2016
DOI: 10.20853/30-4-613
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The benefits of using small supervisor-initiated groups to supervise master's research

Abstract: This article is based on an autoethnographic study I carried out between 2004 and 2015 to explore the benefits of group supervision. I obtained my data from self-observations and self-reflections, documents and artefacts of my supervision practice, observations, and field notes on both the context and the students. I also collected external data from my (mostly master's) students through interactive interviews, informal conversations, e-mail exchanges and recordings of group supervision sessions. Most group su… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The PGS literature identifies benefits in the practice in relation to different supervision models and practices (Bitzer and Albertyn, 2011; O'Neil et al , 2016; Rambe and Mkono, 2019; Snowden and Halsall, 2018). This literature, however, does not pay much attention to the benefits we identified as special, which we enjoyed from the CPS the relationships.…”
Section: The Dialectical Space For Colleague Postgraduate Supervisionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The PGS literature identifies benefits in the practice in relation to different supervision models and practices (Bitzer and Albertyn, 2011; O'Neil et al , 2016; Rambe and Mkono, 2019; Snowden and Halsall, 2018). This literature, however, does not pay much attention to the benefits we identified as special, which we enjoyed from the CPS the relationships.…”
Section: The Dialectical Space For Colleague Postgraduate Supervisionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the traditional apprenticeship supervision model remains dominant (Backhouse, 2010;Pillay & Balfour, 2011), despite critiques and limitations of this model (Heyns et al, 2019;McKenna, 2017;Nkoane, 2014). Various scholars have explored alternative approaches to supervision (Bitzer & Albertyn, 2011;Nkoane, 2014), including supervisor-initiated groups (O'Neil et al, 2016), communities of doctoral scholars (McKenna, 2017), or person-centred supervision (Heyns et al, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%