Abstract
In this introductory chapter, we discuss how supervision of degree projects is an essential part of higher education, as students in many countries and disciplines are expected to write some form of final thesis (undergraduate projects, BA theses, MA theses, etc.) during their education. We highlight that supervision of degree projects is in many ways a complex activity, involving a range of activities in which students and supervisors are involved; supervision meetings, writing and commenting on texts, questions and answers by e-mail or telephone, etc., and also includes interaction and communication with other actors such as course coordinators, seminar leaders, fellow students and colleagues.
Furthermore, we discuss how academic supervision is undergoing a process of professionalisation and point out how this book contributes both to existing research on supervision primarily based on interviews, which discusses, for example, supervisors’ expectations, experiences and attitudes or proposes different models of academic supervision, and to research based on documented supervision interaction, which examines supervision practice in more detail, looking at what supervisors do and how they do it.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download chapter PDF
Keywords
In order to complete their education and obtain a degree, university students in various disciplines and academic programmes around the world are generally expected to produce some form of major written academic work or thesis. Such theses or degree projectsFootnote 1 are usually produced under the guidance of a supervisor, making supervision an extensive activity within higher education in many countries. This raises issues relating to teaching and learning in higher education, but also to time and funding. How do we ensure that all these people, time and money are well spent? And, given the time and financial frameworks available, how can supervision be designed to best contribute to student learning and development? This last question is the starting point for this book, in which we will discuss degree project supervision in relation to student independence and academic literacies.
Not all higher education students are required to produce an academic thesis as part of their education, as higher education systems and degree requirements vary between countries, universities and academic programmes. Nevertheless, in many parts of the world, this is a common requirement for students at bachelor’s and master’s level. Eurydice, the European Commission’s website providing information on higher education systems in the European Union, shows, for instance, that degree projects generally are a compulsory element for students to obtain a bachelor’s or master’s degree (European Commission 2023).Footnote 2 The Bologna Declaration on Higher Education, which focuses on students obtaining academic degrees that are relatively equivalent between participating countries, also includes countries outside the European Union, such as the United Kingdom, Norway and, earlier, Russia,Footnote 3 all of which follow the same organisation of higher education with a bachelor’s and master’s level (European Ministers in charge of Higher Education 1999; Curaj et al. 2012). Also outside Europe, a student thesis is commonly required for a bachelor’s or master’s degree, which means that a considerable amount of time and resources are devoted to the supervision of these degree projects, making this a significant part of the workload for many university lecturers and professors.
Academic supervision of student theses has traditionally been associated with an individualistic learning culture, where individuals, mainly students and supervisors, are part of a primarily dyadic pedagogical relationship, characterised by relatively informal relationships and meetings, where one person teaches and another is taught (Vehviläinen and Löfström 2016). In recent years, this view has been increasingly challenged and the social and collective aspects of supervision have been more widely acknowledged. This can be understood in terms of how practical, economic and pedagogical circumstances have made it common for students to be supervised in pairs or groups for all or part of the supervision process, with implications for supervision interactions and relationships. However, it can also be seen in the light of a greater focus on the collegial structures and collective learning of the academic community, with more attention being paid to the process in relation to the end product. Troelsen (2021, 2) describes this as the need to open up the individual supervisory space and make visible what is happening in the supervision situation.
One way to describe these processes is in terms of academic professionalisation, which takes place through several channels: pedagogical courses on academic supervision, supervision handbooks and research on supervision, as well as collegial meetings and discussions on supervision (cf. Van Veldhuizen et al. 2021; Brodin et al. 2020; Wels et al. 2017; Epstein et al. 2007; Lee 2019). Through these channels, networks and forums are created for the exchange of expertise and experience that help to clarify what actually happens in the supervision process, as well as the factors that can influence it in different ways. This book should be seen as part of this ongoing professionalisation, with the aim of shedding light on supervision practice and contributing to its development. The ambition is that the book will serve as a starting point for individual and collegial reflection on the supervision of degree projects/theses in higher education. It has a solid research base, based on both focus group interviews and documented supervision interactions, and offers useful tools for developing supervisory skills and competences, with a theoretical starting point for discussions. Our ambition is that it will be relevant to those new to supervision at the undergraduate level, such as doctoral students or new lecturers, as well as to experienced supervisors who wish to develop their skills and practice, and to groups of supervisors/colleagues within a particular discipline or academic programme who wish to work together on the collegial development of their degree project courses and supervision practice.
