Supervision as transacting in the social space
5.2 Participants’ conception of supervision as transacting in the social space
5.2.1 Transacting with university-assigned supervisors
The relationship between supervisees and supervisors can either be empowering or disempowering. This relationship arises due to the task that needs to be accomplished in
121 supervision, which is the thesis development, as shaped by the supervision approach/style that supervisors adopt. Two participants noted this conception, by saying:
It depends on whether you have something to present to your supervisor or not. At times, also supervisor availability also determines the frequency of supervision meetings (Kenneth, 11b).
All they want to see is your work and you must present it chapter by chapter… So, it is not regular at all (Naomi, 14a).
Here, the participants reveal that contact with the supervisors (supervision meetings) depend very much on the rate of progress of the individual student, in terms of developing the thesis. In other words, the frequency of contact with the supervisor is tied to the ability of the student to develop at least a chapter of the thesis within a reasonable time-frame. This shows that the thesis is central to the supervision relationship. But, considering that students must produce a complete chapter before consultation, it means that supervision meetings will, as a minimum, be erratic. The implication is that doctoral students would be denied the opportunity of getting regular guidance from supervisors through constant exchanges, which entail receiving and giving feedback, which is critical to student development as newcomer researchers. Thus, minimal interaction/contact between doctoral students and supervisors could inhibit doctoral students’ growth towards autonomy in learning, as the processes of learning that the doctoral students need to go through may be neglected.
Also, the data seem to suggest that although supervisors may be concerned with the development of the chapters of the thesis (thesis-focused), yet those supervisors cannot develop the thesis themselves except through the doctoral student. This means that the doctoral student is central to the success, or otherwise, of the tasks that are expected to be accomplished in supervision, in the same way that the thesis and the supervisor are both equally important. In line with this view, one of the participants revealed how the supervisor enhanced the success of his defence, thus:
She actually sat us down for a period of three hours, asking us to present our work the way we would present it on that day…So everyone of us stood up and presented…After that, she looked at areas we have failed, and then gave some directives – ‘this is not what you should
122 do’ and so on. She also gave commendations that ‘yes you are quite in order, sustain that tempo’ and things like that (Abel, 1a).
The data here show that for the supervisor to prepare her doctoral students for the viva proposal defence, she set aside time and gave each of her students the opportunity to personally present their studies to her. By so doing, she was able to carry out a diagnosis of their work, hence, she identified the strengths and weaknesses and then provided feedback to strengthen the weak areas.
Looking at the data critically, it seems clear that the supervisor adopted a very directive and commandeering approach in giving feedback to her doctoral students, instead of providing some constructive feedback. Arguably, there is no provision for a two-way communication between the supervisor and the doctoral students, whereby students exercise independent thinking. On the contrary, the supervisor provides instructive feedbacks to students, almost as with an official and formal communiqué, which needs to be obeyed or acted upon. This raises questions with regards to ownership of the ideas/arguments/thesis.
Another participant revealed a varied way in which supervisors empower doctoral student, as follows:
…she had told me that I need to belong to a recognised organisation/association. So, I went and registered with ABEN. So, since then, I make sure that, any time there is a conference, I attend and present a paper (Cecelia, 3b).
In analysing the data, the supervisor tends to create an awareness for his doctoral student in order to understand the necessity of being a member of a professional body which is a community of practice. As a result, the doctoral student did not only become a registered member of Association of Business Educators of Nigeria (ABEN), she became a participating member of that professional body. Therefore, this shows how a supervisor could encourage doctoral students to transact in the wider academic social space. One of the participants revealed the benefit of being in such a social space, thus:
123 It has been helpful … overtime, you feel more confident. You get to know more people, the big thinkers in the field (Kenneth, 11b).
According to this participant, exposure to well-established and professional academics has developed his confidence. Usually, when doctoral students socialise in the wider academic social space through attendance of conferences and seminars, they become aware of the kind of knowledge that is valued in their field of study and how their study could contribute in this regard.
By so doing, they deal with self-doubt and they develop confidence. This shows that supervisors can be instrumental to supervisees’ personal and professional development.
A variation in conception is captured in the excerpt below, which indicates that some supervisor- supervisee relationships are characterised by strong issues of the power relation:
We are not equal at all, they are up there and we are down here (Naomi, 14a).
Usually, in an asymmetrical relationship, it is the voice of the master (supervisor) that is privileged.
Most of the time the less powerful (student) only receives information/instruction and must act upon it. This is evident in the way that one of the participants experienced a proposal (viva voce or viva preparation) by her supervisor, as shown below:
…my supervisor had seriously warned me not to exceed the time; that I should just mention the key points and jump to the next section. So, that was what I did (Favour, 6b).
What is presented above, is in opposition to earlier reports where the supervisor arranged for a mock proposal presentation to prepare supervisees for defence. In this case, the supervisor simply advised the doctoral student with regards to time management. But, the tone with which the advice was given shows the authoritative position from which the supervisor speaks with the doctoral student. Thus, because of the disempowering relations which are seemingly attained between the supervisor and the doctoral student, the doctoral student may not feel confident enough to assert herself in the relationship.
124 Again, with regards to the thesis, which is believed to be central in the supervision relationship, as explained earlier, the participants revealed a variation in the way that supervisors and doctoral students view the thesis:
…by the time you come to collect your file and find out that there is no trace of correction or anything, you will then know that he has been doing nothing about your work. But then, this person asked you to come, you know what it means… (James, 10a).
Most times they will give you appointment and when you go on that day you won’t see them... So, one has to develop a kind of patience, you have to endure most of these challenges and you don’t need to pick up offence… (Cecelia, 3a).
The data here show that the way in which the supervisor views the thesis could be quite different from the way that doctoral students view it and relate with it. Notably, the thesis may not mean much for some supervisors, as they often do not think about it and they can afford to consistently miss appointments that are meant for the development and progress of the thesis. On the contrary, the data show that some doctoral students view the thesis as something that is worthy of their, time, endurance, and energy; and despite any discouragement and lack of commitment on the part of supervisors, doctoral students feel that the thesis is worthy of their resilience in their cause.