what does a thesis supervisor do

Duties of a thesis supervisor and the supervision plan

Search for degree programme, open university programmes.

Open university Flag this item

Bachelor's Programmes

Bachelor's Programme for Teachers of Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Agricultural Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Applied Psychology Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Art Studies Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Biology Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Chemistry Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Computer Science (TKT) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Cultural Studies Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Economics Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Class Teacher (KLU, in Swedish) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Class Teacher, Education (LO-KT) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Class Teacher, Educational Psychology (LO-KP) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Craft Teacher Education (KÄ) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Early Education Teacher (SBP) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Early Education Teacher (VO) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: General and Adult Education (PED, in Swedish) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: General and Adult Education (YL and AKT) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Home Economics Teacher (KO) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Education: Special Education (EP) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Environmental and Food Economics Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Environmental Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Food Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Forest Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Geography Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Geosciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in History Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Languages Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Law Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Logopedics Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Mathematical Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Molecular Biosciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Pharmacy Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Philosophy Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Physical Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Politics, Media and Communication Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Psychology Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Science (BSC) Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Social Research Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Social Sciences Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Society and Change Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in the Languages and Literatures of Finland Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Theology and Religious Studies Flag this item
Bachelor's Programme in Veterinary Medicine Flag this item

Master's and Licentiate's Programmes

Degree Programme in Dentistry Flag this item
Degree Programme in Medicine Flag this item
Degree Programme in Veterinary Medicine Flag this item
International Masters in Economy, State & Society Flag this item
Master ́s Programme in Development of health care services Flag this item
Master's Programme for Teachers of Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry Flag this item
Master's Programme in Agricultural Sciences Flag this item
Master's Programme in Agricultural, Environmental and Resource Economics Flag this item
Master's Programme in Area and Cultural Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Art Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Atmospheric Sciences (ATM) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Changing Education Flag this item
Master's Programme in Chemistry and Molecular Sciences Flag this item
Master's Programme in Computer Science (CSM) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Contemporary Societies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Cultural Heritage Flag this item
Master's Programme in Culture and Communication (in Swedish) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Data Science Flag this item
Master's Programme in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Flag this item
Master's Programme in Economics Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Class Teacher (KLU, in Swedish) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Class Teacher, Education (LO-KT) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Class Teacher, Educational Psychology (LO-KP) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Craft Teacher Education (KÄ) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Early Education (VAKA) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: General and Adult Education (PED, in Swedish) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: General and Adult Education (YL and AKT) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Home Economics Teacher (KO) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Education: Special Education (EP) Flag this item
Master's Programme in English Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Environmental Change and Global Sustainability Flag this item
Master's Programme in European and Nordic Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Finnish and Finno-Ugrian Languages and Cultures Flag this item
Master's Programme in Food Economy and Consumption Flag this item
Master's Programme in Food Sciences Flag this item
Master's Programme in Forest Sciences Flag this item
Master's Programme in Gender Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Genetics and Molecular Biosciences Flag this item
Master's Programme in Geography Flag this item
Master's Programme in Geology and Geophysics Flag this item
Master's Programme in Global Politics and Communication Flag this item
Master's Programme in History Flag this item
Master's Programme in Human Nutrition and Food-Related Behaviour Flag this item
Master's Programme in Integrative Plant Sciences Flag this item
Master's Programme in Intercultural Encounters Flag this item
Master's Programme in International Business Law Flag this item
Master's Programme in Languages Flag this item
Master's Programme in Law Flag this item
Master's Programme in Life Science Informatics (LSI) Flag this item
Master's programme in Linguistic Diversity and Digital Humanities Flag this item
Master's Programme in Literary Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Logopedics Flag this item
Master's Programme in Materials Research (MATRES) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Mathematics and Statistics (MAST) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Microbiology and Microbial Biotechnology Flag this item
Master's Programme in Neuroscience Flag this item
Master's Programme in Particle Physics and Astrophysical Sciences (PARAS) Flag this item
Master's programme in Pharmaceutical Research, Development and Safety Flag this item
Master's Programme in Pharmacy Flag this item
Master's Programme in Philosophy Flag this item
Master's Programme in Politics, Media and Communication Flag this item
Master's Programme in Psychology Flag this item
Master's Programme in Russian, Eurasian and Eastern European Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Scandinavian Languages and Literature Flag this item
Master's Programme in Social and Health Research and Management Flag this item
Master's Programme in Social Research Flag this item
Master's Programme in Social Sciences (in Swedish) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Society and Change Flag this item
Master's Programme in Theology and Religious Studies Flag this item
Master's Programme in Theoretical and Computational Methods (TCM) Flag this item
Master's Programme in Translation and Interpreting Flag this item
Master's Programme in Translational Medicine Flag this item
Master's Programme in Urban Studies and Planning (USP) Flag this item
Master’s Programme in Global Governance Law Flag this item
Nordic Master Programme in Environmental Changes at Higher Latitudes (ENCHIL) Flag this item

Doctoral Programmes

Doctoral Programme Brain and Mind Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Atmospheric Sciences (ATM-DP) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Biomedicine (DPBM) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Chemistry and Molecular Sciences (CHEMS) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Clinical Research (KLTO) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Clinical Veterinary Medicine (CVM) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Cognition, Learning, Instruction and Communication (CLIC) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Computer Science (DoCS) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Drug Research (DPDR) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Economics Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Food Chain and Health Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Gender, Culture and Society (SKY) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Geosciences (GeoDoc) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in History and Cultural Heritage Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Human Behaviour (DPHuB) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Integrative Life Science (ILS) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Interdisciplinary Environmental Sciences (DENVI) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Language Studies (HELSLANG) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Law Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Materials Research and Nanoscience (MATRENA) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Mathematics and Statistics (Domast) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Microbiology and Biotechnology Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Oral Sciences (FINDOS) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Particle Physics and Universe Sciences (PAPU) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Philosophy, Arts and Society Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Plant Sciences (DPPS) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Political, Societal and Regional Changes (PYAM) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Population Health (DOCPOP) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in School, Education, Society and Culture Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Social Sciences Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Sustainable Use of Renewable Natural Resources (AGFOREE) Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Theology and Religious Studies Flag this item
Doctoral Programme in Wildlife Biology (LUOVA) Flag this item

Specialist training programmes

Multidisciplinary studies for class teachers (teaching in Finnish) Flag this item
Multidisciplinary studies for class teachers (teaching in Swedish) Flag this item
Non-degree studies for special education teachers (ELO) Flag this item
Non-degree studies for special education teachers (LEO) Flag this item
Non-degree studies for special education teachers (VEO) Flag this item
Non-degree studies in subject teacher education Flag this item
Specific Training in General Medical Practice Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Clinical Mental Health Psychology Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Neuropsychology Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Environmental Health and Food Control (old) Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Equine Medicine (old) Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Food Production Hygiene Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Infectious Animal Diseases (new) Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Production Animal Medicine (old) Flag this item
Specialisation Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Small Animal Medicine (old) Flag this item
Specialisation Studies in Community and Hospital Pharmacy (for B.Sc.Pharm.) Flag this item
Specialisation Studies in Community and Hospital Pharmacy (for M.Sc.Pharm.) Flag this item
Specialisation Studies in Industrial Pharmacy (for B.Sc.Pharm.) Flag this item
Specialisation Studies in Industrial Pharmacy (for M.Sc.Pharm.) Flag this item
Specialist Training in Dentistry Flag this item
Specialist Training in Hospital Chemistry Flag this item
Specialist Training in Hospital Microbiology Flag this item
Specialist Training in Medicine, 5-year training Flag this item
Specialist Training in Medicine, 6-year training Flag this item
Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Environmental Health and Food Control Flag this item
Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Equine Medicine (new) Flag this item
Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, general veterinary medicine Flag this item
Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Infectious Animal Diseases (new) Flag this item
Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Production Animal Medicine (new) Flag this item
Specialist's Programme in Veterinary Medicine, Small Animal Medicine (new) Flag this item
Trainer Training Programme in Integrative Psychotherapy Flag this item
Training Programme for Psychotherapists Flag this item
Language Centre
Open University

Supervision work is closely linked to the intended learning outcomes of the degree and thesis as well as the related grading criteria. In accordance with the Regulations on Degrees and the Protection of Students’ Rights at the University of Helsinki, the student must receive instruction both during their studies and while writing their thesis. See here for instructions on ensuring that your supervision is aligned with the learning outcomes.

The Rector decides on the principles of supervision, including the rights and obligations of the student and the supervisor. The degree programme’s curriculum must contain instructions on how to prepare a personal study plan, along with the practices for approving and updating the plan. Please review the curriculum of your faculty and the thesis grading criteria in order to ensure that your supervision is aligned with the learning outcomes.

In the Rector’s decision, supervision refers to the support provided for the student’s or doctoral candidate’s learning process as they change, gain experience and grow as an expert. As a whole, supervision consists of communication, advice, instruction and special guidance. Supervision and counselling can be organised in a group led by the supervisor, at a seminar, in a peer group of students or doctoral candidates organised by the supervisor or in a personal meeting separately agreed between the supervisor and the student/doctoral candidate. Supervision and counselling can also be provided electronically through, for example, Moodle or other teaching tools available.

Members of the teaching and research staff provide counselling that is related to teaching and research and requires knowledge of the content of different studies and disciplines. This counselling may concern, for example, personal study plans or thesis supervision.

Guidance and counselling are provided in the Finnish and Swedish-language and multilingual degree programmes in Finnish or Swedish depending on the student’s native language or in English or another language as agreed with the student. If the student’s native language is a language other than Finnish or Swedish, guidance and counselling are provided in English or, if agreed with the student, in another language. In English-language master’s programmes and doctoral programmes, guidance can also be provided solely in English.

The degree programme steering group is responsible for ensuring that each student is appointed with a primary supervisor who is responsible for the supervision of their thesis. Additional supervisors may also be appointed. Your supervision plan can be used to agree on the responsibilities related to the supervision.

Supervision as interaction and the supervision plan

Supervision is about interaction with responsibilities that are divided between the different parties of the supervision relationship. Ambiguities related to supervision are often due to the parties’ different expectations regarding the content and responsibilities of the supervision and the fact that the parties are often unaware of the others’ expectations. Below, you can find a table that serves as a great tool for considering the different rights and obligations related to supervision

TEACHER	STUDENT
Teacher has a right to
Teacher's obligations

The policies and practices of supervision should be discussed in the early stages of the thesis process. The supervisor and the student may also prepare a written supervision plan that clarifies the schedule for the supervision and the thesis work as well as the content of the supervision. The plan can also be utilised if any problems arise or you fall behind schedule.

Topics the supervisor should incorporate in the supervision

When supervising a student’s thesis work, remember to pay attention to the following topics:

the responsible conduct of research and avoiding cheating
guiding the student in matters related to data protection
matters related to open access publications and the public availability of theses
inform the student of the general process of thesis examination and approval and the related schedule

Different faculties may have their own decisions and instructions on thesis supervision. Please read the instructions provided by your faculty.

Bachelor’s theses and maturity tests

Thesis and maturity test in master's and licentiate's programmes.

Instructions for students
Notifications for students

Changes are coming to this website. Learn more ➜

Roles and responsibilities of supervisors

Introduction

Knowledge of regulations, policies and procedures
Advice on program of study, research and professional development
Meetings/consultation
Financial assistance
Intellectual property
Publications
Withdrawal of supervisory duties
Accommodation

Introduction

Effective graduate student supervision requires complex interactions between graduate students and their supervisors. The role of a supervisor is threefold: to advise graduate students, monitor their academic progress, and act as a mentor. Supervisors not only provide guidance, instruction and encouragement in the research activities of their students, but also take part in the evaluation and examination of their students’ progress, performance and navigation through the requirements of their academic program with the goal to ensure that their students are successful.

Supervisors are responsible for fostering the intellectual and scholarly development of their students. They also play an important role in providing advice about professional development and both academic and non-academic career opportunities, as they are able, and based upon the student’s career interests.

While these expectations apply to all graduate students, supervising PhD students reflects a longer-term, more substantive commitment. The privilege to supervise PhD students requires that the supervisor hold Approved Doctoral Dissertation Supervisor (ADDS) status. The intent of ADDS policy is to ensure that faculty have the appropriate knowledge to facilitate excellence in PhD supervision.

return to top

Knowledge of regulations, policies and procedures

Effective graduate student supervision requires a knowledge and understanding of the University’s requirements and expectations. To this end, supervisors should:

2.1 Be knowledgeable and remain updated on department, Faculty and University regulations, policies and procedures, and have these protocols guide the supervisors’ decision-making and behaviour as they interact with graduate students. Supervisors are encouraged to take the necessary steps to be well-informed with those Policies identified in section 1.2 .

2.2 Be familiar with the support services available to students and faculty at the University including those articulated in section 1.2 . This information is normally available through department graduate co-ordinators, Faculty Graduate Studies Offices, Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs (GSPA), the Graduate Student Association (GSA) or the University Secretariat.

2.3 Be informed about University of Waterloo policies and procedures that inform academic integrity (Office of Research).

2.4 Be aware of the University of Waterloo and Tri-Agency policies and procedures associated with the conduct of research. Where appropriate, supervisors should be prepared to provide guidance to students on:

The responsible conduct of research, with particular emphasis on the Tri-Agency Framework as defined in the Faculty Association of University of Waterloo (FAUW) /University of Waterloo memorandum of Agreement (Section 14).
The ethical conduct of research (Office of Research) involving animals, animal or human tissues, and human participants

2.5 Have knowledge of the policies and procedures that govern international travel and security that can be found at Waterloo International.

return to top

Advice on program of study, research and professional development

As noted above, supervisors are expected to serve as mentors to their graduate students. To this end, supervisors should be prepared to provide well-informed advice on academics and professional development. More specifically, supervisors should be prepared to advise students on:

2.6 An academic program that is challenging, at the appropriate level for the degree being sought, and that can be accomplished within commonly understood and desirable time and resource expectations of the student and the supervisor.

2.7 The choice of courses and seminars needed to fulfil the degree requirements.

2.8 The development and construct of a research topic and proposal.

2.9 The development of a communication plan with the supervisory/advisory committee as to how the student’s progress will be assessed (including during thesis writing and completion), and the role of advisory committee members in the assessment.

2.10 The availability of internships, practica, co-op or other experiential learning opportunities as part of the program.

2.11 The availability of professional development resources for Waterloo graduate students to help advance the students’ career objectives.

Meetings/consultation

The establishment and communication of common expectations are critical elements to positive experiences for both graduate students and their supervisors. Achieving these outcomes can be facilitated by regular meetings and/or consultation between students, their supervisors, and where appropriate advisory committees. Especially important is timely feedback on students’ written submissions.

The University encourages supervisors to:

2.12 Ensure, especially important in the case of doctoral students, that the student has:

An advisory committee as required.
A program of study consistent with department and Faculty requirements that has been approved by the advisory committee as required.
A research plan that is appropriate in breadth, depth and time to completion (see Milestones in master's and doctoral programs ).

2.13 Arrange for regular (as agreed by the student and supervisor) meetings (which may involve the advisory committee) with students for consultation to ensure steady progress. The frequency of such meetings will depend on the discipline/field of study, type of program, and the student’s progress. At least two, preferably more, meetings should be arranged in each academic term. Supervisors should also be reasonably accessible for meetings requested by their students. The approach to these student meetings should be individualized to reflect the needs of the student. For example, some students may need more support while other may need less.