The primary audience for this book is thus academic teachers/lecturers involved in supervision, and more specifically academic teachers as reflective practitioners, as the book is both research-based and aimed at professional and pedagogical reflection on the supervision of degree projects/student theses. The research project from which the examples in the book are drawn was primarily concerned with teacher education and journalism education in Sweden and Russia, but, as the research and handbooks on academic supervision indicate, the issues and challenges surrounding the supervision of degree projects are similar in many disciplines within the social sciences and humanities and in many countries.
What Is Academic Supervision?
This book starts from an empirical perspective on academic supervision, which means that the focus is on how supervision is talked about and described by supervisors, but also on what supervision interaction might look like in practice. Drawing on a multidisciplinary research project in which we have interviewed supervisors and recorded and documented supervision processes, we will highlight and discuss different perspectives on supervision and supervision practice.
What is meant by supervision—how it is defined, what activities it consists of, what it should cover and what its main purpose should be—can be understood in many different ways. At a more general level, the purpose of supervision may be defined, for example, as teaching the student to learn (Manderson 1996) or contributing to a more general development of the student’s ability to work academically or scientifically (Lundström 2016, 89). However, the purpose of supervision can also be understood in a more specific sense, such as that supervision should help to socialise the individual into a particular disciplinary culture or tradition, or that the completion of the individual degree project or student thesis is the goal of supervision. Other differences in how supervision is understood and defined may concern whether it is seen as a form of teaching (Gustavsson and Eriksson 2015) or primarily as feedback or guidance (Lundström 2016), and whether it is perceived to involve only a few learning activities or a greater variety (Rienecker et al. 2019, 11).
This book focuses on the perspective and activities of supervisors and is therefore based on an inclusive and general definition of supervision, borrowed from Randi Brodersen (2009). Brodersen defines supervision as everything that supervisors do through oral and written communication in order to
-
1.
assist the student in the process of completing academic work within a specified timeframe and in achieving an academic degree
-
2.
promote student learning and practice of self-reflection
-
3.
socialise the student into the disciplinary community.
(Brodersen 2009, 181, author’s translation)
Based on this definition, we have chosen to consider all dialogical activities between supervisor and student as supervision, which, based on the material we start from, includes
-
oral communication in the form of supervision discussions between students and supervisors
-
written communication from supervisors in the form of comments on drafts of texts either sent or used as the basis for supervision discussions
-
written communication in the form of e-mails between supervisors and students.
Thus, when we talk about academic supervision in this book, we are referring to all these types of interaction between supervisors and students.
Another key feature of this book is our view of supervision as a social and collegial practice involving more actors than the individual supervisors and students. Course coordinators, programme directors, colleagues, examiners and fellow students, as well as governing documents and policies at different levels, are all important to what individual supervision practice looks like and what the interaction between supervisors and students will be like in a particular setting. In order to develop supervision practices within such local academic contexts, as well as at the individual level, there is a need for concepts and tools that can be used to share experiences and knowledge about supervision between these different actors. It is our ambition that this book will contribute to this.
Finally, we would like to return to the book’s focus on supervision practice. Much of the existing research on academic supervision is primarily based on interviews, where a number of aspects of supervision are described by different actors in the supervision context: expectations, experiences, cultural and disciplinary differences, identity perspectives, challenges and so on (e.g. Brodin 2018; Ding and Devine 2018; Vereijken et al. 2018; Jacobsen et al. 2021; Neupane Bastola and Hu 2021; Henttonen 2023). Several studies have also proposed different types of supervision models, for example, based on identified types of supervisor styles and patterns (e.g. Scholefield and Cox 2016; Nordentoft et al. 2013; Mainhard et al. 2009; Agricola et al. 2021; Knight and Botting 2016).
There is also research that focuses on the practical level of academic supervision, for example, based on recorded supervision conversations, which often examines specific aspects of the interaction and conversations between students and supervisors, such as asking questions or giving and receiving feedback (e.g. Björkman 2015; Henricson and Nelson 2017; Magnusson and Zackariasson 2021; Thanh Ta 2021, 2023; Vehviläinen 2003, 2009, 2012; Zhang and Hyland 2022; Schneijderberg 2021). Research based on this kind of material thus provides a further perspective on academic supervision by opening up to questions oriented towards supervision practice, such as What do supervisors do to show commitment and support to students, and how do they do it? How do different supervisor styles emerge in the supervisory interaction? and so on.
As this book is based on research that includes interviews with supervisors, as well as recorded supervision sessions and documented communications between supervisors and students, we are able to explore and discuss supervisors’ views and experiences of supervision, as well as the actual practice—what the interaction between supervisors and students may look like. Throughout the book, we will highlight in particular two important aspects of academic supervision of student theses: student independence and academic literacies. These are discussed from five main perspectives: (1) supervisors’ perceptions and understandings of student independence, (2) the relationship between supervisors and students, (3) the emotional dimension of supervision, (4) supervision tools for independence, and (5) the role of the supervisor not only as a guide and helper but also as an assessor of students’ work.
