This paper documents the early stages of the PhD supervision process from my perspective as a new supervisor. It draws on experiences prior to and during a programme of training and support for new PhD supervisors, exploring its impact on my professional knowledge and practice. Given what Delamont et al (1997: 24) highlight as the challenges caused by) “the inexperienced supervisor, the inexperienced student, and the (possible) failure to get the relationship going”, the reflection on these early stages is clearly important for supervisors, students and indeed institutions who wish to reduce attrition rates from doctoral programmes. Articulations of my deeper understanding of the PhD process and significance in the HE context provide the backdrop for the subsequent reflections on impact on practice, through a series of critical incidents, in which the definition of criticality is based on the justification, significance, or meaning given to incidents by participants (Angelides, 2001). Using Tripp’s (1993) framework for analysis, I explore aspects of the supervision process, focusing in particular on concepts of the nature and role of the supervision process, and the styles through which it may effectively operate in the early stages.
|Publication status||Published - 2010|
|Event||Centre for Learner Identity Studies (CLIS) conference - Southport, United Kingdom|
Duration: 18 Jun 2010 → …
|Conference||Centre for Learner Identity Studies (CLIS) conference|
|Period||18/06/10 → …|