2.14 Communicate their evaluation of student progress to the department once a year or more often if required. The report should clearly indicate the status of the student’s progress (i.e., satisfactory or unsatisfactory). In the latter case, the report must include a clearly articulated set of conditions that if satisfied will restore the student’s status to satisfactory. Where the supervisor feels that the student will have serious difficulties finishing the program, the supervisor, in consultation with the advisory committee as appropriate, will inform in writing, both the student and the graduate officer of the nature of the problem(s), suggested remedies and may recommend withdrawal from the program. More information on assessing students’ progress can be found in the Graduate Studies Academic Calendar.

2.15 Thoroughly review and provide constructive feedback on all written materials relevant to the thesis or research paper submitted by their students. The supervisor and the student are encouraged to establish in writing expectations on what constitutes timely feedback; a timeframe of two to three weeks depending on the complexity of the document is commonly applied. However, this can vary depending on various circumstances such as travel or vacation. These circumstances should be discussed between the supervisor and student.

2.16 Have knowledge of the guidelines for evaluating students’ progress in a research program (Graduate Studies Academic Calendar).

2.17 Inform students about the broad spectrum of resources available (Writing and Communication Centre) to facilitate development of oral communication and writing skills.

2.18 Be active and supportive in promoting students’ well-being. This may include:

Inquiring about a student’s well-being, as appropriate.
Directing students to appropriate support services , including Mental Health and Wellness resources (Campus Wellness).
Displaying empathy towards the student.

2.19 Complete as appropriate the University requirements for Sexual violence awareness, referral and support training (Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion Office) to understand how to respond to disclosures of sexual violence and refer students to the appropriate supports.

The University recognizes that supervisors will be away from the University for extended periods of time (e.g., sabbatical, satellite campus, visiting professorship). Being physically away from the University does not preclude a supervisor from remaining engaged with their graduate students. In cases where the supervisor will not be available either in person or via electronic communications, the supervisor should:

2.20 Inform students, prospective students and the department of any anticipated extended period where communication will not be occurring. In cases when the absence is for a period of two months or more, supervisors should arrange for suitable communication methods. Interim supervision also must be arranged, for example, using members of advisory committees. Supervisors must inform the student’s department (chair/graduate officer) of the arrangements made for the period of absence, including supervision of laboratory or field work where graduate students continue to work during the absence.

2.21 Ensure students know that in situations where a supervisor works away from campus for two months or more and where their students can accompany the supervisor, the decision to remain on campus or to follow the supervisor rests entirely with the student. Students shall face no pressure (explicit or implicit) or consequences when making this choice and are not required to provide any reason.

As with the departmental representatives, supervisors have responsibility to advance safety. More specifically, supervisors should:

2.22 Ensure a safe working environment both on and off campus (working alone, field work) by assessing hazards and implementing appropriate controls. This must be in accordance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act, Policy 34 (Secretariat) and department and Faculty regulations. All supervisors must complete mandatory health and safety supervisor awareness training (Safety Office) and must ensure that graduate students complete both mandatory and work-specific safety training. More information can be found on the Safety Office website.

2.23 Ensure that students obtain additional training when new safety risks arise and ensure training is kept up to date.

Inherent to graduate education are the dissemination of knowledge and the participation in scholarly activities away from the University campus. Travel (domestic and international) can include fieldwork, conferences, course work and other work related to the thesis. Supervisors are encouraged to support students’ travel to accomplish these important objectives. Supervisors should:

2.24 Follow or encourage students to follow Policy 31 (Secretariat) that governs University-sanctioned travel.

2.25 Categorize and report risk associated with travel. Low risk (Safety Office) are activities for which it is expected that participants will encounter hazards that are no greater than what they encounter in their everyday lives. Examples of significant risk (e.g. industrial sites, remote regions etc.) are noted on the Safety Office website . Travel or field work that involves significant risk must be documented using the Fieldwork Risk Management Form from the Safety Office . For low risk activities off campus, supervisors should:

Provide advice on preparation for pre-departure orientation and planning for any travel and including associated risk, as they are able;

2.26 Document the student(s) location and duration of travel, including personal and emergency contact information. Review the material provided by Waterloo International to understand how to best mitigate risk and ensure safety for international travel.

2.27 Encourage students to register using the Pre-departure Travel Form at Waterloo International .

2.28 Consult the Government of Canada Travel Advice and Advisories web page for the international destination and discuss the mitigation of risk with the students to the destination.

Financial assistance

Supervisors regularly provide financial support for their graduate students. Both the supervisor and the student benefit when a clear understanding exists of the value of funding, and the academic outcomes that should occur from the supported activities. Specifically, supervisors should:

2.29 Be informed about the spectrum of funding opportunities available through the department, Faculty and Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs (GSPA) for students in financial need and to communicate these sources to student.

2.30 Communicate clearly and in writing to their students the terms (e.g., amounts, length of time, conditions) of the financial commitment being made when financial assistance is to be provided from research grants or contracts under the supervisor’s direction.

2.31 Support students’ understanding of their funding, including a consideration of student expenses (primarily tuition and housing) and taxation, if appropriate.

Intellectual property

Increasingly, students and supervisors enter into their academic relationships with previously established intellectual property (IP). Moreover, students and supervisors may have an expectation that their collective work may produce new IP. Best practices include the articulation of students’ and supervisors’ understanding of IP relationships at regular intervals throughout the students’ academic program. More specifically, supervisors should:

2.32 Discuss issues related to intellectual property such as patents, software, copyright, and income from sales and royalties, and inform students of University policies about intellectual property and the conduct of research. It should be recognized that, in accordance with Policy 73 (Secretariat), intellectual property normally is owned by the creators. However, the University retains a royalty-free right to use, for educational and research purposes, any intellectual property created by faculty, staff and students. Ideally, supervisors and students should enter into a written agreement that expresses IP owned by either party prior to beginning the research relationship and the default way in which IP created by the researchers’ joint activities will be owned. A common example is an assumption in the absence of an explicit agreement of joint IP ownership, with each researcher owning an equal share.

2.33 Ensure that students are aware of implications and/or obligations regarding intellectual property of research conducted under contract. If appropriate, discuss with their students and any research partners the protection of intellectual property by patent or copyright. Any significant intellectual contribution by a student must be recognized in the form of co-authorship. Supervisors must convey to students, in advance of publication, whether they intend to recognize the student as co-author for work under contract.

Publications

Academic outputs – in various forms – document and demonstrate ownership of creative research and other scholarly activities. These outputs are important for advancing knowledge and catalyzing additional scholarly activity in these areas and should be encouraged. When supervisors and graduate students work collectively on these academic works, it is important for both that their relative contributions are represented appropriately. To achieve these goals, supervisors should:

2.34 Discuss with their students, at an early stage of their program, authorship practices within the discipline and University policies about publications ( Policy 73 on the Secretariat website).

2.35 Discuss and reach agreement with students, well in advance of publication and ideally at the outset of collaboration, the way in which authorship will be shared, if appropriate, between the supervisor, the student and other contributors for work conducted under contract.

2.36 Encourage the dissemination of students’ research results by publication in scholarly and research journals, presentation at conferences (domestic or international) and seminars;

2.37 Motivate the dissemination of research through non-traditional or non-academic avenues (e.g. Open Access resources, public presentations, and popular media).

Withdrawal of supervisory duties

In rare cases supervisors may determine that they are not prepared or able to continue in a supervisory capacity. When this occurs, the supervisor is required to:

2.38 Follow the guidelines in the Graduate Studies Academic Calendar regarding University Responsibilities Regarding Supervisory Relationships that outlines the steps for dissolution of the supervisory relationship.

Accommodation

The University is eager to establish conditions that maximize graduate students’ likelihood of success. To this end, supervisors:

2.39 Have a duty to engage in accommodations processes with AccessAbility Services , as requested, and to provide appropriate accommodation to the point of undue hardship.

2.40 Remain informed of their roles and responsibilities with respect to accommodations.

<< previous section : Roles and responsibilities of departments, graduate officers and graduate co-ordinators

>> next section : Roles and responsibilities of graduate students

Responsibilities of the supervisor

This page contains detailed information about the role and responsibilities of a postgraduate supervisor, including research planning and thesis requirements. Its content is relevant to staff and students across all of the UK, China and Malaysia campuses.

Search the manual

Note: In addition to the responsibilities detailed in this section, Postgraduate Student Advisors should also see the additional Covid-19 related responsibilities for Heads of Schools, PGR Directors and Supervisors for 2020-21. For more information, please consult the following:

Responsibilities of the Head of School, Supervisor and Director of PGR Programme - Additional guidance for the 2020-21 academic year in response to Covid-19

Supervisors will provide guidance and assistance to PGRs so that they may carry out their research and present their results to the best advantage.

Every supervisor and every PGR will be provided with guidance on their respective roles and responsibilities.

2. Role of the supervisor

The general role of supervisors is to guide and assist PGRs until submission of their thesis and any subsequent period of corrections, until such a point that examiners have reached a final decision on the award of the degree. The roles of supervisor and examiner are quite distinct, and it is not one of the roles of the supervisor to assess the thesis.

The specific roles of supervisors may differ depending on the academic discipline, Departmental practice and whether the member of staff is acting as lead, second, assistant, temporary or permanent supervisor. The lead supervisor (or delegate) will also consider requests for annual leave in line with School/Departmental policy.

3. Role of the assistant supervisor

Many postdoctoral research staff, level 4 Research Officers and research technicians make valuable contributions towards the supervision of the University’s PGRs.

The formal appointment of such staff as assistant supervisors as part of a supervisory team is intended to recognise and acknowledge this contribution and to identify the roles and responsibilities of assistant supervisors in order that this is clear to the candidate and all members of the supervisory team.

Assistant supervisors are responsible for:

providing regular support and advice to PGRs. This may include guidance on welfare matters and health and safety.
providing guidance on how to use equipment or specific research techniques and methods.
helping PGRs to resolve difficulties they encounter and/or direct them to others who can assist.
providing PGRs with informal feedback on their written work and/or presentations.
where applicable, contributing to the reporting of progress of PGRs, noting that the level of involvement with this will be agreed, in advance, with the lead and co-supervisor(s).
encouraging PGRs to disseminate their research.
engaging with professional development opportunities to develop their supervisory practice including any mandatory training requirements.
ensuring they are familiar with policies and processes applicable to research degrees.

4. Continuing professional development

All supervisors must undertake continuing professional development, so that their work as a supervisor is supported.

Supervisors should take the initiative in updating their knowledge and skills by participating in a range of appropriate activities and sharing good practice.

More information on support for research supervisors can be found here:

Researcher Academy

5. Documentation check

Includes: responsibilities

At the outset the supervisor should check that the candidate has received information sent by the University concerning registration and that they have registered for that session.

Before or at initial registration or, at the latest within 4 weeks of initial registration, supervisors should check that all their PGRs have received copies of essential documentation relevant to their research studies or have been informed about where to locate them on the web. As a minimum, this should include: information about registration and services, the School Handbook, and any relevant safety advice.

For more information about registration, please consult the following:

Student Services - registration

6. Research plan

Includes: assistance; designing a programme of research; for full-time doctoral students

Supervisors will assist their PGRs to plan their research studies, including helping them to define their research topic; to identify schemes and specific tasks; to identify the relevant research literature, databases and other relevant sources, and to be aware of the standards in the discipline.

The supervisor and candidate should design a programme of research in which (subject to research progress and taking into account special cases) all or much of the thesis will have been written up by the candidate by the end of their period of registered study. The design of the programme of research should not at the outset plan to include any period of thesis pending that the candidate is entitled to.

For full-time doctoral candidates on a 3 year programme, it is expected that the completion of the entire doctoral examination process is completed within 4 years. The PGR may need to register for some taught modules or attend research training courses. The supervisor will advise them how to do this.

7. Advising on regulations

Includes: understanding and knowledge; responsibilities

Supervisors should have a reasonable knowledge and understanding of the University's regulations governing research study and the University, Faculty and Departmental procedures governing research study and supervision.

They are required to advise their PGRs on these regulations and procedures or, if they feel a question is outside their knowledge, to direct their PGR to other sources such as Student Services (or Central Administration at UNM and the Graduate School at UNNC).

Supervisors also have a responsibility to ensure that other members of the supervisory team are kept informed of the candidate’s progress, and any issues which may be having an impact on their programme.

8. Advising on services and facilities

Includes: responsibilities; review of PGR needs

Supervisors should have a reasonable knowledge of and be able to advise their PGRs on the availability of the University's academic services and facilities (for example library and computing facilities) and how to make use of them.

The supervisors in conjunction with the PGR should keep under review the facilities which are required in order to carry out the research and make these needs known to the Head of School.

9. Minimum number of supervisions

Includes: responsibility to provide appropriate and regular supervision; requirements for part-time PGRs

Supervisors are responsible for providing appropriate and regular supervision for their PGRs until submission of their thesis and any subsequent period of corrections, until such a point that examiners have reached a final decision on the award of the degree. They are also responsible for being accessible at mutually convenient times to listen and offer advice.

Students and supervisors are jointly responsible for arranging the supervision meetings.

Supervisors must provide their part-time candidates with a minimum of 6 recorded supervisions a year and their full-time candidates with a minimum of 12 recorded supervisions a year.

These supervisory meetings must be at least monthly for full time candidates and two-monthly for part time candidates. This is based on calendar months. Note, it is expected that in many cases the actual number of meetings between supervisors and candidates may exceed these minima.

If it is not possible for a meeting to take place as scheduled, the meeting should be re-arranged for the next available opportunity.

If no meetings are possible in any given month (or two months for part time students), the supervisor is responsible to ensure that the reason for the missed meeting is recorded appropriately. These reports should be regularly monitored by the School. University staff will review the missed meeting reports on a case by case basis, particularly for PGRs are at risk of breaching visa and immigration requirements, to see if any additional support is required. These requirements may also be modified under the rules for supervising students working off-site.

For students who are missing meetings, or who are not meeting the meeting minima requirements, the regulations governing attendance and engagement should be reviewed:

10. Format for supervisions

Includes: definition; purpose

A 'supervision meeting' is considered to be a any simultaneous contact between the supervisor(s) and PGR candidate for an academic purpose. It is important that at the supervision meetings the PGR’s progress to date and/or the future direction of their research or thesis writing is discussed. It is also necessary that these discussions must be summarised in writing so that they are available if required, for example for audit purposes, or to aid student wellbeing or support. These written reports must meet the minimum number requirements as detailed earlier.

There is no specified format for these meetings. For example, a daily chat at the lab bench and/or a pre-scheduled sit down meeting would meet these criteria, as long as a monthly report with a progress overview is still submitted. Group meetings of PGRs and/or seminars would be acceptable as long as the PGR’s progress to date and/or the future direction of their research or thesis writing is discussed.

A supervision meeting should typically take place as a face-to-face meeting, but can also include meetings conducted online, such as on Microsoft Teams. The exception to this is where the PGR is in the UK on a student visa, unless the student has been given formal permission to study at a different location, supervision meetings must be face-to-face and on campus.

11. Supervision record

Includes: reporting needs; annual review of PGRs

In order that proper audit of supervision provision can be carried out, so that supervisors may undertake continuous monitoring of their PGR’s progress, and records of this progress monitoring are available for formal Progression Review, supervisors are required to ensure the maintenance of a supervision record of at least the minimum number and frequency of supervision meetings a year (see Section 9 above).