Notes
- 1.
This type of student work may be called a bachelor’s or master’s thesis, an essay, a degree project, a student dissertation or an undergraduate project, depending on the national and local academic context. In this book, we mainly use the terms degree project and student thesis, as these cover different types of academic theses at both bachelor and master levels.
- 2.
It has been estimated that more than 100,000 degree projects are written each year in Sweden alone, according to a report by Segerstad et al. (2008), based on statistics from Statistics Sweden, which may give some indication of the numbers at the European or global level.
- 3.
Russia became part of the Bologna process in 2003, which meant that the Russian higher education system became similar to the higher education systems in most European countries (Pursiainen and Medvedev 2005). The country is currently not part of the Bologna process and has started to make some changes to its higher education system. However, the system of a first cycle/bachelor’s degree with a compulsory degree project followed by a second cycle/master’s degree was still in use in 2023 (Study in Russia 2023; Kuzminov and Yudkevich 2022).
References
Agricola, Bas T., Frans J. Prins, Marieke F. van der Schaaf, and Jan van Tartwijk. 2021. Supervisor and Student Perspectives on Undergraduate Thesis Supervision in Higher Education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 65 (5): 877–897. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2020.1775115.
Björkman, Beyza. 2015. PhD supervisor-PhD Student Interactions in an English-medium Higher Education (HE) setting: Expressing Disagreement. European Journal of Applied Linguistics 3 (2): 205–229. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2015-0011.
Brodersen, Randi Benedikte. 2009. Akademisk vejledning og skrivning - for vejledere og studerende: Mere kollektiv og dialogisk vejledning giver mere laering of flere gode opgaver. Millimála 1: 173–217.
Brodin, Eva. 2018. The Stifling Silence around Scholarly Creativity in Doctoral Education: Experiences of Students and Supervisors in Four Disciplines. Higher Education 75 (4): 655–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0168-3.
Brodin, Eva, Jitka Lindén, Anders Sonesson, and Åsa Lindberg-Sand. 2020. Doctoral Supervision in Theory and Practice. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Curaj, Adrian, Peter Scott, Lazăr Vlasceanu, and Lesley Wilson. 2012. European Higher Education at the Crossroads: Between the Bologna Process and National Reforms. Dordrecht, Heidelberg, New York, London: Springer.
Ding, Qun, and Nesta Devine. 2018. Exploring the Supervision Experiences of Chinese Overseas Phd students in New Zealand. Knowledge Cultures 6 (1): 62–78. https://doi.org/10.22381/KC6120186.
Epstein, Debbie, Rebecca Boden, and Jane Kenway. 2007. Teaching and Supervision. London: Sage.
European Commission. 2023. Eurydice. Accessed November 28, 2023. https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/.
European Ministers in Charge of Higher Education. 1999. The Bologna Declaration of 19 June 1999: Joint Declaration of the European Ministers of Education. European Association of Institutions in Higher Education. Accessed January 09, 2017. https://www.eurashe.eu/library/bologna_1999_bologna-declaration-pdf/.
Gustavsson, Susanne, and Anita Eriksson. 2015. Blivande lärares frågor vid handledning – Gör jag en kvalitativ studie med kvantitativa inslag? Pedagogisk forskning i Sverige 20 (1–2): 79–99.
Henricson, Sofie, and Marie Nelson. 2017. Giving and Receiving Advice in Higher Education. Comparing Sweden-Swedish and Finland-Swedish Supervision Meetings. Journal of Pragmatics 109: 105–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.12.013.
Henttonen, Ani. 2023. Writing a Bachelor’s Thesis in Nursing Education: A Tool for the Future. Diss., Uppsala University.
Jacobsen, Michele, Sharon Friesen, and Sandra Becker. 2021. Online Supervision in a Professional Doctorate in Education: Cultivating Relational Trust Within Learning Alliances. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 58 (6): 635–646. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2021.1991425.
Knight, Rachael-Anne, and Nicola Botting. 2016. Organising Undergraduate Research Projects: Student-led and Academic-led Models. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education 8 (4): 455–468. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-07-2015-0054.
Kuzminov, Yaroslav, and Maria Yudkevich. 2022. Higher Education in Russia. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Lee, Anne. 2019. Successful Research Supervision: Advising students doing research. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
Lundström, Markus. 2016. Handledningens potential, examineringens låsningar – om uppsatsmomentets konflikt mellan formativ och summativ bedömning. Utbildning & lärande 10 (1): 88–93.
