mode, research supervision is increasingly perceived as a service provided within a provider-consumer framework, and the fundamental aspects of research supervision are being reshaped to align with a culture of performance measurement, control, and accountability (Taylor et al., 2018 ). In modern academia, universities and institutions have established specific guidelines and protocols for research supervision, which require supervisors to follow diligently and take accountability in the supervision process (Figueira et al., 2018 ).

The presence of extensive external scrutiny or accountability ignored the context-dependent and non-standardized nature of research supervision, leading to adverse effects on both supervisors and graduate students. On the one hand, supervisors face significant pressure within an accountability-based context. They are expected to serve as facilitators of structured knowledge transmission, which is enforced through the demanding requirements and time-consuming tasks associated with supervisory practices (Halse, 2011 ). However, the distinctive characteristics of various disciplines and the interdependent relationship between the supervisory context and graduate students’ learning process are neglected (Liang et al., 2021 ). Such a narrow focus on knowledge transmission may pose potential threats to supervisors’ autonomy and academic freedom, generating their feelings of self-questioning, helplessness, and demotivation (Halse, 2011 ). Supervisors in our study reported many examples of emotion regulation strategies utilized to cope with performative and accountability pressures in their workplace. Specifically, the responsibility to ensure timely doctoral completions, prioritize students’ safety, and maintain accountability for those experiencing delays or violating research codes evoked feelings of nervousness, pressure, and insecurity among supervisors.

On the other hand, interventionist supervision within accountability-driven supervisory contexts is perceived as detrimental to students’ academic innovation (Bastalich, 2017 ). The prevailing environment of heightened performativity and accountability alters supervisors’ attitudes toward academic risk-taking, thereby influencing their supervisory practices (Figueira et al., 2018 ). For example, participants in our study utilized prevention and intervention strategies to mitigate potential negative occurrences. This included adopting a directive approach to supervise students’ work and dissuading them from undertaking risky or time-consuming methods to ensure timely completion. However, such micromanagement may stifle innovation, thereby inhibiting doctoral students’ development as independent researchers (Gruzdev et al., 2020 ). Providing pre-packaged research projects or excessive support may hinder students’ acquisition of essential knowledge, skills, and expertise required for their future pursuits, potentially obstructing their progress toward independent thinking (Gruzdev et al., 2020 ).

The conflicts between the prevailing shift from autonomy to accountability in higher education and the context-dependent and non-standardized nature of research supervision highlight the necessity for practice-informed evaluations for research supervision. This finding resonates with previous studies on policy-making in graduate education (Taylor et al., 2018 ), which emphasized the challenges of establishing evidence-based institutional policies to capture the intricate realities of supervision in practice.

Limitations

This study contributes to the understanding of research supervisors’ work by examining their emotion regulation strategies in authentic supervisory situations. However, certain limitations should be addressed for future research. First, the small sample size is a significant limitation, as only six supervisors participated. Future studies may increase the sample size and enhance diversity within the sample. Second, as our study only involved perspectives from research supervisors, future studies may consider incorporating the perceptions of both supervisors and graduate students and analyzing the level of convergence and divergence between the obtained results to enhance the validity of data collection.

Implications for practice

Despite being situated in China’s supervisory accountability system, our study holds broader implications in the global context. As the shift toward corporatized management models in higher education worldwide reshapes research supervision to align with performance measurement and accountability culture (Jedemark & Londos, 2021 ), our results offer implications for research supervision and policy-making beyond the Chinese context.

First, for research supervisors and graduate students, the intricate and dynamic nature of research supervision revealed in our study makes it challenging to offer direct recommendations for optimal emotion regulation strategies. Instead, supervisors are encouraged to adaptively employ a range of emotion regulation strategies in different supervisory situations to enhance their emotional well-being. Additionally, recognizing the context-dependent nature of research supervision, both research supervisors and graduate students are urged to take into account factors such as each other’s beliefs, motivations, and initiatives in their research and daily interactions.

Second, in light of the discrepancy between the current standardized accountability measures in higher education and the context-dependent nature of research supervision, it is imperative for universities and institutions to develop practice-based policies that are tailored to supervisors’ and students’ academic development, avoiding generic and assumed approaches. To effectively address the distinctive requirements of research supervision, policy-makers are strongly encouraged to implement multi-dimensional, discipline-oriented evaluation systems for supervisors in the future.

Data Availability

Data from this study cannot be shared publicly because participants may still be identifiable despite efforts to anonymise the data. Therefore, data will only be made available for researchers who meet criteria for access to confidential data.

Agudo, J. D. M. (Ed.). (2018). Emotions in second language teaching: Theory, research and teacher education . Springer.