Supervisors should advise their PGRs on the procedures for monitoring their progress which are described in the section of this Quality Manual entitled Progression Review of research students.

These include:

(i) Supervision Records - attendance at supervision sessions and completion of supervision records;

(ii) Progression Review - formal review of progress towards meeting the required outcomes, and assessment of whether the outcomes will be met in the required time. Completion of the Progression Review forms.

(iii) MPhil and doctoral registration - procedures for upgrading or downgrading candidates and for confirming MPhil or doctoral registration.

Supervisors may, from time to time, be required to provide reports on their PGR’s progress for other purposes and to other agencies, for example, the Research Councils and other sponsors. Such reports should be provided within the required deadline to ensure, in particular, that the continuation of candidate’s funding by outside agencies is not compromised.

For more information about the Progression Review of research students, please consult the following:

Progression Review of research students

12. Training needs

Includes: discussing personal, academic, and professional skills; PGR training programme; research ethics; Code of research conduct and research ethics

The supervisor should discuss with the PGR what personal, academic, and professional skills training they require in order to complete their research degree and to provide a skills base for a future career.

The supervisor should agree with the candidate a research training programme which is compatible with the PGR's needs and which is achievable in relation to the research commitments within the limits of their registered period of study, making it clear where attendance at training courses is compulsory or voluntary. This programme should be reviewed each year.

The supervisors should take reasonable steps to ensure that the PGR’s training needs are met. Normally such training will be delivered within the University and the supervisor should, therefore, be aware of any research training offered through the Researcher Academy, the Doctoral Training Centre/Programme, the Faculty and the School.

The supervisor should also ensure that the PGR receives adequate training in research ethics and is given assistance in applying for ethical approval if appropriate.

For more information, please consult the following:

Code of research conduct and research ethics

Includes: correct procedures; seeking advice

14. Meetings, conferences and publication

The supervisor(s) should encourage and facilitate the PGR to engage with relevant academics who will support their doctoral research and future career development.

This could be through encouraging attendance at seminars, meetings and conferences; introducing them to relevant individuals and professional networks; and encouraging them to publish the results of their research.

Where appropriate supervisors should also support the PGRs to participate in public and policy engagement activities or undertake placements and internships that will enable them to develop their broader research experiences.

15. Written work

16. supervision during thesis pending period.

Includes: minimum number of meetings; the role of proofreaders

During the thesis pending period and any period of corrections or thesis re-submission, supervisors and PGRs should continue to meet regularly (as described above).

Supervisors will also read and comment on one draft of the candidate’s thesis prior to each submission (as appropriate) when submitted within the required timeframes for feedback to be given.

The Role of Proofreaders

A proofreader may only ensure that the meaning of the author is not misrepresented due to the quality and standard of the English used. This can include correcting spelling and basic grammar errors.

Inaccuracies in academic content should not be corrected nor should the structure of the piece of work be changed; doing so may result in a charge of plagiarism.

17. Thesis presentation

Supervisors should advise candidate’s on the timing, construction and form of presentation of their thesis and should check that they receive a copy of the University's guidance on presenting a thesis, from Student Services or Central Administration at UNM or Graduate School at UNNC.

18. Examination of thesis

19. submission of data, additional information.

Includes: PGR supervision record; Research supervisor resources

Research supervisor resources

Students studying in outside organisations

UNUK students

Student services, unnc students .

UNM students

Staff , related content.

Portland Building, University of Nottingham University Park Nottingham, NG7 2RD

Legal information

Terms and conditions
Posting rules
Accessibility
Freedom of information
Charity gateway
Cookie policy

Connect with the University of Nottingham through social media and our blogs .

Browser does not support script.

Thesis supervision

Find a thesis supervisor.

Thesis supervisors must be authorized by their Faculty to supervise theses.

Finding a thesis supervisor arrow_drop_down

Before thinking about a supervisor, students should make sure they are committing to the area of study that most interests them. They should ask themselves whether they are enthusiastic enough about a topic area to sustain this enthusiasm over the period of time it will take to prepare the thesis. Speaking to students and professors who do research in the proposed area of study will help clarify the students’ thoughts. The students should make sure they are well-informed before they approach any potential supervisors.

A professor is not obligated to take on a student if he or she feels the match-up would not be a good one, or if the professor lacks lab space, time or funding.

A student may have more than one supervisor. When mention is made of the thesis supervisor, it is implicit that there may be a co-supervisor.

Information to collect before contacting a potential supervisor
Questions to ask after the meeting with the potential supervisor
Professors, by research interest

Appointment of a thesis supervisor arrow_drop_down

From the uoZone Application tab, click Service Requests to create a service request and appoint a thesis supervisor.

Meetings between the supervisor and the student arrow_drop_down

Preliminary meetings.

Before a student begins researching and writing a thesis, the supervisor and the student should have a detailed discussion of expectations and requirements. Below are examples of general and specific issues to be discussed during the preliminary meetings.

As soon as possible, the student should obtain ethics approvals or any other required approvals to conduct research. The student should discuss with the thesis supervisor and visit the Office of Research Ethics and Integrity Website.

General and specific topics to be discussed

Regular meetings

The student and the supervisor should plan to meet regularly whether or not the student has any finished work to show to the supervisor.

If it is a major meeting, the student should draw up and deliver to the supervisor an agenda beforehand. If the meeting is to discuss text that has already been written, the student must send the draft well in advance of the meeting.

After the meeting, and based on this agenda, the student prepares a brief report on what was discussed and decided, and shares this report with the supervisor.

It is important to be productive at these major meetings, but it is also crucial to just keep in touch.

Components of a typical agenda

a summary of the purpose of the meeting
a review of what was discussed at the previous meeting and what has been accomplished to date
a discussion and clarification of the current topics, ideas and issues
next steps as a result of this discussion
agree with a date for the next meeting

Feedback and revision arrow_drop_down

All along during the thesis preparation process, a student will receive feedback and should expect to do revisions. Revising a thesis based on feedback from the thesis supervisor, advisory committee (if applicable) and from the jury is an important part of the thesis preparation process.

Part of the advancement of knowledge that preparing a thesis fosters involves engaging in dialogue and learning from these discussions, learning how to communicate clearly, and responding appropriately to suggestions for improvement

Already a student?

Types of supervision, co-supervision arrow_drop_down.

A joint management with a professor in another discipline may be considered if the research project of a student is favoured.

Cotutelle arrow_drop_down

A doctoral student may prepare a thesis under a cotutelle agreement. You find below additional information to help familiarize yourself with the roles played by each of the stakeholders.

Learn more about Cotutelle.

Thesis advisory committee arrow_drop_down

In many academic units, a thesis advisory committee, also referred to as thesis committee, is assembled as soon as a student finds a thesis supervisor. Please note that not all academic units have thesis committees, the students must check on the protocol in their own academic unit.

Constitution of the thesis committee

How the thesis committee is formed varies from academic unit to academic unit. The thesis supervisor plays the biggest role by approaching colleagues who have the expertise and inviting them to join the committee.

A thesis committee is made up of:

the student
the thesis supervisor, and
usually at least two other professors.

The thesis supervisor is usually the chair of the thesis committee.

Role of the thesis committee

While the roles and responsibilities of thesis committees may vary from one academic unit to another, members of the committee should provide guidance to the student on thesis planning, research and writing; be available to discuss ideas or for consultation on any other matter related to the thesis; and, if this is the practice within the discipline, evaluate the thesis after submission.

Thesis committees meet according to a schedule set either by the academic unit or by the committee itself. The student is usually responsible for initiating the meetings. When concerns about the progress of the research arise, the supervisor and/or academic unit may require meetings at more frequent intervals.

Useful information

Contracts arrow_drop_down.

Some supervisors and students have contracts or agreements to formalize the expectations and delineate the responsibilities in the preparation of a thesis.

Although these agreements are not considered official documents with force of law, they set out the expectations of the student and supervisor in relation to many of the issues covered in this Website section and help avoid conflict and misunderstandings.

A student should not make assumptions about who will do what in the research and who gets credit for any new discoveries or inventions. A supervisor should not assume the supervised student is aware of any assumptions the supervisor has or any authorship or credit protocols that may exist in the area of research.

Professors who use contracts do so because they have found such agreements are a good tool for helping students achieve their goals and finish their theses. However, while a written agreement can be very useful, one of the keys to a successful supervisor–student relationship is good communication and mutual trust. Both sides need to foster and build on that.

Absences arrow_drop_down

Sometimes a potential supervisor is approached by a student looking for a thesis supervisor and both the student and professor agree it would be a good match, but the professor is going on an academic leave partway through the period in which the student will be preparing this thesis. In the event of a scheduled absence from the University for more than one month, the thesis supervisor must make the necessary arrangements with his students and the academic unit concerned to ensure that students continue to be accompanied during the supervisor's absence.

A thesis supervisor who is going to be away should let the student know well in advance. The same goes for the student. The student should discuss this with the thesis supervisor well ahead of time. In case of illness, the student should let the supervisor know the expected timeline for recovery.

If the student is planning to suspend work on the thesis for a term or more, for whatever reason, the student needs to apply for and receive approval for a leave of absence. Please note that absence has an impact on eligibility for funding.

Professionalism arrow_drop_down

As a student, the development of professional skills—for example, communicating appropriately in writing and in person, responding promptly to e-mails, coming prepared to meetings, following up after meetings, respecting deadlines, tracking changes to the text so that it is easy for the supervisor to review each draft after revisions—is important in the preparation of the thesis. Some faculties offer courses in professional skills.

If the student feels aspects of the supervisor’s behavior are unprofessional, he or she should consult the graduate program director or the chair of the academic unit.

Changing supervisors arrow_drop_down

As for changing supervisors partway through a thesis, this is not recommended. Keep in mind that as long as the thesis is logical and the conclusions drawn from the data are valid, the student and the supervisor do not need to be in total agreement on methodology, analysis or interpretation.

The thesis committee may be able to fill in whatever gaps the student perceives in the relationship with the supervisor. If the research goes off in an unexpected direction, one that is not very familiar to the thesis supervisor, the student could see what opportunities are available and what guidelines the academic unit has for this situation. The student could consider joint supervision as an alternative to finding a new supervisor.

If the student has explored all other options and still wish to change supervisors, he or she should talk to the graduate program director. If the supervisor happens to be the graduate program director, the student should talk to the director of the academic unit. If the student remains uncertain or dissatisfied, he or she should talk to the vice-dean graduate studies of his/her home faculty. Beyond that, the student can talk to the university ombudsperson. The student can request that the exchanges with any or all of these individuals (directors, vice-dean, ombudsperson) remain confidential.

The student should be sure to explore options carefully before withdrawing from the supervisory arrangement—a student who terminates the relationship with a supervisor before finding another supervisor may have difficulty securing another supervisor and compromise the thesis project.

Research article
Open access
Published: 22 August 2019

The journey of thesis supervisors from novice to expert: a grounded theory study

Leila Bazrafkan 1 ,
Alireza Yousefy 2 ,
Mitra Amini 1 &
Nikoo Yamani 2

BMC Medical Education volume 19 , Article number: 320 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

9884 Accesses

8 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

Supervision is a well-defined interpersonal relationship between the thesis supervisors and their students. The purpose of this study was to identify the patterns which can explain the process of expertise attainment by thesis supervisors. We aimed at developing a conceptual framework/model to explain this development based on the experience of both students and supervisors.

We have conducted a qualitative grounded theory study in 20 universities of medical sciences in Iran since 2017 by using purposive, snowball sampling, and theoretical sampling and enrolled 84 participants. The data were gathered through semi-structured interviews. Based on the encoding approach of Strauss and Corbin (1998), the data underwent open, axial, and selective coding by constant comparative analysis. Then, the core variables were selected, and a model was developed.

We could obtain three themes and seven related subthemes, the central variable, which explains the process of expertise as the phenomenon of concentration and makes an association among the subthemes, was interactive accountability. The key dimensions during expertise process which generated the supervisors’ competence development in research supervision consisted maturation; also, seven subthemes as curious observation, evaluation of the reality, poorly structured rules, lack of time, reflection in action, reflection on action, and interactive accountability emerged which explain the process of expertise attainment by thesis supervisors.

Conclusions

As the core variable in the expertise process, accountability must be considered in expertise development program planning and decision- making. In other words, efforts must be made to improve responsibility and responsiveness.

Peer Review reports

Supervision is a well-defined term in the interpersonal relationship between thesis supervisors and students. A supervisor is designated to assist the student’s development in terms of their research project [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]. Faculty members supervise the students because qualified supervision leads to success on the part of the student, and it has moral, reputational, and financial outcomes for the institution. Supervisors are expected to train students to gain competence in areas such as specialist skills, generalist skills, self-reliance skills, and group/team skills [ 4 ]. Expertise is derived from the three essential elements of knowledge, experience, and the ability to solve problems in society [ 5 , 6 , 7 ]. .According to Dreyfus, acquisition of expertise or practical wisdom represents a higher level of “self-actualization.” At this point, one reaches a level in which they can flourish in their talents and abilities. This enables the teachers to function in scientific communities and multicultural environments [ 7 ].

Wiscer has identified three stages in the thesis supervision process and describes the duties of the supervisors in each of them [ 8 ]. Pearson and Brew state that maturation in specialist skills, generalist skills, self-reliance skills, and group/team skills are the major areas that need to be promoted in the student. Moreover, these are the generic processes in which the supervisors should be involved for efficacious supervision if they aim to help the students develop in various institutional, disciplinary and professional settings; acquire appropriate expertise and features needed for employment; and make an outline of what might form a flexible professional development program for supervisors in this setting [ 3 ]. Vereijken et al. emphasized novice supervisors’ approaches to reach expertise in supervision and explained the relationship between practice and dilemmas among novice supervisors [ 9 ].

.Despite the importance of expertise in higher education and particularly research supervision, research abilities are not considered as one of the priorities in the employment of the academic staff. Furthermore, the newly employed faculty members are often involved in teaching, administrative tasks, and services in health care; this inhibits them from expertise attainment in other aspects such as research supervision [ 10 , 11 , 12 ]. In this regard, Malekafzali believes that in the area of research activities, the faculty members have serious weaknesses in defining the problem, choosing the appropriate method for research, analyzing the data, interpreting the results, and publishing scientific articles. Besides, there is a lack of coherent and compiled training programs which can enhance their research capabilities [ 13 ].

One of the most important factors contributing to the thesis and research quality is the process of developing expertise in supervisors’ research supervision. Most studies in our country have focused on research abilities during the research, and fewer studies have focused on the process of expertise acquisition in thesis supervision, and no actual model has been proposed for this [ 11 , 12 , 13 ]. The quantitative researches could not explain exactly how and through which process the faculty members, as thesis supervisors, become experts in thesis supervision since the expertise process is multi-factorial and has many unknown aspects. Considering the effective role of qualitative research in clarifying ambiguous and unknown aspects, we chose the grounded theory approach for this study [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. This theory will be used when the investigator intends to determine the patterns of actions and social interactions needed for the development of expertise by specific groups of people in a specific setting [ 17 , 18 ].

In this study, we aimed to identify the themes that explain the expertise development process among thesis supervisors in Iran, and also to develop a conceptual framework/model to explain this development based on the experience of both students and supervisors.

