This unfathomable thing called supervision: negotiating better working relationships with supervisors

Abstract

Supervision has been a ‘hot’ topic on the postgraduate research agenda in recent years. This reflects the high importance of the supervisory relationship in completion of research theses and completion on tune, as well as the dissatisfaction sometimes voiced by students about their supervisory experiences. The varied and complex issues of postgraduate research supervision have now received considerable coverage in the literature (D. & K. Battersby, 1980; Powles, 1988 & 1994; Moses, 1984, 1988 &1990; Ballard & Clanchy, 1993; Parry & Hayden, 1994; Cullen et al, 1994; Acker et al ,1994). Special attention has been given to reviewing supervisors’ current practices and procedures, to improving practice, to initiating development workshops, training programs and so forth (Welsh, 1982; Christopherson et al, 1983; Connell, 1985; Ballard & Clanchy, 1991; Conrad, 1992; Moses, 1985 &1992; Nightingale, 1992; Powles, 1993; Russell, 1994; Whittle, 1994; Willcoxson, 1994). Expansive manuals detailing procedures for conducting residential workshop programs on postgraduate supervision, such as that edited by Zuber-Skerritt, have also appeared (1992). In short, there has been extensive scrutiny of the subject in the literature. <P> The push behind the more ‘practical’ literature has been to increase the effectiveness of supervisors to supervise. Listening to conference participants detail the various initiatives they have introduced in their respective universities also reinforces my impression of focussed attention on the supervisor. It is important that this push to improve supervisory practice continues. It is also reasonable to ask what students themselves might be able to contribute to this two-way relationship. The question is though, whether students can take a more active role in determining what goes on in supervision, given the unequal power relations of which they are often acutely aware, particularly in the early stages of their degrees. Further questions are: if they can, why do so many seem not to? what might be the value for students generally in becoming more active on their own behalf? and what can be done to help them in this ? <P> These questions have arisen from my advisory work with research students during the past five years. The questioning began, however, with submission of my own PhD and the realisation of how much time I had lost because of my own inefficiencies, often due to ignorance of a procedural kind. Since then, I have heard many completing PhDs express the same view. Only when it is all over do we become aware of how best to proceed, not only with the research and writing but also with a range of academic matters including handling supervision. There is not much comfort in knowing retrospectively. Some of this knowledge might be put to good use in future research projects, but most (there are a crazy few) will never again do a PhD.