Today’s session background
Proposed research project
Student dimension
Staff dimension
CLT group UG / PG
I want to cover:
Background thoughts
Data from student questionnaire
Reflections on how we supervise
Moving forward
UG research projects
Often seen as the last but most challenging obstacle
Should be about their first big project
Which lays foundations for a developmental pathway
And makes them part of an academic research community
Models of supervision
‘Technical rationality’
‘Negotiated order’ Actions of students and supervisors based on
perspectives derived from:
Past / present experiences Interactions with others Interpretations of situations (Wisker, 2005: 25-29)
supervision
Is a socially constructed product of mutual expectations between students and supervisors and subject to negotiation and change over time
The interface is a personal relationship, often 1-2-1
UG ITE
Research Preparation
Preparation for tutorial time
Mostly number of hours
Suggestions about how to use effectively
Student responsibility
Student questionnaire
Primary 3 – 7
Primary 5 – 11
Upper Primary Lower Secondary
2 Year BA
CPD generic UG
Satisfied with their tutorial time
Satisfied Students Tutorial hours
11 3 / 3.5 hours
19 2 / 2.5 hours
4 1 hour
0 30 mins
Total = 34
Wanted more on top of what?
Students Had tutor hours
29 3 / 3.5 hours
32 2 / 2.5 hours
29 1 hour
17 30 mins
Total = 107
Preference for tutorial time allocation
Allocation- hours
As Given Extra hour
Extra 2 hours
Extra 3 hours
Totals
3+ 11 16 10 3 40
2-3 19 20 3 9 51
1 4 13 12 4 33
30 mins 0 6 6 5 17
Totals 34 55 31 21 141
Supervision format
All but 1 had individual time with tutor
The majority had email contact with tutor
19 experienced paired or small group tutorials (some overlap, so less)
Preferences
Overwhelmingly for one to one tutorials
Combined 1-2-1 + email the next most popular
2/19 enjoyed the shared tutorial
Student expectations of tutor
Guidance on subject content Help with structuring your writing Help with generating ideas Supporting writing skills Critiquing your work
Student expectations of tutor
No clear pattern
Predominantly subject guidance
Followed by critique of draft work
Supervisors helpful?
Largely yes: 134 / 164 thought so
Some ‘very helpful’
Calming – reassuring – positive – supportive
laughed – respectful – easy to contact
provide ideas – honest - critical - helpful
What helpful supervisors did
Read work – clarified ideas Reassured checked work – provided feedback answered emails built confidence allowed discussion told student about new research arranged meetings
Unsatisfactory tutors
About 30 were mentioned
Maybe 30 tutors or a smaller number with multiple tutees
Main complaints were access and availability
Illness / absence / change of tutor
Unsatisfactory tutors
Were difficult to meet did not answer emails at all - or did so too
late didn’t seem clear about regulations didn’t provide feedback or no immediate
feedback were harshly critical did not provide encouragement – negative
Supervision tasks
Please think about supervision tasks and fill in the flip charts available
What disrupts supervision?
Preparation of tutors and students
Recognition of the product
Recognition of the process
Indicators along the way
Conceptual development
How do we promote this?
How do we recognise it
How do we help the student to recognise this?
Identity of ‘research worker’
May not be wanted May not be clear May not be seen as useful/professional May be seen as superfluous May not want to move on!
Make explicit:
Previous experience of supervision
personal anchors
personal identity issues
to excavate fundamental ideas about learning