This study was carried out in 20 universities of medical sciences with different ranks in Iran because universities are the places where supervisors and students interact purposefully to discourse the needs of experts on specific occasions and in specific conditions. In these universities, different students study with various disciplines. There are three types of universities in Iran. Type 1 universities are the ones with the most facilities, faculties, research presentations, international collaborations, and scientific outcomes. The second rank belongs to type 2, and the one with the least mentioned qualities is type 3 universities. All three types of universities were included in this study. In all these courses, writing a thesis is one of the requirements with the same role and regulation. The majority of the students in this research project were in the late stages of both undergraduate and postgraduate educational programs within the same function and regulation.

Study design

We conducted this qualitative study based on a grounded theory approach in a systematic form [ 17 , 18 ]. Grounded theory is a symbolic interaction which is derived from systematic data collection during the research process. In this strategy, collecting and analyzing data and the theory derived from the data have a close association [ 17 , 19 ]. The investigator’s purpose in using grounded theory is to describe and clarify a phenomenon in the social condition and to identify the essential processes working within [ 17 ].

Participants

In this study, 84 subjects including 56 faculty members of medical sciences, 20 undergraduate and postgraduate students (medical students, MS of Science, Ph.D. and residents), and eight managers in the field of research supervision participated. Using purposive sampling, snowball sampling with maximum variation, we selected the participants from a variety of academic ranks with different work experiences, as the key informants in thesis supervisors. Then, to continue the sampling, we used theoretical sampling and data saturation. The inclusion criterion was 5 years of work experience in thesis supervision, and the exclusion criterion was the unwillingness to participate in the study. Firstly, we collected data in Shiraz University with the help of a research supervisor who is known for his high quality of supervision and then data gathering was initiated in the university of Isfahan. There were 34 key informants from the two universities and 22 individuals from other universities. Students were selected based on their willingness to participate.

Theoretical sampling was used next to develop the tentative theory. The basis for theoretical sampling was the queries that emerged during data analysis. At this stage, the researcher interviewed the supervisor, administrators, and students. Theoretical sampling facilitated in verifying the supervisors’ responses and credibility of categories and resulted in more conceptual density. Data saturation was obtained when no new data emerged in the last five interviews. Therefore, data gathering by interviews was terminated.

Data collection

We collected the data primarily by semi-structured interviews from September 2017 to September 2018. The participants were recognized with unknown codes based on their field of work and setting, and each participant was interviewed in one or two sessions. Having obtained the participants’ informed consent, we recorded the interviews and they were transcribed verbatim immediately. The interviews began with open-ended general questions such as, “What did you experience during research supervision?” and then the participants were asked to describe their perceptions regarding their expertise process. Leading questions were also used to deeply explore the conditions, processes, and other factors that participants recognized as significant issues. The interview was based mostly on the questions which came up during the interview. On average, each interview lasted for an hour, during which field notes and memos were taken. At the end of each session, the participants were asked to give an opinion on other important topics which did not come up during the interview, followed by data collection and analysis which are simultaneously done in grounded theory; analytic thought and queries that arose from one interview were carried to the next one [ 20 ].

The data were also collected by unstructured observations of the educational atmosphere in the laboratory, and the faculty member and students’ counseling offices. These observations lasted 5 weeks, during which the faculties and students’ interactions and the manner of supervision were closely monitored. The observation was arranged to sample the maximum variety of research supervisor activity for some faculty member who is known to be a good or poor supervisor and detailed organized field notes were kept.

Also, we used the field notes to reflect emergent analytic concepts as a source of three angulations of data, frequently reconsidering the data, and referring to field notes in the context of each participant’s explanation. Analysis of the field notes facilitated in shaping contextual conditions and clarifying variations in the supervisors’ responses in each context. This led to the arrangement of several assumptions in the effect of contexts.

Data analysis

We simultaneously performed data collection and analysis. We read the scripts carefully several times and then entered them into MAXQDA (version10). We collected and analyzed the data practically and simultaneously by using a constant comparative method. Data were analyzed based on the 3-stage coding approach, including open, axial, and selective coding by Strauss and Corbin In the open coding stage, we extracted the basic concepts or meaning units from the gathered information. Then, more general concepts were formed by grouping similar concepts into one theme. The themes became clearer throughout the interviews. Then, the constructs of them were compared with each other to form tentative categories. After that, we conducted axial coding by using the guidelines given in Corbin and Strauss’s (2008) Paradigm Model [ 21 ]. The extracted themes (codes) in the previous (open coding) stage were summarized in 3 main themes during the axial coding stage, and then the core variables were selected in the selective coding stage [ 20 ]. To generate a reasonable theory to the community, a grounded theorist needs to condense the studied happenings a the precise sequence. To check the data against categories, the researcher asks questions related to certain categories and returns to the data to seek evidence. After developing a theory, the researcher is required to confirm the theory by comparing it with existing theories found in the recently available research [ 21 ]. We finalized the model after 5 days; during this time, we explained the relations between subcategories and the core category for realizing theoretical saturation and clarifying the theoretical power of the analysis explained about work as narration.

In terms of accuracy improvement, we used the Lincoln and Guba’s criteria, including credibility, dependability, conformability, and transferability [ 22 , 23 ].

To increase credibility, we collected data from different universities in Iran, and their credibility was also confirmed by three reviewers and experts in qualitative research. Also, some of the participants rechecked the data and the investigators’ description and interpretation of their experiences carefully. Prolonged engagement and tenacious observation facilitated the data credibility. In this way, the process of data collection and analysis took 12 months. Data triangulation and method triangulation also confirmed credibility [ 20 ]. The use of the maximum variation sampling method contributed to the dependability and conformability of data. Furthermore, once the explanation of the phenomenon was full, it was returned for confirmation to 3 participants of each university, and they validated the descriptions. Finally, to attain transferability, we adequately described the data in this article, so that a judgment of transferability can be made by readers.

Ethical considerations

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences (92–6746). The participants were informed about the research aim and interviews. Informed consent for conducting and recording the interview was obtained. The confidentiality of the participants’ information was maintained throughout the study.

In this study, the mean age of the faculty members and students was 44.34 ± 14.60 and 28.54 ± 2.38 years, respectively. All the faculty members and most of the students were married. Only three students were single. Three themes and seven interrelated sub-themes emerged from the data (Table 1 ). The main variable, which explains the process of expertise as the phenomenon of concentration and makes an association among the categories, was interactive accountability. The key dimensions of the expertise process are displayed in a model (Fig. 1 ).

The process of expertise attainment in research supervisor model

Theme 1: engagement

In this theme, the initial phase of expertise, the supervisor starts to observe the others’ behavior in the students’ supervision and guidance based on the practical and cognitive skills previously acquired. They attempt to recognize the different needs based on the amount of their motivation and previous competence so that the models become important for them, and they recognize the scope of the needs based on their importance. Then, they try to understand the needs and values of real thesis supervision in this context. In this theme, two sub-themes, curious observation, and evaluation with reality emerged.

Curious observation

In this sub-theme, several concepts such as personal interest, self-awareness, ability to meet the students’ needs, ability to detect weaknesses in research skills, and observation of role models in this area act as the impellent factors in expertise attainment in research supervision.

Regarding personal interest, a successful faculty member in the area of research supervision said:

“…In my experience, faculties must be selected from those who have curious personalities as well as being good observers, first of all. In this way, they will have the appropriate intrinsic character to acquire knowledge in guidance and supervision)…” (Faculty member N0.3)

According to our participants, the most important intrinsic motivation is the desire to update the content knowledge and skills in research supervision. An experienced professor said:

“ … The knowledge gap between the new and old generations of faculty members is what forced me to update my knowledge...and it has been detected by myself…” (Faculty member N0.3).

Another important intrinsic motivation is the ability to meet the educational and research needs of students. However, usually these needs are combined; one of the faculty members put it:

“…I would like to be an expert in this process (thesis supervision) to meet my students’ needs. Because I have seen and felt this need many times before…” (Faculty member N0.12).

Since the publication of research directly affects the promotion of a faculty, some professors seek skills that are practical in article publication such as several statistical and basic skills for thesis writing. The participants considered the self-awareness and consciousness elements as very important. Through consciousness, one can better understand their needs.

Evaluation with reality

In this sub-theme, in the initial phase maintaining academic dignity and competition motivates the faculty members to obtain expertise in research supervision. At this point, the supervisor evaluates themself and their potentialities considering more precise features and acquired information (or data), so that they can find the distance between the optimal state and the existing conditions. They also evaluate the others’ potentialities in this field realistically and compete. Good supervision is then highlighted for them. Based on the supervisors’ experience, at this stage, they are seriously engaged in evaluation and competition.

Another motivation was obtaining academic and social promotion. Although the number of theses supervised by them can affect the academic promotion of supervisors, this effect is insignificant. The real motivation is maintaining academic dignity and competition amongst peers. A member of the clinical faculties stated:

“ … To enhance academic dignity, a faculty member should master various skills such as patient care, teaching, educational skills, and last but not least, research supervision. I got involved in research and thesis supervision because I felt I should not be left behind…” ( Faculty member N0.17).

At this stage, the junior supervisor tries to increase the cognitive knowledge in research supervision such as increasing specific knowledge of the discipline, planning, directing of a project effectively, and developing good interpersonal skills presented in research supervision.

Theme 2: supervision climate

In this theme, we describe the contextual factor which changes the process of expertise attainment in thesis supervisors. The result of the study reflects some concerns about the relationship between individuals in the context in that they interact purposefully but with barriers. The supervision climate in the thesis supervision process in this theme led to the emergence of two sub-themes, challenging shortcomings and role ambiguity. These challenges include poorly structured rules and regulations which, in turn, can cause confusion and role ambiguity.

Challenging shortcomings

This report shows that contextual factor plays a significant role in promoting the quality of a thesis in a university, but the process is faced with altered challenges such as inadequate resources, inadequate time, and ineffective evaluation and rule and regulation deficit. These challenges include the following. Most faculty members and students have experienced these shortcomings.

Various inadequate resources, such as access to new and online journals, laboratory equipment were one of the challenges for supervisors in certain aspects which required more competency, and the constraints on communication with the other academic centers worldwide undermine the sense of competition and hinder the effort put in to become an expert. One of the students said: “… I see how difficult it is to gain access to a good article or laboratory materials in this situation …we try, but it just isn’t possible...” (Faculty member N0.17).

Based on our results, the sudden changes in personal life, work position, and organizational change can affect the path to expertise. These changes such as marriage, work overload, admission of students over the capacity, new rules and regulation of scholar citizenship, promotion and so on can have both positive and negative impacts, depending on whether they facilitate or restrict the professional development of faculties as supervisors. For instance, an increase in student admission causes work overload, which results in neglecting self-improvement.

“…As you know, we are over- loaded with students (they have increased the number of admissions), which is beyond our capacity. This means that most of our time will be dedicated to teaching. Self-improvement is difficult due to lack of time…” (Faculty member N0.6).

Role ambiguity

Poorly structured supervision can occur where there is an ambiguous context of supervision structure, supervisors and students’ roles. Most participants, as faculty members, managers, and students have experienced some difficulties in this regard, due to poorly structured rules(EDITORS NOTE; do you mean ‘rules and regulations ‘here) and regulations and its impact on the thesis supervision. It is not only the rules themselves but also the way they are implemented. One of the faculty members expressed confusion over the rules related to the dissertation as follows:

“…It should be made clear what I must do exactly. It is obvious regarding supervision on the work of students; there are not the same expectations from an Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and a professor. Most problems occur as a result of the gap in legislation; For example, the rules imply a full Professor does not need a statistical consult, while many supervisors like me do not have enough knowledge and skills in statistical analysis...” (Faculty member N0.1).

Failure to implement the rules also increases the sense of this ambiguity, and there are no specific rules for verifying capability and audits to determine inadequate experts in thesis supervision. The role ambiguity or unclear roles and responsibilities of the supervisor and student in the thesis process were other limitations that were emphasized by the majority of participants. A faculty member stated:

“… Supervisors have different roles during the thesis process. To enhance this process, one must exactly know one’s responsibilities. For instance, in the beginning, the supervisor should guide the students through the process of finding a suitable research topic, but if the teacher's role is unclear, then instead of guiding they may actually choose the topic, and if so, the students will be prevented from exploring, using their creative thinking, and improving their problem-solving abilities…” (Faculty member N0.1).

Various performance

Based on the participants’ experiences, in this situation in which there are inadequate resources and organizational and social problems, some faculty members are well-trained in the field of supervision. One of the senior faculty members said: “It is my honor to mention that despite the existence of many obstacles, I have been able to train well-educated students, who have become researchers and contribute to the development of science in my country.”

One of the most important causes of poor performance is ineffective evaluation. Based on the participants experiences, two main problems can result in ineffective evaluation. First of all is the inadequate feedback from the supervisor which leads to unmotivated learners and the second one is lack of feedback from the stakeholders and educational institutes which in turn diminishes the supervisor’s efforts toward self-improvement. These can lead to poor performance both in students and supervisors.

In one of the Ph.D. student’s words:

“…In this system, there is no supervision on the supervisors; there is no control or evaluation of their work. Also, the supervisors don't get feedback from their students during the research process, and there is no third person who investigates whether the report is real or not…” (student N0. 7).

Evidence from data suggests that an unfair judgment and evaluation of academic theses are other problems in the process of acquiring the merit of teachers. If there isn’t proper evaluation, students and supervisors would not have the right standards to correct their performance.

The professors do not always consider the lack of expertise to be the only cause of poor performance. Many believe that inadequate monitoring can also reduce the motivation for quality performance. This means that supervisors may obtain the necessary expertise, but they are not motivated to enhance their performance since they are not expected to do this. One student had experienced:

“…I was so thrilled that my thesis supervisor was an experienced, older and well-known professor, but unfortunately, I soon found out that not only was his scientific knowledge outdated, but also he lacked the necessary supervision skills, so he let the students do all the work unsupervised. He did not take any responsibility during the process…” (Student N0.4).

Another point which leads to poor performance is the fact that some faculty members do not comprehend the main purpose of the thesis writing process; actually, they do not know the difference between teaching and guiding in the project or thesis supervision. One of the basic science supervisors said: “… Some faculties consider a thesis as research work and not a lesson in which research methodology should be taught...” (Faculty member N0.5).

Performing poorly along with ignoring professional ethics can also lead to increased tension and stress in student-teacher relationships. This can result in despondency and frustration in both students and teachers and create a vicious cycle of inefficient supervisors who will train inefficient students or future supervisors.

One of the students put it this way:

“...I feel the absence of a supervisor in my research; I would have been more successful, and my results would have been better if I had had more guidance.” (Student N0.6).

Theme 3: maturation

In this theme, the secondary phase of expertise, the individual is emotionally involved and feels that success or failure is important. This is a stage in which the learner needs an integrated schedule to be competent, and as a result, success or failure will follow. The supervisors frequently think about personal promotion and takes action in this way. They try out different approaches, and sometimes due to disappointment and embarrassment they fail. Some individuals quit at this stage and never reach competence, or they have what may be called an artificial competence. And this does not mean that they are not considered to be well-known supervisors; rather, they know, as do the students, that they are not competent. At this stage, the supervisor attempts to acquire the identity of a researcher and tries to enhance his availability, and be dutiful, knowledgeable, and enthusiastic in research supervision. Along the lines of this theme, three sub-themes of Reflection in action, Reflection on action, and Interactive accountability emerged.