Google Scholar

Bastalich, W. (2017). Content and context in knowledge production: A critical review of doctoral supervision literature. Studies in Higher Education, 42 (7), 1145–1157.

Article Google Scholar

Bøgelund, P. (2015). How supervisors perceive PhD supervision-and how they practice it. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 10 , 39–55.

Brotheridge, C. M., & Grandey, A. A. (2002). Emotional labor and burnout: Comparing two perspectives of “people work.” Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60 (1), 17–39.

Campos, J. J., Walle, E. A., Dahl, A., & Main, A. (2011). Reconceptualizing emotion regulation. Emotion Review, 3 (1), 26–35.

Chen, J., & Cheng, T. (2022). Review of research on teacher emotion during 1985–2019: A descriptive quantitative analysis of knowledge production trends. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 37 (2), 417–438.

Cheng, M. W. T., & Leung, M. L. (2022). “I’m not the only victim...” Student perceptions of exploitative supervision relation in doctoral degree. Higher Education, 84 (3), 523–540.

Denis, C., Colet, N. R., & Lison, C. (2018). Doctoral supervision in North America: Perception and challenges of supervisor and supervisee. Higher Education Studies, 9 (1), 30–39.

Diekman, A. B., Clark, E. K., Johnston, A. M., Brown, E. R., & Steinberg, M. (2011). Malleability in communal goals and beliefs influences attraction to stem careers: Evidence for a goal congruity perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101 (5), 902–918.

Feinberg, M., Willer, R., Antonenko, O., & John, O. P. (2012). Liberating reason from the passions: Overriding intuitionist moral judgments through emotion reappraisal. Psychological Science, 23 (7), 788–795.

Figueira, C., Theodorakopoulos, N., & Caselli, G. (2018). Unveiling faculty conceptions of academic risk taking: A phenomenographic study. Studies in Higher Education, 43 (8), 1307–1320.

Friedensen, R. E., Bettencourt, G. M., & Bartlett, M. L. (2024). Power-conscious ecosystems: Understanding how power dynamics in US doctoral advising shape students’ experiences. Higher Education, 87 (1), 149–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-00998-x

Grandey, A. A. (2000). Emotional regulation in the workplace: A new way to conceptualize emotional labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5 (1), 95–110.

Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2 , 271–299.

Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, 26 (1), 1–26.

Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85 (2), 348.

Gruzdev, I., Terentev, E., & Dzhafarova, Z. (2020). Superhero or hands-off supervisor? An empirical categorization of PhD supervision styles and student satisfaction in Russian universities. Higher Education, 79 (5), 773–789.

Gu, J., Levin, J. S., & Luo, Y. (2018). Reproducing “academic successors” or cultivating “versatile experts”: Influences of doctoral training on career expectations of Chinese PhD students. Higher Education, 76 (3), 427–447.

Halse, C. (2011). ‘Becoming a supervisor’: The impact of doctoral supervision on supervisors’ learning. Studies in Higher Education, 36 (5), 557–570.

Halse, C., & Malfroy, J. (2010). Retheorizing doctoral supervision as professional work. Studies in Higher Education, 35 (1), 79–92.

Han, Y., & Xu, Y. (2023). Emotional support from the perspective of extrinsic emotion regulation: Insights of computer science. Teaching in Higher Education, 28 (7), 1725–1743.

Han, J., & Wang, T. (2024). Exploring graduate students’ research characteristics, emotional exhaustion, mastery approach, and research career commitment: insights from the JD-R theory. Studies in Higher Education, 1–15.

Hargreaves, A. (1998). The emotional practice of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14 (8), 835–854.

Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling . University of California Press.

Hosotani, R. (2011). Emotional experience, expression, and regulation of high-quality Japanese elementary school teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27 (6), 1039–1048.

Janssen, S., & Vuuren, M. (2021). Sensemaking in supervisor-doctoral student relationships: Revealing schemas on the fulfillment of basic psychological needs. Studies in Higher Education, 46 (12), 2738–2750.

Jedemark, M., & Londos, M. (2021). Four different assessment practices: How university teachers handle the field of tension between professional responsibility and professional accountability. Higher Education, 81 (6), 1293–1309.

Johnson, J. W. (2001). The relative importance of task and contextual performance dimensions to supervisor judgments of overall performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86 (5), 984–996.

Lee, A. (2008). How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision. Studies in Higher Education, 33 (3), 267–281.

Lee, A. (2020). Successful research supervision: Advising students doing research (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Liang, W., Liu, S., & Zhao, C. (2021). Impact of student-supervisor relationship on postgraduate students’ subjective well-being: A study based on longitudinal data in China. Higher Education, 82 (2), 273–305.

