Search

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to describe the challenges of post-traditional, distance PhD supervision and suggest pedagogical interventions to bridge the distance. The paper investigates the skills and understandings necessary for mediating the supervisor-supervisee dyad within faceless encounters. Design/methodology/approach – Grounded in a literature review and using interview-based narratives, the paper describes a case study investigating the needs and experiences of three part-time, trans-Tasman PhD students, writing practitioner- or practice-led research (PLR) higher degrees by research (HDR) by artefact and exegesis. Findings – Findings reveal the importance of proactivity, dialogue and mutual trust and the necessity of knowing which interactions, including e-moderated supervisions and fast-turnaround electronic communications, potentially help to bridge the gulf. Research limitations/implications – While this small-scale study makes no major claims that results can be generalised, the results are pertinent to those involved in distance HDR supervision, particularly in PLR. Originality/value – As distance supervisions become increasingly commonplace, HDR supervisors need to build best practice models from shared personal and professional understandings of effective supervisory interventions in this mode. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to focus on pedagogy as a crucial element in postgraduate research undertakings, implying active involvement of both student and supervisor in process of teaching and learning. Design/methodology/approach – Drawing on Australian higher degree research supervision practice to illustrate their argument, the authors take issue with reliance on traditional Oxbridge conventions as informing dominant practices of supervision of postgraduate research studies and suggest pedagogy as intentional and systematic intervention that acknowledges the problematic natures of relationships between teaching, learning, and knowledge production as integral to supervision and research studies. Findings – The authors examine issues of discursive practice and the problematic nature of power differentials in supervisor-supervisee relationships, and the taken-for-grantedness of discursive practice of such relationships. The authors do this from the perspective of the student involved in higher degree research programs, a departure from the bulk of the literature that has as its focus the perspective of the supervisor and/or the institution. Originality/value – The paper examines the perspective of the student involved in higher degree research programs, a departure from the bulk of the literature that has as its focus the perspective of the supervisor and/or the institution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]