Reflection in action

In this sub-theme, the patterns of expertise development begin, and self-directed learning, participatory teaching and learning strategies through a hidden curriculum are considered. At this stage, the supervisor tries to follow self-directed learning, and the amount of time allocated to expertise acquirement seems to be one of the most important factors. In this regard, one stated:

“…My success in this case (research supervision) is, first of all, due to self-evaluation and self-effort. For instance, to be in control and take full responsibility, I think about everything related to the guidance of the students, and I felt the need to master every aspect of research, even the statistical skills needed for analysis…” (Faculty member N0.8).

The supervisors’ activities were divided into two groups: self-directed –learning strategy and gaining experience through individual effort. Expertise requires continuous interaction and experience. They evaluate their learning, and by this, they experience the manner of managing and allocating time for effective supervision. According to participants, the amount of time allocation for expertise seems to be one of the most important factors for self-directed learning and expertise acquirement.

The formal training workshops provided an opportunity for supervisors with similar terms and the same problems in terms of learning experiences, environmental features, students, and educational problems to come together in one place. Participants also considered the formal participatory teaching necessary since it can provide an opportunity for the peers to get together and exchange their experiences. As a clinical faculty member put it:

“…Collaborative strategies can be beneficial in many ways. One of them is the facilitation of experience exchanges amongst teachers, peers, and colleagues and modeling the behavior of teachers and teaching workshops that emphasize the importance of their expertise in research supervision…” (Faculty member N0.1).

In our participants’ experience, this self-directed learning is effective if, and only if, it is done accompanied by proper training and participatory teaching. Otherwise, it is a waste of time. As an example, one of the students in this field said:

“…my supervisor was a great teacher and put in a lot of time and effort on my thesis supervision; however, due to his lack of research skills, I had to change my thesis proposal three times. However, after he participated in a training course at the University of Oxford, his progress was unbelievable and impressive…and I saw his expertise…” (Student N0.11).

One of the faculty members also quoted:

“…When the teachers feel a gap in their knowledge or skill, the university must provide a comfortable, appropriate, and easy way for learning them …” (Faculty member N0.10).

Regarding this subject, one of the Managers in this field stated:

“…Another improvement strategy is the use of interpersonal interactions among faculty members, these instructive interpersonal interactions among the faculty members in similar conditions make it possible to benefit from peers’ feedback …” (Manager N0.1).

A hidden curriculum strategy, like learning through trial and error can also affect the expertise process. One of the professors expressed:

“… Learning through trial and error is very effective; through the supervision of each thesis, we learn some of our mistakes and try not to remake them in the next one …” (Faculty member N0.3).

Reflection on action

The learner provides an integrated schedule for their competence and uses all the facilitators and facilities around them for further efficiency and promotion. This stage is named Conditional Self-efficacy by expertise experience. At this stage, the supervisor is considered a competent individual who can guide the students based on the experiences of specialized and non-specialized faculty members.

In this regard, one of the students said:

“…I can acknowledge that my supervisor functioned very impressively in this thesis, but guidance and supervision are not static; rather, it is an active process. To be a good supervisor, the faculty members should try to keep up to date and revise their attitudes, duties, and their specialty and knowledge. …” (Student N0.3).

According to the participants, at this stage the supervisors have achieved meta-competence and general characteristics or professional value; are able to guide the students and others; and develop characteristics such as acquiring specific knowledge of the discipline, especially well-organized knowledge, planning, directing of a project effectively, having good interpersonal skills, and being dutiful, knowledgeable and enthusiastic in research.

One of the PhD students states: “… My supervisor is typical of an expert. His ingenious inquiries, extraordinary attention to science and his personality have always been admired and he has been a role model for me…” (Student N0.6).

For example, the supervisors attend educational programs on scientific writing and thesis evaluation as well as ethics in research and apply them in team work. Gradually, their competency can enable them to function as a good supervisor for their students. At this stage, the supervisor develops so that they can respond due to discovery and intuition. These responses replace their dubious and unskilled reactions. The supervisor now reflects various stages of supervision and guidance. They take action, and in fact, a part of their reactions are achieved through observation and recognition. In this stage, they not only recognize what should be done but also distinguish how to achieve it with more precise discretion. A competent person does the appropriate task in the most appropriate time using the right platform.

The time period required for training or acquiring expertise varies from one person to another. Some individuals become experts very soon, whilst it takes others longer.. As one of the professors said:

“…In the beginning, I was too concerned with my responsibility as a thesis supervisor and was not sure what I should do. However, after ten years of experience, I have gained a sense of awareness which makes supervision easier for me. Of course, up to date knowledge and skill as to managing a thesis are always necessary. It took me about 12 years to reach where I am today. Furthermore, an individual who is expert at present, will not be so in two years, so I want to say that the expertise in thesis supervision in a continuum, which depends on the supervisor’s reflections on work and activity …” (Faculty member N0.15).

The continuous path of expertise in supervision can be affected by various factors. This has resulted in a range of expertise and performance in supervisors. This range and continuum is a theme that most of our participants agreed with. One of the managers revealed:

“…There is surely a continuum of expertise. We cannot deny the expert supervisors; however, the existence of those with poor supervising skills must also be acknowledged (in thesis supervision). There are those on whose ethics, honesty, and knowledge we can rely on. On the other hand, there are a few who are not as trustworthy as needed.” (Manager N0.1).

The core variable: interactive accountability

As shown in Fig. 1 , through this survey, we found that the core variable in thesis supervision process is the interactive accountability shaped by interactions of supervisors and students in an academic setting, so to enhance the accountability, each group must take responsibility and do his or her job. In this regard, one of the managers claimed:

“…When supervisors find themselves responsible, and the university officials recognize this responsibility, the supervisors are motivated to seek expertise and try to enhance their competencies and acquire learning strategies because of being accountable…” (Manager N0.2)

This means that teachers must be responsive to the needs of students, university and community. Accountability is a mutual interaction between the students and their supervisor, in other words, if the student is responsive to his duties, he creates motivation in his supervisor. One of the participants commented;

“…I've always tried to be a competent thesis supervisor, so that I have the ability to meet the needs of the community and university as well as students. I say to myself when I accept the supervision of a thesis, I should be well accountable for its results…” (Faculty member N0.32)

This study aimed at exploring the processes of expertise among thesis supervisors based on the experience of faculty members, students, and managers of Iranian universities of medical sciences. The section concludes with an explanation of how these themes are a cohesive relationship, which enables the expertise development of supervisors. It seems that the core variable in the expertise process is the concept of interactive accountability and efforts to acquire the capacity to respond to the students and academic needs. This will help them to promote their professional behavior in research supervision. The importance of accountability and various types of ability in thesis supervision has also been emphasized by other studies [ 24 , 25 , 26 ]. It was also mentioned as the major feature of the supervisor in other studies [ 26 , 27 ].

In this study, “accountability” emerged as the behavioral pattern through which the supervisors resolved their main concern of being an expert in being responsive to academic and students’ needs. Supervision training is complex since academic choices in the real world can depend on supervisor characteristics. The results of this study revealed that in the initial phase of supervision, observation, evaluation, and reflection in action and maturation stage in the secondary phase were the major themes that emerged. This result compared with Bandura’s social learning and self-efficacy theory was significant in similarity and difference. Bandura believes that achieving self-efficacy is one of the most important contributors to competence. In his model, he suggested four sources of self-efficacy, including previous accomplishments, vicarious experiences such as having a role model, verbal persuasion such as coaching and evaluative feedback, and emotional arousal [ 28 , 29 ]. Likewise, in this study, we found that the emotional arousals such as personal interest in cooperative learning, peer competition, meeting the needs of students, self-awareness and the need for upgrading are the significant factors for the faculties’ expertise. Also, our participants found that the utilization of previous experiences is the most effective method of achieving personal competence. However, this study indicates conditional expertise, which means if an expert’s information is not up to date and they do not make any effort in this regard, being an expert and having expertise is not a permanent condition.

This study also revealed that self-effort, workshops, and role models, as part of a hidden curriculum, are influential methods of teacher empowerment which agrees with the results of some studies such as those of Britzman et al. and Patel et al. Patel et al. have also suggested the importance of role modeling; they believe that modeling and observing other faculty members behavior is an effective tool for promoting and strengthening the sense of efficacy in learners [ 30 , 31 ].

Based on our study results, among the learning methods used in Iran, the collaborative education and problem-based learning is the widely accepted method which is preferred by most faculties. Therefore, cooperative and collaborative learning strategies can be used in educating the faculty members towards expertise in supervision, as revealed in other studies [ 32 , 33 ].

Lack of time is reported by supervisors to be one of the most common barriers in trying to become an expert and carry out respectable worthy supervision, and taking one’s time is acknowledged as a motivating factor for putting in more effort in thesis supervision [ 34 , 35 , 36 ].

The effect of contextual factors is studied in several surveys [ 36 , 37 , 38 ]. Gillet et al. state that contextual and organizational factors play a key role in the competence of teachers in research supervision [ 36 ]. This study also showed that faculty expertise in thesis supervision was significantly affected by the impact of contextual interventional factors such as sudden changes, structural shortcomings, and educational environment. Based on our and other studies’ results, among the sudden changes, increased workload due to the increase in the student population has greatly affected expertise. Moreover, while an increase in the workload can lead to more experienced faculty members, it is very time-consuming and, therefore, reduces the chance to obtain new information and skills in thesis supervision [ 33 , 37 ].

Similar to our study, other studies such as those of Al-Naggar et al. and Yousefi et al. have also found insufficient monitoring and lack of formative evaluations to be one of the main obstacles in the thesis supervision process. Studies have indicated that to improve the supervision process, careful planning and incentive rules must be applied [ 5 , 34 ]. Similarly, our participants mentioned that rules and regulations which have resulted in the positive effect of research on scholarship and promotion had truly motivated them. Like our study, other studies in Iran have also found that the amount of time allocated to learning is one of the influential factors affecting the faculty members’ expertise [ 13 , 38 ]. A malfunctioning relationship between the student and supervisors can affect both of them negatively; that is, it can compel the students to misbehave and also reduce the teachers’ motivation to develop better skills. This malfunction may be due to the lack of constructive interactions or paternalism leadership in research supervision [ 39 , 40 ]. As shown in Fig. 1 , this study provided a conceptual framework that can be used in policy making and studies of expertise development in research supervision. This framework is based on the perception and experience of the majority of those involved in the thesis process. It also provides teachers with an opportunity to compare and share their experiences.

This model has three fields of experience, which yields a comprehensive gradient of the factors used for the development and progress of thesis supervision quality. In other words, it is a rational structure that makes an effort to cover a comprehensible number of stages, of concept, achievement, and impact or consequence. In other words, this model is a combination of a great number of items that help to recognize the present and future processes of expertise in thesis supervision, and future challenges in this area which predict results and impacts of supervisor’s knowledge, attitude and research supervision. Table one offers the categories and clarifications [ 17 ].

This study is based on our overall model of expertise attainment. This model reveals that specific personal efforts such as observation of prior knowledge, evaluation or self-assessments alongside the university contextual dynamics help to figure out how supervisors select their approaches and engagements, and respond carefully to their task, which in turn impacts the supervisors’ level of expertise and, finally, outcomes such as work and perseverance, which then help them to become an expert. Similar to the social learning theory of Bandura, this model also states that there is a mutual relationship between different parts that can mutually affect one another. For instance, faculty members have shown in various studies how one’s previous academic success and failure can affect the future levels of involvement and motivation. Based on the study aims, we focused on only three of the components of the model: observation, evaluation, and self-efficacy; in terms of motivational processes, we focused on four motivational components. The first is self-efficacy, defined as students’ judgments of supervisor abilities to carry out a task, and their beliefs about their ability to do so show the highest levels of academic achievement and also engagement in academic behaviors promoting learning.

Through the use of this grounded theory, we can begin to understand the supervisors’ challenges and why it may be difficult to become an expert in research supervision in practice. The junior supervisors curiously observe and evaluate their environment by reflection and in action and do their best to attain knowledge and skills in the supervision of the theses, so that they can reach maturation. They are mainly supported by prior knowledge of the research supervision, which they had acquired when they were students. The concept of “interactive accountability” refers to the fact that if the supervisor is responsive to the students’ needs, they can be an expert in supervision. If they cannot overcome the barriers and shortcomings such as lack of time, they will not attain expertise in thesis supervision.

Strengths and limitations of the study

This grounded theory study describes the main dimensions of expertise in research supervision from straight reports of a large qualitative sample ( n = 84) which consists of thesis supervisors, from all Iranian universities in three different data collection phases. Like other qualitative research, the results of this study cannot be generalized; therefore, it is recommended that the researchers conduct further qualitative research in other contexts to support these findings.

Despite the above limitations, we believe that this model can be useful for supervisors in the thesis supervision area, not only in analyzing the supervisors’ experience of supervision and being an expert but also in recognizing the areas of intervention or development of teacher training.

Implications of the study

The findings of the present study will help administrators to choose the supervisor with definite criteria in medical sciences institutes and facilitate the expertise in the supervision process through elimination of the shortcomings and improvement of the educational climate. The supervisor’s interest, talent, and capabilities should be assessed at the beginning of their employment as academic staff. Supervisors should attend educational workshops for updating their knowledge about supervision. It is recommended that collaborative strategies and methods should be used, so that we can contribute to the process of becoming an expert. The assessment of supervisors’ functioning in supervising and provision of feedback can contribute to the process of expertise. Feedback received from students about their supervisors will improve the supervisor’s further expertise and capabilities. For future studies survey on the impact of successful models in thesis supervision, disclosure analysis studies about student and supervisor are recommended.

In this study, we aimed to find out how thesis supervisors achieve expertise in supervision. The results of our study indicated that thesis supervisors achieve expertise in supervision in two stages of engagement and maturation. The emotional need to be responsive towards peers and students is the main motivation for the acquisition of competency at observation and evaluation phase of engagement. Through the evaluation and observation phase, the supervisors reach cognitive competence, such as research skills. Also, in the maturation phases, they reach meta-competence in research supervision such as problem-solving and resolving dilemmas by reflection in and when exposed to dilemmas. Meanwhile, the effects of supervision climate include shortcomings and role ambiguities which should be taken into account. According to this model, when supervisors are exposed to such problems, they apply multiple strategies, such as self-directed and collaborative learning; and learning by trial and error and from the role models. This will help them to promote their professional behavior in research supervision. This study indicated that interactive accountability, as the core variable, can be guaranteed in thesis supervisors by making the role clear, creating a supportive context, and improving the academic competencies of staff in an ongoing fashion. Therefore, this can promote constructive expertise in supervisors and foster a deeper understanding of the supervisor’s expertise in thesis supervision.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets produced and analyzed during the present study are not publicly accessible due to participant confidentiality, but are obtainable from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Harwood N, Petrić B. Adaptive master’s dissertation supervision: a longitudinal case study. Teach High Educ. 2018; https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1541881 .

Hal de Kleijn RA, Meijer PC, Brekelmans M, Pilot A. Adaptive research supervision: exploring expert thesis supervisors’ practical knowledge. High Educ Res Dev. 2015;34(1):117–30.

Article Google Scholar

Pearson M, Brew A. Research training and supervision development. Stud High Educ. 2002;27(2):135–50.

