Abstract
The idea of peer and group learning is not new in higher education. It has been applied and studied extensively in courses, programmes, and other formal classroom contexts. However, there is not, as yet, a correspondingly large body of research into peer learning in supervision contexts. In this article we address the challenges experienced by supervisors practising Collective Academic Supervision (CAS) as part of a Master Programme in Guidance and Counselling. The data stem from a research and development project and consist of video footage from three collegial development seminars in which five supervisors at master’s level watched and discussed video footage of their own supervision of practices. The article, therefore, adds to existing literature on supervision in higher education by illuminating supervisors’ perspective on collective supervision processes. Our analysis reveals three major challenges experienced by the supervisors: (1) facilitating equal participation within heterogeneous student groups, (2) balancing between providing answers and involving students, (3) identifying and developing the students’ analytical skills. We discuss the practical implications of these challenges and conclude that metacommunication regarding individual expectations and group behaviour should be part of supervisors’ repertoire of strategies when practicing CAS. However, more research is needed regarding supervisors’ dilemmas, roles and responsibilities in collective supervision, as well as modes of interaction between supervisors and students in different study contexts.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andersen, & Tom, (1991). The reflecting team: Dialogues and dialogues about the dialogues. New York: Norton & Co.
Baltzersen, R. K. (2013). The importance of metacommunication in supervision processes. International Journal of Higher Education, 2(2), 128–140.
Bligh, D. (2000). What’s the point in discussion?. Exeter: Intellect Books.
Boud, D., & Lee, A. (2005). ‘Peer learning’ as pedagogic discourse for research education. Studies in Higher Education, 30(5), 501–516.
Bruce, C. (2008). Towards a pedagogy of supervision in the technology disciplines. Queensland University of Technology. Australia: Australian Learning and Teaching Council.
Caffarella, R., & Barnett, B. (2000). Teaching doctoral students to become scholarly writers: The importance of giving and receiving critiques. Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 39–51.
Choy, S., Delahaye, B.L., & Saggers, B. (2014). Developing learning cohorts for postgraduate research degrees. The Australian educational researcher, 1–16. doi: 10.1007/s13384-014-0147-y.
Cumming, J. (2009). The doctoral experience in science: Challenging the current orthodoxy. British Educational Research Journal, 35(6), 877–890.
Delamont, S., Atkonson, P., & Parry, O. (2004). Supervising the doctorate—A guide to success ( (2nd ed.). NY: Open University Press.
Dempsey, N. (2010). Stimulated recall interviews in ethnography. Qualitative Sociology,. doi:10.1007/s11133-010-9157-x.
Deuchar, R. (2008). Facilitator, director or critical friend?: Contradiction and congruence in doctoral supervision styles. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(4), 489–500.
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.
Eley, A., & Murray, R. (2009). How to be an effective supervisor—Best practice in research student supervision. NY: Open University Press.
Fenge, L.-A. (2012). Enhancing the doctoral journey: The role of group supervision in supporting collaborative learning and creativity. Studies in Higher Education, 37(4), 401–414.
Fisher, K. (2006). Peer support groups. In C. Denholm & T. Evans (Eds.), Doctorates down under: Keys to successful doctoral study in Australia and New Zealand (pp. 41–49). Camberwell, Victoria: Acer Press.
Gardner, S. K. (2007). I heard it through the grapevine”: Doctoral student socialization in chemistry and history. Higher Education,. doi:10.1007/s10734-006-9020-x.
Gardner, S. K. (2009). Conceptualizing success in doctoral education: Perspectives of faculty in seven disciplines. The Review of Higher Education, 32(3), 383–406.
Govender, K., & Dhunpath, R. (2011) Perspectives in education: The changing face of doctoral education in South Africa [Special Issue 3]. vol. 29, 88–99.
Haksever, A. M., & Manisali, E. (2000). Assessing supervision requirements of PhD students. European Journal of Engineering Education, 25(1), 19–32.
Handal, G. (2007). Veilederen: Guru eller kritisk venn? In T. Kroksmark & K. Åberg (Eds.), Veiledning i pedagogisk arbeid (pp. 23–33). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.
Heath, T. (2002). A quantitative analysis of PhD students’ views of supervision. Higher Education Research and Development, 21(1), 41–53.
Hornstrup, C.et al.(2008). Team coaching and reflecting teams. Macmann Berg. Assessed 1107 2014 at http://www.taosinstitute.net/Websites/taos/Images/ResourcesManuscripts/Hornstrup-Team_coaching_and_reflecting_teams.pdf.
