Supervisors’ approaches to supervision and how these relate to conceptions of research

TY - CONF

T1 - Supervisors’ approaches to supervision and how these relate to conceptions of research

AU - Kobayashi, Sofie

N1 - Conference code: 10

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - Supervisors' approaches to supervision have been researched from different perspectives by various researchers, leading to various conceptual frameworks of supervision. These frameworks enable supervisors to reflect on their own practice (e.g. Lee 2008; Wright et al. 2007). Supervisors' conceptions of research have also been studied by various authors (e.g. Kiley and Mullins 2005), leading to discipline-neutral conceptual frameworks. Supervisors can use these frameworks in their communication about research with students as a common conceptual language to avoid miscommunication. To my knowledge we are short of empirical studies that can shed light on the relations between supervisors' conceptions of research and their approaches to supervision. This work which lies in the research-teaching nexus arena of doctoral supervision has the potential to provide new insights into supervision by identifying how supervision is different or similar to research. Møller Madsen and Winsløw (2009) have investigated researchers' understanding of relations between research and teaching in two disciplines: Mathematics and Physical Geography using Chevallard's anthropological theory of didactics (Chevallard 2006). This approach enables a deeper understanding of the actual practices within a discipline. In this pilot study for my doctoral research into doctoral supervision in life sciences I will use the above approach to study supervisors' conceptions of research to see how these relate to their approaches to supervision, both as reflection through interviews, and in practice through the observation of supervision sessions.

AB - Supervisors' approaches to supervision have been researched from different perspectives by various researchers, leading to various conceptual frameworks of supervision. These frameworks enable supervisors to reflect on their own practice (e.g. Lee 2008; Wright et al. 2007). Supervisors' conceptions of research have also been studied by various authors (e.g. Kiley and Mullins 2005), leading to discipline-neutral conceptual frameworks. Supervisors can use these frameworks in their communication about research with students as a common conceptual language to avoid miscommunication. To my knowledge we are short of empirical studies that can shed light on the relations between supervisors' conceptions of research and their approaches to supervision. This work which lies in the research-teaching nexus arena of doctoral supervision has the potential to provide new insights into supervision by identifying how supervision is different or similar to research. Møller Madsen and Winsløw (2009) have investigated researchers' understanding of relations between research and teaching in two disciplines: Mathematics and Physical Geography using Chevallard's anthropological theory of didactics (Chevallard 2006). This approach enables a deeper understanding of the actual practices within a discipline. In this pilot study for my doctoral research into doctoral supervision in life sciences I will use the above approach to study supervisors' conceptions of research to see how these relate to their approaches to supervision, both as reflection through interviews, and in practice through the observation of supervision sessions.

M3 - Poster

T2 - Quality in Postgraduate Research

Y2 - 17 April 2012 through 19 April 2012

ER -