Light, G, Cox R, Calkins S. Learning and teaching in higher education: the reflective professional. 2nd ed. London: Paul Chapman; 2009.

Youseffi A, Bazrafkan L, Yamani N. A qualitative inquiry into the challenges and complexities of research supervision: viewpoints of postgraduate students and faculty members. J Adv Med Educ Prof. 2015;3(3):91.

Google Scholar

Lee AM. Developing effective supervisors: concepts of research supervision. South Afr J High Educ. 2007;21(4):680–93.

Hall-Ellis SD, Grealy DS. The Dreyfus model of skill acquisition: a career development framework for succession planning and management in academic libraries. Coll Res Libr. 2013;74(6):587–603.

Wisker G. The good supervisor: Supervising postgraduate and undergraduate research for doctoral theses and dissertations. 2nd ed. Palgrave Macmillan; 2012.

Vereijken MW, van der Rijst RM, van Driel JH, Dekker FW. Novice supervisors’ practices and dilemmatic space in supervision of student research projects. Teach High Educ. 2018;23(4):522–42.

Haghdoost AA, Ghazi M, Rafiee Z, Afshari M. The trend of governmental support from post-graduated Iranian students in medical fields to study abroad. Iran J Public Health. 2013;42(Suppl 1):141–6.

Malekzadeh R, Mokri A, & , Azarmina P. Medical science and research in Iran. Arch Iran Med (2001)4(1):27–39.

Samari A, Sorkhabi E, Omran S, Geraeenejed. Research and identify the factors contributing to the process of “academic development”. Iran Univ Stud Educ Plann. 2014;2(4):67–100.

Malekafzali H, Majdzadeh S, Fotouhi A, Tavakoli S. Applied research methodology in medical sciences. Tehran: Tehran University of Medical Sciences; 2004.

Creswell JW. Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publication; 2012.

Strauss AJC. Basic of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage Co; 1998.

Jeon Y-H. The application of grounded theory and symbolic interactionism. Scand J Caring Sci. 2004;18(3):249–56.

Denzin NK. The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. 2nd edition. Routledge: Taylor and Francis group; 2017.

Book Google Scholar

Dilley P. Interviews and the philosophy of qualitative research. J High Educ. 2004;75(1):127–32.

Strauss AJC. Basic of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage Co; 2008.

Cho JY, Lee E-H. Reducing confusion about grounded theory and qualitative content analysis: similarities and differences. Qual Rep. 2014;19(32):1–20.

Gioia DACK, Hamilton AL. Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research notes on the Gioia methodology. Organ Res Methods. 2013;16(1):15–31.

Skeith L, Ridinger H, Srinivasan S, Givi B, Youssef N, Harris I. Exploring the thesis experience of master of health professions education graduates: a qualitative study. Int J Med Educ. 2018;9:113.

Yeatman A. Making supervision relationships accountable: graduate student logs. Aust Univ Rev. 1995;38(2):9–11.

Saaban A, Abu B, Jiar YK. Students and supervisors’ roles and responsibilities in doctoral research supervision. Adv Sci Lett. 2018;24(1):66–8.

Carter S, Laurs D, Chant L, Wolfgramm-Foliaki E. Indigenous knowledges and supervision: changing the lens. Innov Educ Teach Int. 2018;55(3):384–93.

Boston P. The three faces of supervision: Individual learning, group learning, and supervisor accountability. In C. Burck and G. Daniel (2010) (Eds.) Mirrors and Reflections Processes of Systemic Supervision. Routledge, Taylor, and Francis; 2010:27–48.

Chapter Google Scholar

Manathunga C. The development of research supervision: “turning the light on a private space”. Int J Acad Dev. 2005;10(1):17–30.

Bandura A. On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. J Manag. 2012;38(1):9–44.

Bandura A. On deconstructing commentaries regarding alternative theories of self-regulation. J Manag. 2015;41(4):1025–44.

Britzman DP. Practice makes practice: A critical study of learning to teach. -State University of New York Press; 2003.

Patel M, Reed D, Smith C, Arora V. Role-modeling cost-conscious care—a national evaluation of perceptions of faculty at teaching hospitals in the United States. J Gen Intern Med. 2015;30(9):1294–8.

Howard M, Steensma HK, Lyles M, Dhanaraj C. Learning to collaborate through collaboration: how allying with expert firms influences collaborative innovation within novice firms. Strateg Manag J. 2015:n/a.

Steinert Y. Faculty development: core concepts and principles. Steinert Y, editor. Faculty development in the health professions. Innovation and change in professional education. 11: Springer Netherlands; 2014. 3–25.

Al-Naggar R, et al. Doctorate international students’ satisfaction and stress on academic supervision in a Malaysian University: a qualitative approach. Educ Res. 2012;3(3):264–9.

Gillet N, Gagné M, Sauvagère S, Fouquereau E. The role of supervisor autonomy support, organizational support, and autonomous and controlled motivation in predicting employees’ satisfaction and turnover intentions. Eur J Work Organ Psy. 2012;22(4):450–60.

Harden RM. AMEE guide no. 14: outcome-based education: part 1-an introduction to outcome-based education. Med Teach. 1999;21(1):7–14.

Bazrafkan L, Shokrpour N, Yousefi A, Yamani N. Management of stress and anxiety among phd students during thesis writing: a qualitative study. Health Care Manag. 2016;35(3):231–40.

Ghadirian L, Sayarifard A, Majdzadeh R, Rajabi F, Yunesian M. Challenges for better thesis supervision. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2014;28:32.

Vehviläinen S, Löfström E. ‘I wish I had a crystal ball’: discourses and potentials for developing academic supervising. Stud High Educ. 2016;41(3):508–24.

Grossman ES. ‘My supervisor is so busy...’ informal spaces for postgraduate learning in the health sciences. South Afr J High Educ. 2016;30(2):94–109.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The researchers would like to thank all research participants of Medical Sciences Universities (faculty, student, and managers) who contributed to the study. The authors would also like to thank the Education Development Center of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences for cooperation in this study and special thanks to Professor Shokrpoour for her editing.

The present article was extracted from the thesis written by Leila Bazrafkan. The design and implementation of the project was financially supported by Esfahan University of Medical Sciences (Grant No. 92–6746).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Clinical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

Leila Bazrafkan & Mitra Amini

Department of Medical Education, Medical Education Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Alireza Yousefy & Nikoo Yamani

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

LB developed the study design, conducted the interviews and analysis, ensured trustworthiness, and drafted the manuscript. AY, as the supervisor participated in the study design, supervised the codes and data analysis process, and revised the manuscripts. NY as research advisor participated in the study and provided guidance during the study and MA revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors’ information

LB is an assistant professor of medical education in Medical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences,

AY is Professor of Medical Education Dept., Medical Education Research Center, University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan

MA is Professor of Medical Education in the Medical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences,

NY Associate Professor of Medical Education Dept., Medical Education Research Center, University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nikoo Yamani .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences (92–6746). The participants were justified about the research aim and interviews. Informed consent for conducting and recording the interview was obtained. The confidentiality of the participants’ information was maintained throughout the study.

Consent for publication

Participants gave printed informed consent for the use of passages for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Bazrafkan, L., Yousefy, A., Amini, M. et al. The journey of thesis supervisors from novice to expert: a grounded theory study. BMC Med Educ 19 , 320 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1739-z

Download citation

Received : 07 February 2019

Accepted : 29 July 2019

Published : 22 August 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1739-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Qualitative research
Medical sciences faculty
Grounded theory
Thesis supervision

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

Submission enquiries: [email protected]
General enquiries: [email protected]

First meeting with your dissertation supervisor: What to expect

The first meeting with your dissertation supervisor can be a little intimidating, as you do not know what to expect. While every situation is unique, first meetings with a dissertation supervisor often centre around getting to know each other, establishing expectations, and creating work routines.

Why a good relationship with a dissertation supervisor matters

What is important to know is that the relationship that you establish with your supervisor can be a crucial factor in completing a successful dissertation.

A better relationship often results in better and timely completion of a dissertation. This finding is backed up by science. This study , for instance, points out that student-supervisor relationships strongly influence the quality, success or failure of completing a PhD (on time).

Commonly experienced challenges in student-supervisor relationships, on the other hand, are “different expectations, needs and ways of thinking and working” (Gill and Burnard, 2008, p. 668).

Getting to know each other during the first meeting

Many first meetings with a dissertation supervisor include a considerable amount of ‘small talk’. Thus, you can expect to engage in a casual conversation to get acquainted.

Getting to know the work environment during the first meeting

PhD students who start their dissertation are often introduced to their lab, research group or department during the first meeting.

There may also be a discussion about accessing an institutional email address or online work environment as a dissertation student. And any questions that are important to answer to kick off the dissertation process.

Establishing a meeting and communication schedule

Establishing a meeting schedule, or at least discussing how often you are planning to meet, how regularly, and within what time intervals, can reduce a lot of stress and uncertainty.

Discussing your research idea with your dissertation supervisor

While you can expect a lot of Smalltalk, planning, and organisational issues to dominate the first meeting with your dissertation supervisor, it is common to also chat about your research idea.

Based on this information, the dissertation supervisor can already point you in the right direction, suggest relevant literature, or connect you with other students or colleagues who work on similar issues.

Discussing expectations with your dissertation supervisor

Expectations differ from supervisor to supervisor. Some may just expect you to simply get used to your work environment, read a lot and explore theories that are relevant to your dissertation. Others may want to see the first results in terms of a literature review or research proposal.

If you are writing a master thesis, your timeframe will be much shorter. Thus, it is even more important to define deadlines and milestones with your dissertation supervisor as soon as possible. The first meeting lends itself to making this plan.

Master Academia

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox, how many conferences postgrads should attend, 10 things to do when you feel like your dissertation is killing you, related articles, the importance of sleep for efficient thesis writing, 5 inspiring phd thesis acknowledgement examples, how to write a literature review introduction (+ examples), 3 inspiring master’s thesis acknowledgement examples.

+44 (0) 207 391 9032

Academic Integrity vs. Academic Dishonesty: Understanding the Key Differences

How to Use AI to Enhance Your Thesis
Academic News
Custom Essays
Dissertation Writing
Essay Marking
Essay Writing
Essay Writing Companies
Model Essays
Model Exam Answers
Oxbridge Essays Updates
PhD Writing
Significant Academics
Student News
Study Skills
University Applications
University Essays
University Life
Writing Tips

How to get the most from your dissertation supervisor

(Last updated: 12 May 2021)

Since 2006, Oxbridge Essays has been the UK’s leading paid essay-writing and dissertation service

We have helped 10,000s of undergraduate, Masters and PhD students to maximise their grades in essays, dissertations, model-exam answers, applications and other materials. If you would like a free chat about your project with one of our UK staff, then please just reach out on one of the methods below.

Working with a supervisor on your own research project at dissertation level offers a very different relationship from the student-tutor relationship you might be more used to – and more comfortable with. It's a relationship that demands clarity and understanding, but that can develop (and challenge!) both your academic and interpersonal skills. Here are some tips on getting the most out of your relationship with your dissertation supervisor.

Choosing the right supervisor

If you're an undergraduate (and perhaps even a Master's student) you may find that your supervisor is chosen for you, based on a broad match with your dissertation topic. For most PhD students and some Master's students, however, choosing your dissertation supervisor will be one of the most important early decisions you make, and it will impact both the direction of your research and the shape of your dissertation. Here are some of the questions you should ask yourself about your prospective supervisor (you can even ask some of them directly to the prospective supervisor, provided you deploy a degree of tact in doing so) to ensure you'll get the most out of your working relationship.

This question gets more important the higher the level of your dissertation. While you can expect most academics to have a broad familiarity with their field, it's not reasonable to expect that everybody in your wider field has a detailed knowledge of the theories, frameworks, and texts you'll use in your own work. And given the other demands on their time, it's also unreasonable to expect a supervisor to familiarise themselves with the work of fifty or a hundred scholars before they even start to read your work! Senior academics are likely to be upfront and refuse to supervise you if they lack the expertise to do so. But academics new to the profession may enthusiastically agree to supervise a project even if they're ill-equipped to provide the necessary level of critique. It's your responsibility to be both discerning and reasonable about your expectations.

You and your dissertation supervisor absolutely don't have to agree on everything – and disagreements can be enormously constructive (see below). However, there are also some approaches to the same field that are fundamentally incompatible. By all means pick a supervisor who will challenge your assumptions, but not someone who is ideologically opposed to everything you do before you start doing it.

By now you should "know yourself" sufficiently to be able to identify what you want in a supervisor. Are you a procrastinator in need of a "hands-on" supervisor who will give you strict deadlines for the delivery of outlines and chapters? Or are you highly self-motivated and content to work with a "hands-off" dissertation supervisor who will read your work when you ask them to do so, but not bug you otherwise? Also ask yourself about their style of grading papers – are they generous with praise at the expense of constructive feedback? Do they offer detailed, constructive feedback on how you can make your work better, or do you find their comments picky and overbearing? And, just as importantly, do you tend to get motivated or deflated by the sight of red pen decorating your work?

Popular supervisors may be supervising a high number of dissertations at any one time, potentially reducing the time they have to spend on you. On the other hand, if an academic has no supervisees at all, there might be a reason for that.

Working with your supervisor

It's important to realise that you and your supervisor will need to develop a working relationship based on trust and a shared understanding of what each expects from the other. The exact shape your working relationship takes will depend on your individual working patterns – and the subject area you're working in – but here are some useful pointers to consider

Work with, not for , your supervisor

No doubt you're used to taking modules at university and completing tasks, assignments and exams to pass those modules. You'll have become accustomed to a certain model of working: your tutor gives you direction and instruction, and you complete the assignments to satisfy their requirements. It can be easy, especially for undergraduates, to fall into this familiar pattern when working with a dissertation supervisor. But, although your dissertation will have to meet rigorous assessment criteria set by your department, you shouldn't think about your dissertation supervisor as the tutor for whom you're completing the work. Think of your supervisor instead as a teammate with whom you're working towards completing a goal – an original, rewarding piece of research.

As with any time you're working in a team, you'll need to provide what you're asked for – whether that's a draft of a chapter, a full dissertation outline, or just a set of research questions – when you're asked for it, because another member of your team requires it in order to fulfil their role in the collective endeavour. But don't forget the other important aspect of teamwork. Be clear about what you'd like your teammate to offer you at each step along the way. If you ask your supervisor to look at an early draft, make sure you're explicit about what kind of feedback you're seeking; if you were just looking for confirmation you're "on the right track" structurally, but your draft is full of factual and grammatical errors, it's not going to feel good for anyone when your supervisor assumes that it's a near-final version and rips it to pieces.

Engage your supervisor early

Many supervisors will insist that you meet frequently during the planning stages of your project, especially if you're writing an undergraduate dissertation. But if your supervisor is particularly "hands-off", they may not insist on these early meetings, so it's your job to do so! Involving your supervisor in the planning stages of your dissertation is essential, and will prevent you from making errors that take a great deal of time to fix later, or simply producing a dissertation that your supervisor fundamentally dislikes. Your supervisor will be able to recommend lots of readings for your literature review , and will help you develop a methodology that is robust, well-grounded and theoretically sound, and that – where applicable – adheres to the required ethics standards. If you and your supervisor are in sync about the grounding and methodology of your project, any disagreements that follow are liable to be of the productive rather than the destructive kind!