Magnusson, Jenny, and Maria Zackariasson. 2021. Handledning i praktiken - Om studenters självständighet och akademiska litteracitet. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Mainhard, Tim, Roeland van der Rijst, Jan van Tartwijk, and Theo Wubbels. 2009. A model for the Supervisor–Doctoral Student Relationship Higher Education 58 (3): 359–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9199-8.
Manderson, Desmond. 1996. Asking better Questions – Approaching the Process of Thesis Supervision. Journal of Legal Education 46 (3): 407–419.
Neupane Bastola, Madhu, and Guangwei Hu. 2021. Supervisory Feedback Across Disciplines: Does it meet Students’ Expectations? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 46 (3): 407–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1780562.
Nordentoft, Helle Merete, Rie Thomsen, and Gitte Wichmann-Hansen. 2013. Collective academic supervision: A model for participation and learning in higher education. Higher Education 65 (5): 581–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9564-x.
Pursiainen, Christer, and Sergey A. Medvedev. 2005. The Bologna Process and its Implications for Russia. The European Integration of Higher Education. Moscow: Russian European Centre for Economic Policy.
Rienecker, Lotte, Gitte Wichmann-Hansen, and Peter Stray Jørgensen. 2019. God vejledning af specialer, bacheloroppgaver og projekter. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.
Schneijderberg, Christian. 2021. Supervision Practices of Doctoral Education and Training. Studies in Higher Education (Dorchester-on-Thames) 46 (7): 1285–1295. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1689384.
Scholefield, Donna, and Georgina Cox. 2016. Evaluation of a Model of Dissertation Supervision for 3rd year B.Sc. Undergraduate Nursing Students. Nurse Education in Practice 17: 78–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2015.11.006.
Segerstad, Helene Hård af, Helen Setterud, and Göran Salerud. 2008. Att synliggöra handledning av självständiga arbeten som stöd för studenter och handledare. Slutrapport projekt. Linköping: Myndigheten för nätverk och samarbete inom högre utbildning.
Study in Russia. 2023. Study in Russia. Official Website about Higher Education in Russia for International Students. Accessed November 28, 2023. https://studyinrussia.ru/en/study-in-russia/info/levels-of-education/.
Thanh Ta, Binh. 2021. A Conversation Analytical Study of Story-openings in Advice-giving Episodes in Doctoral Research Supervision Meetings. Discourse Studies 23 (2): 213–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445620966925.
———. 2023. A Conversation Analytic Approach to Doctoral Supervision: Feedback, Advice, and Guidance. London: Routledge.
Troelsen, Rie. 2021. Det åbne vejledningsrum. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift 16 (31): 2.
Van Veldhuizen, Bert, Ron Oostdam, Mascha Enthoven, and Marco Snoek. 2021. Reflective Movements in the Professional Development of Teacher Educators as Supervisors of Student Research in Higher Education. European Journal of Teacher Education 44 (4): 452–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1777977.
Vehviläinen, Sanna. 2003. Avoiding Providing Solutions: Orienting to the Ideal of Students’ Self-Directedness in Counselling Interaction. Discourse Studies 5 (3): 389–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614456030053005.
———. 2009. Student-Initiated Advice in Academic Supervision. Research on Language and Social Interaction 42 (2): 163–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810902864560.
———. 2012. Question-prefaced Advice in Feedback Sequences of Finnish Academic Supervisions. In Advice in Discourse, ed. Holger Limberg and Miriam A. Locher, 31–52. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.
Vehviläinen, Sanna, and Erika Löfström. 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.
Vereijken, Mayke W.C., Roeland M. van der Rijst, Jan H. van Driel, and Friedo W. Dekker. 2018. Novice Supervisors’ Practices and Dilemmatic Space in Supervision of Student Research Projects. Teaching in Higher Education 23 (4): 522–542. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1414791.
Wels, Harry, Sioux McKenna, Jenny Clarence-Fincham, Chrissie Boughey, and J.H.M. van den Heuvel. 2017. Strengthening Postgraduate Supervision. Stellenbosch: SUN Press.
Zhang, Yan, and Ken Hyland. 2022. Responding to Supervisory Feedback: Mediated Positioning in Thesis Writing. Written Communication 39 (2): 171–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883211069901.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, sharing, 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 license and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this license to share adapted material derived from this chapter or parts of it.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license 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.
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zackariasson, M., Magnusson, J. (2024). Introduction. In: Supervising Student Independence. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66371-0_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66371-0_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-66370-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-66371-0
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)