Abstract
Development of researchers through higher degree research studies is a high priority in most universities. Yet, research about supervision as pedagogy and models of supervision is only recently gained increasing attention. Charged with producing good researchers within very limited resources, academics are constantly looking for more efficient models of supervision for higher degree research students. A cohort model of supervision promises several efficiencies, but we argue that its success lies importantly on how well the cohort is developed specifically for higher degree research studies. We drew on a growing body of literature on higher degree research supervision to design, implement and evaluate our approach to developing a cohort of seven students enrolled in the Master of Education (Research) degree. Our approach included four provisions: initial residential workshop, development of a learning community, nourishing scholarship, and ongoing learning opportunities. The four provisions resulted in gradually developing an environment and culture that students found very supportive and nurturing. This paper is based on the findings from data collected from student evaluations in the first year of studies, feedback from the cohort’s sponsor, and our reflective notes. The evaluation substantiated the value in investing time and resources for purposely developing a cohort for higher degree research studies. Whether the cohorts are sponsored or not, universities will still need to invest time and resources for cohort development if a cohort model is intended to gain wider efficiencies in supervision of higher degree research students.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brookfield, S. D., & Preskill, S. (1999). Discussion as a way of teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Burnett, P. C. (1999). The supervision of doctoral dissertation using a collaborative cohort model. Counselor Education and Supervision, 39(1), 46–52.
Calma, A. (2007). Postgraduate supervision in the Philippines: Setting the research agenda. The Asia Pacific-Education Research, 16, 91–100.
Carr, E. C. J., Galvin, K. T., & Todres, L. (2010). Facilitating nourished scholarship through cohort supervision in a professional doctorate programme. Encyclopaedia, 27, 11–16.
Choy, S., & Delahaye, B. (2011). Partnerships between universities and workplaces: Some challenges for work integrated learning. Studies in Continuing Education, 33(2), 157–172.
Cooner, T. S. (2010). Creating opportunities for students in large cohorts to reflect in and on practice: Lessons learnt from a formative evaluation of students’ experiences of a technology-enhanced blended learning design. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), 271–286.
De Lange, N., Pillay, G., & Chikoko, V. (2011). Doctoral learning: A case for a cohort model of supervision and support. South African Journal of Education, 31, 15–30.
De Valero, Y. (2001). Departmental factors affecting time-to-degree and completion rates of doctoral students at one land grant research institute. Journal of Higher Education, 72(3), 341–367.
Delahaye, B. L. (2011). Human Resource Development: Managing t learning and knowledge capital (3rd ed.). Victoria: University Press.
Delahaye, B. L. & Choy, S. (2007). Using work integrated learning for management development: Some key elements for success. Australia and New Zealand Association of Management conference, 4–8 Dec, Sydney.
Dinsmore, J. & Wenger, K. (2006). Relationships in pre-service teacher preparation: From cohorts to communities. Teacher Education Quarterly, Winter, p. 57–74.
Drago-Severson, E., Helsing, D., Kegan, R., Popp, N., Broderick, M., & Portnow, K. (2001). The power of a cohort and of collaborative groups, focus on basics. Connecting Research & Practice, 5(B), 15–22.
Dysthe, O., Samara, A., & Westrheim, K. (2006). Multivoiced supervision of Master’s students: A case study of alternative supervision practices in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), 299–318.
Fosnot, C. T. (1996). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Franke, A., & Arvidsson, B. (2011). Research supervisors’ different ways of experiencing supervision of doctoral students. Studies in Higher Education, 36(1), 7–19.
Ge, X., & Hardre, P. L. (2010). Self-processes and learning environment as influences in the development of expertise in instructional design. Learning Environment Research, 13, 23–41.
Glover, S. (2010). Cohort-based Supervision of Postgraduate Creative Writers: The effectiveness of the university-based writers’ workshop. New writing. The International Journal for the Practice and Theory of Creative Writing, 7(2), 123–136.
Hill, M. F., & Haigh, M. A. (2012). Creating a culture of research in teacher education: Learning research within communities of practice. Studies in Higher Education, 37(8), 971–988.
Hockey, J. (1996). Motive and meaning amongst PhD supervisors in the social sciences. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 17(4), 489–506.
Imel, S. (2002). Adult learning in cohort groups: Practice application. Brief No. 24. Columbus, OH, Centre on Education and Training for Employment: The Ohio State University.
Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2013). Action research planner: Doing critical participatory action research. Singapore: Springer.
Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2007). Implementing the four levels: A practical guide for effective evaluation of training programs. San Francisco: Berrett Koehler.
Lave, W., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, A. (2008). How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision. Guildford, UK: Information Services: University of Surrey.
Maher, M. A. (2004). What really happens in cohorts? About Campus, July–August, 18–23
Manathunga, C., & Goozee, J. (2007). Challenging the dual assumption of the ‘always/already’ autonomous student and effective supervisor. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(3), 309–322.
McCallin, A., & Nayar, S. (2012). Postgraduate research supervision: A critical review of current practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(1), 63–74.
Mezirow, J. (2009). Transformative learning theory. In J. Mezirow and E. W Taylor (Eds.) Transformational learning in practice: Insights from community, workplace and higher education (pp. 18–32). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mouton, J. (1996). Understanding social research. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nonaka, I., & von Krogh, G. (2009). Tacit knowledge and knowledge conversion: Controversy and advancement in organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 20(3), 635–652.
Parker, R. (2009). A learning community approach to doctoral education in social sciences. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(1), 43–54.
Probst, G., & Borzillo, S. (2008). Why communities of practice succeed and why they fail. European Management Journal, 26(5), 335–347.
Revans, R. W. (1988). ABC of action learning. Charwell-Bratt: Kent.
Saltiel, I., & Russo, C. (2001). Cohort programming and learning: Improving educational experiences for adult learners. Malabar, FL: Krieger.
Tisdell, E. J., Strohschen, G. L. E., Carver, M. L., Corrigan, P., Nash, J., Nelson, M., et al. (2004). Cohort learning online in graduate higher education: Constructing knowledge in cyber community. Educational Technology & Society, 7(1), 115–127.
Van Rensburg, H., & Danaher, P. A. (2009). Assessment in different dimensions. In J. Milton, C. Hall, J. Lang, G. Allan, & M. Nomikoudis (Eds.), Teaching and learning in tertiary education conference proceedings. Melbourne: Learning and teaching unit, RMIT University.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wisker, G., Robinson, G., & Shacham, M. (2007). Postgraduate research success: Communities of practice involving cohorts, guardian supervisors and online communities. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(3), 301–320.
Acknowledgments
We acknowledge the contributions of the Director, Strategy and Research (Mr Peter Skippington) and Senior Strategy Officer (Ms Judy Gronold) of the Queensland VET Development Centre for assistance in developing the cohort. We appreciate very much the support and input of Queensland University of Technology staff who assisted with the workshops. We thank the cohort members for participation in this research on the cohort model.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Choy, S., Delahaye, B.L. & Saggers, B. Developing learning cohorts for postgraduate research degrees. Aust. Educ. Res. 42, 19–34 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-014-0147-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-014-0147-y