Hoskins, C. M., & Goldberg, A. D. (2005). Doctoral student persistence in counselor education programs: Student-program match. Counselor Education and Supervision, 44(3), 175–188.
Hunt, L., Chalmers, D., & MacDonald, R. (2012). Effective classroom teaching. In L. Hunt & D. Chalmers (Eds.), University teaching in focus. A learning-centred approach (pp. 21–37). Sydney: ACER Press.
Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39–103.
Kvale, S. (1996). interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. London: Sage.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, A., & Boud, D. (2003). Writing groups, change and academic identity: Research development as local practice. Studies in Higher Education, 28(2), 187–200.
Lillejord, S., & Dysthe, O. (2008). Productive learning spaces—A theoretical discussion based on two cases. Journal of Education and Work,. doi:10.1080/13639080801957154.
Malfroy, J. (2005). Doctoral supervision, workplace research and the changing pedagogic practices. Higher Education Research and Development, 24(2), 165–178.
Manathunga, C. (2012). Supervisors watching supervisors: The deconstructive possibilities and tensions of team supervision. Australian Universities’ Review, 54(1), 29–37.
Manathunga, C., & Goozée, J. (2007). Challenging the dual assumption of the ‘always/already’ autonomous student and effective supervisor. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(3), 309–322.
Neumann, R. (2003). The doctoral education experience. Diversity and complexity. Canberra: Australian Department of Education Science and Training.
Nordentoft, H. M., Thomsen, R., & Wichmann-Hansen, G. (2013). Collective academic supervision: A model for participation and learning in higher education. Higher Education, 65(5), 581–593.
Northedge, A. (2003). Rethinking teaching in the context of diversity. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(1), 17–32.
Parker, R. (2009). A learning community approach to doctoral education in the social sciences. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(1), 43–54.
Pearson, M. (2005). Framing research on doctoral education in Australia in a global context. Higher Education Research and Development, 24(2), 119–134.
Pearson, M., & Brew, A. (2002). Research training and supervision development. Studies in Higher Education, 27(2), 135–150.
Pole, C. (1998). Joint supervision and the PhD: Safety net or panacea? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 23(3), 259–271.
Samara, A. (2006). Group supervision in graduate education: A process of supervision skill development and text improvement. Higher Education Research and Development, 25(2), 115–129.
Shacham, M., & Od-Cohen, Y. (2009). Rethinking PhD learning incorporating communities of practice. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46(3), 279–292.
Stracke, E. (2010). Undertaking the journey together: Peer learning for a successful and enjoyable PhD experience. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 7(1), 8.
Taylor, S., & Beasley, N. (2005). A handbook for doctoral supervisors. London: Routledge.
Thomsen, R., & Nordentoft, H. M. (2011). Kollektiv Akademisk Vejledning - et bud på en ændret organisering af vejledningen på universitetet. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 7(2), 106–116.
Ulriksen, L. (2009). The implied student. Studies in Higher Education, 34(5), 517–532.
Vekkaila, J., Pyhältö, K., Hakkarainen, K., Keskinen, J., & Lonka, K. (2012). Doctoral students’ key learning experiences in the natural sciences. International Journal for Researcher Development, 3(2), 154–183.
Walker, M., & Thomson, P. (Eds.). (2010). The Routledge doctoral supervisor’s companion—supporting effective research in education and the social sciences. London: Routledge.
Watts, Jacqueline H. (2010). Team supervision of the doctorate: Managing roles, relationships and contradictions. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(3), 335–339. doi:10.1080/13562511003740908.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Westberg, J., & Jason, H. (1996). Fostering learning in small groups. A practica guide. New York: Springer.
Wisker, G., Robinson, G., Trafford, V., Creighton, E., & Warnes, M. (2003). Recognising and overcoming dissonance in postgraduate student research. Studies in Higher Education, 28(1), 91–105.
Woolhouse, J. (2002). Supervising dissertation projects: Expectations of supervisors and students. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 39(2), 137–144.
Wright, T., & Cochrane, R. (2000). Factors influencing successful submission of PhD theses. Studies in Higher Education, 25(2), 181–195.
Yeatman, A. (1995). Making supervision relationships accountable: Graduate student lo gs. Australian Universities’ Review, 38(2), 9–11.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wichmann-Hansen, G., Thomsen, R. & Nordentoft, H.M. Challenges in Collective Academic Supervision: supervisors’ experiences from a Master Programme in Guidance and Counselling. High Educ 70, 19–33 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9821-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9821-2