Ministry of Education, PRC. (2020). The accountability measures for educational supervision [yanjiusheng zhidao xingwei zhunze]. http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A22/s7065/202011/t20201111_499442.html . Accessed 17 May 2024.

Parker-Jenkins, M. (2018). Mind the gap: Developing the roles, expectations and boundaries in the doctoral supervisor–supervisee relationship. Studies in Higher Education, 43 (1), 57–71.

Peng, H. (2015). Assessing the quality of research supervision in mainland Chinese higher education. Quality in Higher Education, 21 (1), 89–100.

Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences . Sage.

Saleem, M. S., Isha, A. S., Awan, M. I., Yusop, Y. B., & Naji, G. M. (2022). Fostering academic engagement in post-graduate students: Assessing the role of positive emotions, positive psychology, and stress. Frontiers in Psychology, 13 , 920395.

Sambrook, S., Stewart, J., & Roberts, C. (2008). Doctoral supervision... A view from above, below and the middle! Journal of Further and Higher Education, 32 (1), 71–84.

Tao, Y., Liu, X., Hou, W., Niu, H., Wang, S., Ma, Z., & Zhang, L. (2022). The mediating role of emotion regulation strategies in the relationship between big five personality traits and anxiety and depression among Chinese firefighters. Frontiers in Public Health, 10 , 901686.

Taxer, J. L., & Frenzel, A. C. (2015). Facets of teachers’ emotional lives: A quantitative investigation of teachers’ genuine, faked, and hidden emotions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 49 , 78–88.

Taxer, J. L., & Gross, J. J. (2018). Emotion regulation in teachers: The “why” and “how”. Teaching and Teacher Education, 74 , 180–189.

Taylor, S., Kiley, M., & Humphrey, R. (2018). A handbook for doctoral supervisors (2nd ed.). Routledge.

To, K. H., & Yin, H. (2021). Being the weather gauge of mood: Demystifying the emotion regulation of kindergarten principals. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 30 (4), 315–325.

Veniger, K. A., & Kočar, S. (2018). The impact of academic discipline on university teaching and pedagogical training courses. Croatian Journal of Education, 20 (4), 1261–1298.

Wollast, R., Aelenei, C., Chevalère, J., Van der Linden, N., Galand, B., Azzi, A., Frenay, M., & Klein, O. (2023). Facing the dropout crisis among PhD candidates: The role of supervisor support in emotional well-being and intended doctoral persistence among men and women. Studies in Higher Education, 48 (6), 813–828.

Xie, A. B., & Zhu, Y. (2008). Retrospect and prospect of Chinese degree and graduate education development in the past three decades. Degree and Graduate Education, 11 , 19–29.

Xie, F. (2021). A study on Chinese EFL teachers’ work engagement: The predictability power of emotion regulation and teacher resilience. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 , 735969.

Xu, Y. (2021). Unpacking the emotional dimension of doctoral supervision: Supervisors’ emotions and emotion regulation strategies. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 , 651859.

Xu, Y., & Liu, J. A. (2023). Exploring and understanding perceived relationships between doctoral students and their supervisors in China. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10 (1), 1–10.

Yin, H. (2015). The effect of teachers’ emotional labour on teaching satisfaction: Moderation of emotional intelligence. Teachers and Teaching, 21 (7), 789–810.

Yin, H. (2016a). Knife-like mouth and tofu-like heart: Emotion regulation by Chinese teachers in classroom teaching. Social Psychology of Education, 19 (1), 1–22.

Yin, H., Huang, S., & Lv, L. (2018). A multilevel analysis of job characteristics, emotion regulation and teacher well-being: A job demands-resources model. Frontiers in Psychology, 9 , 2395.

Yin, R. K. (2016b). Qualitative research from start to finish (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

Zembylas, M. (2021). The affective turn in educational theory. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.1272 . Accessed 17 May 2024.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the participants who made this publication possible.