Meet with your dissertation supervisor frequently, and give them work little and often

Few things are more disheartening than delivering a 5000-word chapter to your supervisor and being told that you need to rewrite almost all of it, because your premise was flawed. It's best to get into the habit of checking in with your dissertation supervisor frequently to discuss where you plan on going next. If you're stuck, your supervisor may be able to help you frame an argument, or transition from one to another. Or they might point you to a couple of sources who will help you make the argument you're trying to make.

Most importantly, you needn't feel that you should only give your supervisor finished or polished work. This is one of the key ways in which a supervisor differs from a tutor, and one of the key reasons why you need to resist thinking of them as such. You shouldn't, of course, give your supervisor sloppy work that you simply haven't bothered to proofread and that is littered with spelling and grammar mistakes. But you can hand in draft introductions or in-process sections with development notes, provided you clearly communicate what it is you're giving your supervisor and what you expect them to do with it.

Disagree – but productively!

You and your supervisor absolutely don't have to agree on everything; academia is based on lively discussion and creative disagreement. Your supervisor is bound to disagree with at least some of what you write – whether it's an interpretation of an individual source or your entire conclusion. It's true that a minority of academics can be dogmatic, and if it becomes evident that your dissertation supervisor is in search of a disciple rather than a student, there may be a problem in your relationship.

If your supervisor is a particularly distinguished academic in their field, it can feel very intimidating to have them argue with you, and it's very tempting to simply back down. Sometimes that's also the right call – knowing when you're wrong and need to change direction is a skill you need to acquire as an emerging academic! Just as often, though, what feels like pressure to simply agree with your supervisor's way of seeing things is actually a challenge, to address counter-arguments in your dissertation and make your work more robust as a result. If you still think your argument is strong even after your supervisor has presented their own reasoning, appropriate that reasoning into your argument, and address head-on why you still believe your interpretation is better. If in doubt, ask your dissertation supervisor directly: do you think I'm just wrong here, or do I need to do more to convince you?

If all else fails… switch!

In the unlikely event that something goes wrong – perhaps you've realised too late that your supervisor simply wants you to write an entirely different dissertation from the one you're writing, or you find their feedback impenetrable and demoralising, or they're too busy to meet with you for weeks at a time – you may decide that you need to switch supervisors. Try talking this out with your dissertation supervisor first, and then approach your head of department.

A freshers’ guide to money and work

A freshers’ guide to university and mental health

dissertation supervisor
study skills
university life

Writing Services

Essay Plans
Critical Reviews
Literature Reviews
Presentations
Dissertation Title Creation
Dissertation Proposals
Dissertation Chapters
PhD Proposals
Journal Publication
CV Writing Service
Business Proofreading Services

Editing Services

Proofreading Service
Editing Service
Academic Editing Service

Additional Services

Marking Services
Consultation Calls
Personal Statements
Tutoring Services

Our Company

Frequently Asked Questions
Become a Writer

Terms & Policies

Fair Use Policy
Policy for Students in England
Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
[email protected]
Contact Form

Payment Methods

Cryptocurrency payments.

Thesis SupportAll
Academic writing
Getting started tips
How to choose a thesis topic
Fear of failure
Perfectionism
Procrastination

Relationship with your supervisor

Stress Management
Time Management
Writer’s block
Thesis bookshelf

Introduction to supervision

A supervisor will guide your thesis-writing process. Next to content related outcomes, the supervisor will also evaluate additional learning outcomes, which are related to competences on bachelor or master level. Your supervisor will evaluate how you apply ethics appropriate to scientific research, how you demonstrate your ability to work on your own initiative and how you demonstrate your ability to organize your work on this long-term project within a tight schedule.

Be aware that it is common that your supervisor has limited time to supervise you, but nonetheless has great expectations of your commitment. The working relationship you have with your supervisor is unique and it frequently happens that it is the source of some friction and sometimes frustration. This is because your supervisor is the person who is likely to be challenging and (constructively) criticising your ideas on a regular basis.

The relationship with your supervisor can have a major influence on your success rate. Be aware of both your roles in the thesis process and if unclear inform yourself on what to expect and what not to expect. In maintaining a successful relationship with your supervisor you might be able to graduate sooner and achieve a higher grade.

Choosing a supervisor

In some cases you are allowed to choose your own supervisor. Before talking to a potential supervisor, it is important to think carefully of the listed points below.

Preferences with respect to the content:

Topic: what do I want to research?
Method: how will I analyse my topic?

Personal preferences:

Level of ambition: which grade do I want to achieve? When do I want to graduate?
Self-support: How much guidance do I need from my supervisor?
Click: Do I prefer to work with a woman or a man? Do I prefer an open or a formal way of communication?

It is important to find supervisors who have the time, the right knowledge and the commitment to work with you productively. Next to that, it is important to be clear what you want, or need, from a supervisor.

They may be a great expert on the precise field in which you want to work (a particular author, say). Or they may be exponents of a theory or method that you want to work with, in a different field from theirs. Or perhaps they may be neither, but have a general knowledge of the broad field, and of different approaches to its study, and sufficient pedagogical skill and experience to be able to direct you effectively. A supervisor of any of these types may be very successful; but try to get clear in advance what it is they can offer you. If you are working, for instance, in an area where very precise skills or knowledge are required (e.g. some kinds of bibliography, or history of ideas, or advanced psychoanalytic theory) you may need the specialist, not the generalist.

Managing the relationship with your supervisor

Good, open communication is the key to managing your relationship with your supervisor. At the beginning of your thesis, come to an agreement with your supervisor on the writing process:

The time and frequency of your supervision meetings.
An overall plan and timeline for your research, as well as how you will agree on interim deadlines.
Whether your supervisor would like to see regular pieces of work, or just finished drafts, and how they will give feedback .

Dealing with problems

Writing your thesis can be a long, intense, and emotional process, and unfortunately, the supervisory relationship sometimes breaks down. If you are having problems working with your supervisor:

Try to talk to your supervisor about your difficulties first – and see if you can work them through.
Take a step back and identify what is making it difficult to work together – focus on specific professional difficulties, as opposed to the character or personality of your supervisor.
Get an objective, confidential, outside perspective from someone you can trust, such as a student advisor.
Ask fellow students who you can trust if they have had similar problems and how they have managed them.
Try to maintain communications with your supervisor and don’t let the relationship deteriorate to a point where you don’t talk.
If things are very difficult, see if you can find a third person to be a mediator. This could be a student advisor or thesis coordinator (if applicable) at your faculty.

Things generally go wrong because of a failure of communication. Therefore, the first thing to do if you are unhappy about something (or if the supervisor is unhappy with your work!) is to talk about it. Don’t hide.

General tips and tools for students

There are some things you can do to make the process go smoothly; before, during and after your meeting with your supervisor.

Before supervisions prepare for the meeting by thinking of:

Your progress and achievements since the last meeting
Any problems or points you need clarifying
An action plan of what to do next

During your supervisions:

Take notes, especially of any actions or things to follow up.
Pay attention to the questions your supervisor asks, as these are often crucial in helping you think about the direction of your research.
Take the opportunity to explain and defend your ideas.

After your supervisions:

Make sure that you confirm the details from each supervision in writing (via email) to check there have been no misunderstandings.
Reflect on what you have discussed – it is likely to trigger more ideas.
Take your supervisor’s advice seriously – they don’t expect you to follow everything they suggest, but they do expect you to consider it carefully.

Get support

If you don’t feel able to address the issue with your supervisor, contact a student advisor at your faculty .

Available workshops at Maastricht University

The Student Services Centre has a wide range of training, workshops and lectures available that can help you with your studies. Take a look at their website for more information .

Contact & Support

For questions or information, use the web form to contact a library specialist.

Ask Your Librarian - Contact a library specialist

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

How should I deal with challenging master thesis students as a supervisor?

I'm a PhD student in my first year, co-supervising master students with a postdoc, and listed as the first supervisor. This is my first experience supervising a thesis. My previous experiences with students were mainly tutoring or conducting lab experiments with students.

The issues:

The students are not honest; they have experience with some tools, and it is in their curriculum, but when I asked them about the tools, they stated to me clearly that they don't have experience with it. In another meeting with the co-supervisor, they admitted the opposite; however, minimum experience.

I have sent many tasks since the beginning stating clearly why these tasks should be done now because they will need it in the future to do so and so. The tasks were ignored.

The student neither thinks actively nor searches for the information, expecting everything to be spoon-fed. I stated many times that this is not how master theses work.

I thought maybe the topic was new to them, so I prepared a list of questions, including keywords with the required material to search within and learn. It was not taken seriously.

Also, they don't consider our time and that we have other responsibilities and expect an answer within a few minutes.

Since time is running out for them, they are playing some game (I don't know the proper term for that) like:

You are my mentor, and the time is running; if I didn't help them immediately, they would spend the time doing something wrong, which would be my fault.

Whenever I ask a question from the questions list I sent earlier; supposedly they did a literature review, and the answers are entirely wrong. Their excuse is the topic is new, and there is not enough literature, which is a lie.

They reached the stage where they complained to me that the server was down (where they should get the data), which is a national server and not my issue.

I don't know what to do anymore; I tried positive reinforcement, specific tasks, and specific tasks with deadlines, but all did not work. I don't want to be an "unsupportive supervisor"; I'm afraid I have already lost interest in the topic and am not interested in getting a good master thesis out of it.

The questions might be: How should I proceed, and how can I proceed objectively?

A good master thesis in my opinion is that the students understand the problem, review the relevant literature, approach the issue, develop a workflow to solve it, try that, and write all that in in their thesis.

The students received their topic/title, recommendation regarding literature, the tools that should be used in the thesis at the beginning. After, two or three consecutive meetings, it was clear that they need to be guided a little bit. That is why I or we started guiding them.

supervision

16 Have you discussed this with your post-doc and professor? If so, what did they say? Also: who decides whether these students pass or fail? I assume a professor -- but if you are "first supervisor," maybe this is your decision? – cag51 ♦ Commented Jun 9, 2022 at 18:56
2 Also: I don't understand your first bullet. What does "in their colloquium" mean? My read is that they are trying to avoid overstating their level of knowledge, which is minimal. Or? – cag51 ♦ Commented Jun 9, 2022 at 19:08
3 If you were my supervisor, I would kindly ask you to let me be freer. You are supposed to only guide them, not to tell them what do you. Note that, there is a difference between giving them suggestions and giving tasks. "[...] getting a good master thesis out of it.". That is not job. That won't affect your career. That is not your thesis. If you are interested in the subject, work on it yourself or give the project to someone else. – Our Commented Jun 9, 2022 at 19:11
2 Please be patient; we're really just trying to understand the situation so that we can offer helpful advice. If I understand correctly, it sounds like you discussed this situation with your professor and they told you to offer additional "handholding." Is that correct? What I'm really trying to understand is: if you tell the students "do X or you or will fail," and they don't do X, will they indeed fail? Or will your professor swoop in and offer some alternative? – cag51 ♦ Commented Jun 9, 2022 at 20:59
1 How many such students? (Suggest the question be edited with that info.) – Daniel R. Collins Commented Jun 9, 2022 at 21:16

You are trying to be helpful, but there is such a thing as too much handholding. The more helpful you are, the more likely students are to exploit this and to become a help vampire .

You do not owe your students any success. You owe them a fair chance at succeeding. But this chance is theirs to take. The thesis is solely their responsibility, especially since the purpose of a masters thesis also is to demonstrate the ability of doing independent academic work. By definition , success or failure of the thesis isn't your fault. Some students will throw their chance away, regardless of how much you help them.

Things that might help in the future include clearer boundaries, and focusing your assistance more on methodological aspects.

Your student currently expects responses within minutes. Matters are rarely so urgent that they need responses the same day.

When supervising a thesis, it might be best to minimize such informal messages except for truly urgent issues, and instead have regular meetings for which the student can prepare questions. Depending on the kind of work, a cadence like one meeting every two weeks might work well. Then, you can defer any small issues that come up: “let's discuss this at our next meeting”.

You mentioned that you “sent many tasks”, provided material, and tried to set deadlines.

This is fine when working with an intern or research assistant, but not for a student who is supposed to independently write a thesis. Firstly, because you're doing their work for them. Secondly, because it's their thesis and they should use whatever working style they believe works for them.

Instead, it might be best to focus your assistance on methodological aspects, so that the student knows how to write a good thesis. For example, many students need an explanation about how to find useful literature, how to structure a thesis, and maybe where to find techniques that weren't covered during lectures. A master thesis is often the longest independent project done by the student, so sharing experience with time management can also help.

But mostly, a Socratic approach is useful, where you ask the students about their plans for the thesis. What are their goals until the next meeting? Do they feel they are on schedule, if not how can they adapt their plans? Have they considered the connection with $related_topic? How to they intend to mitigate a certain risk you are concerned about? What challenges are they currently facing, and how do they intend to solve them? You can suggest things, but it will be the student's decision what they do with that suggestion.

Added benefit: if you set out a plan and they fail, they will blame you, and perhaps rightly so. If they set out a plan and they fail despite knowing your concerns, that's clearly on them.

Since the thesis in question is already close to its end, it will be difficult to switch to clearer boundaries and to more passive support. But if at least two weeks or so are left, not impossible, if you are willing to put your foot down. For example, consider an email along the following lines:

It is great that you have these questions, but this is your thesis and working through such challenges is part of it. I don't have the time to discuss your progress right now, but I can offer a meeting $in_4_business_days. Please continue work on your thesis in the meanwhile, and we can discuss remaining issues then.

Is this impolite? Maybe, but so is bombarding you with endless requests for help.

What I find rather odd in all of this is that it's the first thesis you supervise, and already as the main supervisor. Supervision is a skill that can be learnt, but ideally by shadowing another supervisor for one or two theses. I'm still in that “apprenticeship” phase. So I think it's completely unsurprising that you're running into these kinds of problems, and I also ran into similar problems with the first students that I mentored. The good news for you is that you can learn from this experience, and can be a much better supervisor for the next student. The learning experience goes both ways.

1 I appreciate your answer! And I will keep your advices always in my mind :-) – Jupiter Commented Jun 9, 2022 at 20:33

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged thesis masters supervision ..

Featured on Meta
Announcing a change to the data-dump process
Upcoming initiatives on Stack Overflow and across the Stack Exchange network...

Hot Network Questions

How to calculate baker's percentages for indirect doughs?
What reference is Deadpool making in his line, "What is it, girl? Is there trouble at the well?"
Why does the 68000 have Immediate addressing modes for .b instructions?
Higher homological mirror symmetry?
What do I do if my professor doesn't give me an extra credit assignment that he promised?
Make both colors connected
Callout[] unpredictably fails to display
Is this sample LSAT question / answer based in fallacy?
Why did Godwin Baxter sew money into her dress?
Clarification on Work-Energy Theorem
Travelling from Ireland to Northern Ireland (UK Visa required national)
Difference between copy + paste and duplicate
Nuda per lusus pectora nostra patent
Tax on Company Stock held in 401(k) plan when doing a Roth Conversion
Why is much harder to encrypt emails, compared to web pages?
Publishing a paper written in your free time as an unaffiliated author when you are affiliated
Why did Doctor Baxter ask a rhetorical question here?
How can dragons breathe in space?
Seeking optimization modelling problems involving non-continuous or non-interval defined functions for teaching
What can a time traveler use to generate an encryption key to encrypt information so it's only decryptable after a given time period
Is US Citizen, Omali Yeshitela, facing jail for producing pro-Russian propaganda?
What are applicable skills and abilities for dealing with paperwork, administration and law in 5e?
Name of possible Chinese Warlord in Dr. Who "The Talons of Weng-Chiang"
Are 'get something ready' and 'get something going' examples of causative constructions?