This work was supported by the Project of Outstanding Young and Middle-aged Scholars of Shandong University, Shandong University Program of Graduate Education and Reform (grant number XYJG2023037) and the General Research Fund of Hong Kong SAR (grant number CUHK 14608922).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Foreign Languages and Literature, Shandong University, Jinan, 250100, Shandong, China

Jiying Han & Lei Jin

Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Faculty of Education, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong, SAR, China

Hongbiao Yin

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Jiying Han: writing—original draft preparation, writing—reviewing and editing; Lei Jin: writing—original draft preparation, formal analysis; Hongbiao Yin: conceptualization, validation, writing—reviewing and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hongbiao Yin .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Han, J., Jin, L. & Yin, H. Supervisors’ emotion regulation in research supervision: navigating dilemmas in an accountability-based context. High Educ (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-024-01241-x

Download citation

Accepted : 13 May 2024

Published : 18 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-024-01241-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Emotion regulation
Research supervision
Accountability
Graduate education
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

IMAGES

What is the Role of a Dissertation Supervisor? (600 Words)
Choose Dissertation Supervisor
PPT
(PDF) Supervisor's Roles in Master's Thesis and PhD Dissertation
What is the role of a dissertation supervisor in a research paper
Choose Right Dissertation Supervisor

VIDEO

The role of the academic supervisor, Part 1 of 7
Balancing Act: Navigating Caregiving & Dissertation Writing as Doc Students
The Lab
PhD perfectionists! What if you could be okay with “good enough”?
Vlog 198
Why is Theory Important?

COMMENTS

PDF 7-A Supervisor'S Roles for Successful Thesis and Dissertation
Five supportive roles. of a supervisor involving the supervision system are specific technical support, broader intellectual support, administrative support, management, and personal support brings about the output of the study. A supervisor's roles. for successful thesis and dissertation is reported by using the survey on graduate students ...
Roles and responsibilities of supervisors
Effective graduate student supervision requires complex interactions between graduate students and their supervisors. The role of a supervisor is threefold: to advise graduate students, monitor their academic progress, and act as a mentor. ... can include fieldwork, conferences, course work and other work related to the thesis. Supervisors are ...
The Many Roles of a Thesis Supervisor
In conclusion, the role of a thesis supervisor goes beyond scientific guidance. The supervisor ensures good working conditions, can develop an extra-scientific relationship and build up strong ...
Effective master's thesis supervision
In working on their thesis, students are guided by a master's thesis supervisor (or advisor) who is responsible for fostering the required skills and competences through one-on-one or small-group teaching over an extended period of time, making master's thesis supervision a key teaching role for student development, as well as an increasingly ...
PDF Making the most of the relationship with your dissertation supervisor
AbstractWriting a dissertation can be stressful; one of the keys to success is for students to have a positive, fruitful relationship with their dissertation supervisor, whose guidance can be a great asset. Making the most of this important relationship starts with meeting the supervisor early in the process to agree on roles and expectations.
Supervising Dissertations
Dissertation supervision at the undergraduate, Master's, and PhD levels includes a close mentoring relationship between the student and supervisor (Fleming & Kowalsky, 2021; Todd et al., 2006; Todd & Smith, 2020).Developing the research project, mentoring, motivating, and providing feedback over several rounds is at the core of this relationship (Reguant et al., 2018), with broad scope for ...
Writing your dissertation
Agree a timetable of meetings at the start of your project and stick to it. Ensure that each meeting has a focus e.g. "setting a research problem", "analysing the data", with a clear set of questions to ask. Keep your supervisor informed of progress. Before each meeting send relevant work to your supervisor. This could include:
Dissertation Advisor 101: How To Work With Your Advisor
Establish (and stick to) a regular communication cycle. Develop a clear project plan upfront. Be proactive in engaging with problems. Navigate conflict like a diplomat. 1. Clarify roles on day one. Each university will have slightly different expectations, rules and norms in terms of the research advisor's role.
The journey of thesis supervisors from novice to expert: a grounded
Supervision is a well-defined term in the interpersonal relationship between thesis supervisors and students. A supervisor is designated to assist the student's development in terms of their research project [1,2,3].Faculty members supervise the students because qualified supervision leads to success on the part of the student, and it has moral, reputational, and financial outcomes for the ...
Research and project supervision (all levels): an introduction
Supervising projects, dissertations and research at UCL from undergraduate to PhD. ... Supervision can play a vital role in enabling students to fulfil their potential. Helping a student to become an independent researcher is a significant achievement - and can enhance your own teaching and research. ... Typically, a supervisor acts as a ...
Dissertation Supervision
Dissertation supervision is one of the most enjoyable forms of one-on-one teaching. Dissertation students are working on interesting questions that really matter, and for me, this makes it intrinsically more enjoyable than other forms of independent study. Dissertation supervision differs in other ways from other forms of independent study.
Duties of a thesis supervisor and the supervision plan
The degree programme steering group is responsible for ensuring that each student is appointed with a primary supervisor who is responsible for the supervision of their thesis. Additional supervisors may also be appointed. Your supervision plan can be used to agree on the responsibilities related to the supervision.
Working with Your Dissertation Supervisor
The role of the dissertation supervisor is to guide you through the process of your research project. Your supervisor may or may not have taught you before, but what's certain is that she's done a dissertation (or two) before and will be able to help you with yours. Most courses do their best to allocate a dissertation supervisor at an ...
dissertation supervision
A dissertation supervisor provides regular guidance and support to a student undertaking a dissertation. The supervisory relationship is built on clear communication and mutually agreed expectation in terms of progress. Working in partnership with the student a supervisor assists in the definition of a research topic the design of a programme ...
Responsibilities of the supervisor
The roles of supervisor and examiner are quite distinct, and it is not one of the roles of the supervisor to assess the thesis. The specific roles of supervisors may differ depending on the academic discipline, departmental practice and whether the member of staff is acting as lead, second, assistant, temporary or permanent supervisor.
The supervisor and student in Bachelor thesis supervision: a broad
The supporting role was visible among supervisor colleagues as well, showing that responsibilities may be shared not only between student and supervisor but also among a group of supervisors. Another balancing act which appears in the material is that between seeing the thesis as part of a process versus a product (cf. Svärd Citation 2013 , 49).
A Supervisor's Roles for Successful Thesis and Dissertation
Keywords: supervisor's roles, thesis and dissertation, graduate study Introduction The world in the 21st century is so demanding. There is greater struggle among people to be more qualified, knowledgeable, changeable, and adaptable to the situations. The competitiveness among the group of people, individuals, and organizations is taking place ...
The Supervisor of Undergraduate Dissertations in a Web-Based Context
The provision of support has always been central to the role of the undergraduate dissertation (UD) supervisor, but little research has been done on its contextual determinants in web-facilitated contexts. Beyond the general recognition of the importance of institutional support for the development of supervisors' technological and pedagogical knowledge and the importance of technology and ...
9
The role of the dissertation supervisor/tutor is to provide guidance and advice; they are not responsible for the quality of the submitted work. The responsibilities of the student include: To agree with the dissertation supervisor/tutor a suitable topic for research and work on that topic.
Supervisor's Roles in Master's Thesis and PhD Dissertation
parts. Following 36 roles can help a supervisor to maintain a stan dard. supervising in thesis and dissertati on in their early supervising career. 2. At a Glance Supervisor's Roles. 1 ...
A Review of the Roles of Dissertation Supervisors as Mentors
The role of a dissertation supervisor who becomes a mentor is to create an environment for career preparation suitable for doctoral students. Academic mentors have the responsibility of preparing PhD students to become skilled researchers in their field of study. According to Tribe & Tunariu, (2016) mentorship can be achieved by ensuring that ...
Supervisors' emotion regulation in research supervision ...
Within this system, research supervisors play a crucial role in research-based master's and doctoral education. In 1961, a supervisor accountability system was formalized, placing the responsibility on supervisors for overseeing students in research projects, journal publications, and dissertation completion.

Introduction

Knowledge of regulations, policies and procedures

Advice on program of study, research and professional development

Meetings/consultation

Financial assistance

Intellectual property

Publications

Withdrawal of supervisory duties

Accommodation

Related links

Academic & Employability Skills

Writing your dissertation - working with your supervisor

Your supervisor

Get organised

Share this:

Navigating the dissertation process: my tips for final years

8 ways to beat procrastination

My takeaways on how to write a scientific report

Dissertation Advisor 101

Overview: Working With Your Advisor

1. Clarify roles on day one

Need a helping hand?

2. Establish a regular communication cycle

3. Have a clear project plan

4. Engage with problems proactively

5. Navigate conflict like a diplomat

Recap: Key Takeaways

Psst... there’s more!

You Might Also Like:

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

The journey of thesis supervisors from novice to expert: a grounded theory study

Conclusions

Study design

Participants

Data collection

Data analysis

Ethical considerations

Theme 1: engagement

Curious observation

Evaluation with reality

Theme 2: supervision climate

Challenging shortcomings

Role ambiguity

Various performance

Theme 3: maturation

Reflection in action

Reflection on action

The core variable: interactive accountability

Strengths and limitations of the study

Implications of the study

Availability of data and materials

Acknowledgments

Author information

Contributions

Authors’ information

Corresponding author

Ethics declarations

Consent for publication

Competing interests

Additional information

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

BMC Medical Education

Research and project supervision (all levels): an introduction

What supervision means

Rules and regulations

Undergraduate and Masters supervision

Doctoral (PhD) supervision: introducing your student to the university

Establishing an effective relationship

Styles of supervision

Checking the student’s progress

Checking your own performance

Where to find help and support

External resources

Further information

Education events

Center for Teaching

Teaching Guides

Quick Links