Masters Thesis and Supervisor

[Part of the Policies of the CHD, August 2019]

Master’s Thesis

A candidate for a terminal Master's degree, with the prior approval of a faculty supervisor and of the CHD, may undertake an extended reading and research project resulting in what amounts to a Master's thesis. The thesis is optional for the S.M. degree and required for the M.E. degree. In connection with this project, an S.M. candidate may take no more than two SEAS letter-graded reading and research courses (299r), no more than one in any given semester. M.E. candidates may take up to one 299r course as part of the eight letter-graded courses and are required to take eight 300-level reading and research courses.

Second Reader

When a thesis project is pursued in connection with a terminal Master’s degree, the thesis supervisor, in consultation with the student, shall nominate an outside reader who is a member of the SEAS faculty for approval by the CHD by course-enrollment day of their second semester in the case of SM students, or by course-enrollment day of their third semester for M.E. students. Ordinarily, both the supervisor and reader must be members of the SEAS faculty; exceptions must be approved by the CHD.

An initial draft of the thesis must be transmitted to the supervisor before Spring Recess of the student’s final semester (or Thanksgiving Recess if the student’s final semester is the fall). The final draft of the thesis, incorporating any revisions given on prior drafts by the thesis supervisor and outside reader, must be transmitted to the thesis supervisor and outside reader by the first day of Reading Period, and the student should simultaneously submit a one- or two-page abstract to the Office of Academic Programs. The thesis supervisor and outside reader should each submit to the Office of Academic Programs by the last day of Reading Period a letter giving their evaluation of the thesis.

It is expected that such a thesis will represent a more substantial contribution than is customary for an undergraduate senior thesis, but less so than a doctoral dissertation. The thesis will follow a similar format to a Ph.D. dissertation, and satisfy similar criteria. The main difference is in the volume of original work expected of a master’s thesis, which might have the content of roughly 25% of original research as in the Ph.D. dissertation. No part of a master’s thesis may be included in a subsequent Ph.D. dissertation. The student should note that the following four points should be covered in a master’s thesis: introduction, stating the question being asked, or hypothesis being tested, or design challenge being addressed; literature review, summarizing pertinent prior work; original research or design; and conclusions, stating what was learned.

The thesis abstract and evaluations will be made part of the student's permanent record. When an S.M. or M.E. program plan approved by the CHD provides for or requires the preparation of a thesis, awarding of the degree will not be recommended until the abstract and satisfactory evaluations have been received by the Office of Academic Programs. Unsatisfactory evaluations of the thesis will be reflected as unsatisfactory grades given by the supervisor in the student’s 300-level and/or 299r courses and will preclude the awarding of the M.E. degree; M.E. students who otherwise have met the requirements for the S.M. may apply for that degree to be conferred on the next degree date.

M.E. students who are in-between supervisors

M.E. students who do not remain with their initial supervisor are expected to secure a new supervisor by the end of the second semester. Students who cannot identify a new supervisor by that time will be expected to withdraw from the program based on a lack of progress to degree, receiving the S.M. if they have met the requirements for that degree. Such students may petition to remain for a third semester in order to satisfy the S.M. requirements.

The new supervisor will normally be a member of the SEAS faculty. Permission for a student to have a non-SEAS supervisor may be given by the Director of Graduate Studies; such students must also have a SEAS faculty member as co-advisor.

In Academic Programs

Non-Resident and Part-Time Study
CHD Meeting Schedule
PhD Overview and Timeline
PhD Course Requirements
PhD Program Plans
Teaching: G2 year
Qualifying Exam: by end of G2 year
Research Advisors, Committees, and Meetings
Dissertation and Final Oral Exam
SM and ME Course Requirements
SM and ME Program Plans
SM degree en route to the PhD
Graduate Student Forms
Teaching Fellows
External Fellowships List
COVID-19 Graduate Program Changes (archived)

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

What’s Next for the Harris Campaign

Vice President Kamala Harris faces many questions, from the management of her campaign to the selection of her running mate, should she be the Democratic Party’s nominee.

Share full article

Kamala Harris smiles as she walks onto a stage covered in blue carpeting with blue velvet drapes in the background. A large American flag hangs nearby.

By Zolan Kanno-Youngs Erica L. Green and Nicholas Nehamas

The reporters have covered Vice President Kamala Harris extensively during President Biden’s time in the White House.

July 21, 2024

President Biden endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris to lead the presidential ticket after ending his re-election campaign on Sunday , raising the chance that she could be the first Black woman and the first person of Indian descent to be president of the United States.

Ms. Harris in many ways has been preparing for this moment for the past year as she emerged as one of the Biden campaign’s more aggressive voices on abortion rights and attacks on former President Donald J. Trump. Mr. Biden spoke to Ms. Harris on Sunday morning before he posted a letter online informing the world that he would be stepping down as the Democratic nominee.

In another post less than a half-hour later, he endorsed Ms. Harris, who quickly issued a statement saying she intended to “earn and win this nomination.”

But as the details of the nominating process remain unclear, there are many questions Ms. Harris and her team will face in the days ahead.

What About Her Campaign?

Ms. Harris will now need to take over the vast infrastructure of Mr. Biden’s campaign, which has roughly 1,300 staff members and dozens of offices around the nation. There are signs that is already happening.

On a call with the Biden campaign staff on Sunday, Jen O’Malley Dillon, the Biden campaign chairwoman, and Julie Chavez Rodriguez, the Biden campaign manager, informed the staff members that they were all now working for Harris for President, according to two people who listened to the call. “We’re all going to do it the same,” Ms. Chavez Rodriguez said.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

Want all of The Times? Subscribe .

IMAGES

how to find a thesis supervisor
Characteristics of a good thesis supervisor
Guidelines for Finding a Thesis Supervisor
(PDF) Supervisor's Roles in Master's Thesis and PhD Dissertation
Thesis Roles & Responsibilities
Thesis Supervisor Manual

VIDEO

How to select thesis topic? #thesistopic #mds #mdslife
Does your thesis advisor have a plan?
Thesis Proposal Wiriting Tips! 😍
Final Thesis Presentation Economics Undergraduate Degree FEB UGM Mohammad Arief Rajendra
Duties of The Academic Supervisor Towards His Masters or Doctoral Students
Undergraduate Thesis Presentation_S1 IUP Accounting_Bima Mahardika Widyadhana_454397

COMMENTS

Duties of a thesis supervisor and the supervision plan
The supervisor and the student may also prepare a written supervision plan that clarifies the schedule for the supervision and the thesis work as well as the content of the supervision. The plan can also be utilised if any problems arise or you fall behind schedule.
PDF 7-A Supervisor'S Roles for Successful Thesis and Dissertation
expects the supervisor to do. The first set of the results show the current practices of supervisor that often does only three items as show in Table 1. Table 1 Current Practices of Supervisor Role of supervisor Mean 1 Guide on structuring the thesis and dissertation 4.30 2 Make student feel more confident when working with the supervisor 4.11
Effective master's thesis supervision
This calls for insights that can support (beginning) thesis supervisors, acknowledging that thesis supervision is not a one-size-fits-all activity - the effectiveness of different approaches will vary widely based on students' and supervisors' needs, experiences, and preferences, making thesis supervision a complex and dynamic task (i.e ...
Thesis Supervisor
What does the thesis supervisor do? Your thesis supervisor is an expert on your thesis topic and will work closely with you in all stages of your project. Your supervisor is an important mentor for the process of completing your thesis as well as your specific topic, but they are not expected to be knowledgeable about other aspects of Honors ...
Roles and responsibilities of supervisors
The University recognizes that supervisors will be away from the University for extended periods of time (e.g., sabbatical, satellite campus, visiting professorship). Being physically away from the University does not preclude a supervisor from remaining engaged with their graduate students.
Responsibilities of the supervisor
The roles of supervisor and examiner are quite distinct, and it is not one of the roles of the supervisor to assess the thesis. The specific roles of supervisors may differ depending on the academic discipline, Departmental practice and whether the member of staff is acting as lead, second, assistant, temporary or permanent supervisor. The lead ...
Thesis supervision
The thesis supervisor is usually the chair of the thesis committee. Role of the thesis committee. While the roles and responsibilities of thesis committees may vary from one academic unit to another, members of the committee should provide guidance to the student on thesis planning, research and writing; be available to discuss ideas or for ...
Profile of a Good Thesis Supervisor and a good Thesis Student
The supervisor takes extra care to support the student during the first phase of the thesis research, to get the student on the right track as soon as possible. The supervisor gives advice when the student chooses a thesis subject and encourages the student not to work on an area of philosophy that is completely unfamiliar to the student.
Guide for Thesis Supervisors
Guide for Thesis Supervisors. Thank you for supervising an individualized major senior thesis project. Your expertise is critical in guiding the student's project and setting the criteria for its evaluation. The guidelines below outline some considerations particular to individualized major students. They are most appropriate for traditional ...
PDF GRADUATE THESIS SUPERVISION Responsibilities of faculty, students, and
visors should encourage the publication (jointly or otherwise) of a student's work.Thesis quality. It is the responsibility of the supervisor to advise the student as to the quality of the thesis (i.e., that it meets or e. level work at Acadia) a. d to judge whether it is ready for submission. Responsibilities.
Getting the most out of thesis supervision meetings
Before diving into what you can do to get the most out of thesis supervision meetings, it is important to be clear on the roles during a thesis process: A thesis supervisor supports and guides you through writing your thesis. However, ultimately you are responsible for your work. What this role division means in practice is that students cannot ...
The journey of thesis supervisors from novice to expert: a grounded
Supervision is a well-defined term in the interpersonal relationship between thesis supervisors and students. A supervisor is designated to assist the student's development in terms of their research project [1,2,3].Faculty members supervise the students because qualified supervision leads to success on the part of the student, and it has moral, reputational, and financial outcomes for the ...
What is the role of a thesis supervisor at the MSc level
Your supervisor will guide your thesis and make sure that things like the claims and background section are adequate and truthful. You should use your masters studies to explore the field and gain some of the breadth/depth required to understand if it's really the field you'd want to pursue if you were to do PhD. If that is your goal, you ...
First meeting with your dissertation supervisor: What to expect
Getting to know each other during the first meeting. Many first meetings with a dissertation supervisor include a considerable amount of 'small talk'. Thus, you can expect to engage in a casual conversation to get acquainted. This conversation tends to look different based on whether you already know your dissertation supervisor, or whether ...
PDF What can students expect from their supervisors?
and grammar, to edit the final or any previous versions of your thesis. Supervisors are not copy-editors. The important point here is not, however, that supervisors are not allowed to do the work for you; rather, the important point to remember is that letting them do the work, even if they were allowed to, would not be in your interest.
How to get the most from your dissertation supervisor
It's best to get into the habit of checking in with your dissertation supervisor frequently to discuss where you plan on going next. If you're stuck, your supervisor may be able to help you frame an argument, or transition from one to another. Or they might point you to a couple of sources who will help you make the argument you're trying to make.
PDF Master's Thesis Supervision Guidelines for Students & Supervisors
Supervision Guidelines for Masters Students and Supervisors (THESIS)i. These guidelines should be regarded as something to help in the planning and conduct during the MA Thesis program. The purpose is to make expectations explicit between supervisors and masters students at an early stage. Clear expectations about the responsibilities of both ...
Relationship with your supervisor
A supervisor will guide your thesis-writing process. Next to content related outcomes, the supervisor will also evaluate additional learning outcomes, which are related to competences on bachelor or master level. Your supervisor will evaluate how you apply ethics appropriate to scientific research, how you demonstrate your ability to work on ...
How should I deal with challenging master thesis students as a supervisor?
27. You are trying to be helpful, but there is such a thing as too much handholding. The more helpful you are, the more likely students are to exploit this and to become a help vampire. You do not owe your students any success. You owe them a fair chance at succeeding.
Masters Thesis and Supervisor
The thesis supervisor and outside reader should each submit to the Office of Academic Programs by the last day of Reading Period a letter giving their evaluation of the thesis. Format. It is expected that such a thesis will represent a more substantial contribution than is customary for an undergraduate senior thesis, but less so than a ...
What Are the Responsibilities of a Supervisor?
A supervisor's responsibilities often include: 1. Managing workflow. One of a supervisor's most important responsibilities is managing a team. Often, supervisors create and oversee their team's workflow, or the tasks required to complete a job. Supervisors must define goals, communicate objectives and monitor team performance.
CrowdStrike outage: We finally know what caused it
Insurers have begun calculating the financial damage caused by last week's devastating CrowdStrike software glitch that crashed computers, canceled flights and disrupted hospitals all around the ...
Project 2025: Does Trump Support It? His Plan Versus What It Says
Conservatives behind an extensive plan for reshaping the US government known as Project 2025 see it as a resource for the next presidency of Donald Trump, should he succeed in his bid to return to ...
CrowdStrike-Microsoft Outage: What Caused the IT Meltdown
Airlines, hospitals and people's computers were affected after CrowdStrike, a cybersecurity company, sent out a flawed software update.
What's Next for the Harris Campaign
Vice President Kamala Harris faces many questions, from the management of her campaign to the selection of her running mate, should she be the Democratic Party's nominee.

Duties of a thesis supervisor and the supervision plan

Bachelor's Programmes

Master's and Licentiate's Programmes

Doctoral Programmes

Specialist training programmes

On this page

Supervision as interaction and the supervision plan

Topics the supervisor should incorporate in the supervision

See also the Instructions for Students

Bachelor’s theses and maturity tests

Changes are coming to this website. Learn more ➜

Introduction

Knowledge of regulations, policies and procedures

Advice on program of study, research and professional development

Meetings/consultation

Financial assistance

Intellectual property

Publications

Withdrawal of supervisory duties

Accommodation

Related links

Responsibilities of the supervisor

Search the manual

2. Role of the supervisor

3. Role of the assistant supervisor

4. Continuing professional development

5. Documentation check

6. Research plan

7. Advising on regulations

8. Advising on services and facilities

9. Minimum number of supervisions

10. Format for supervisions

11. Supervision record

12. Training needs

14. Meetings, conferences and publication

15. Written work

The Role of Proofreaders

17. Thesis presentation

18. Examination of thesis

UNUK students

UNM students

Legal information

Thesis supervision

Finding a thesis supervisor arrow_drop_down

Appointment of a thesis supervisor arrow_drop_down

Meetings between the supervisor and the student arrow_drop_down

Regular meetings

Components of a typical agenda

Feedback and revision arrow_drop_down

Already a student?

Cotutelle arrow_drop_down

Thesis advisory committee arrow_drop_down

Constitution of the thesis committee

Role of the thesis committee

Useful information

Absences arrow_drop_down

Professionalism arrow_drop_down

Changing supervisors arrow_drop_down

The journey of thesis supervisors from novice to expert: a grounded theory study

Conclusions

Study design

Participants

Data collection

Data analysis

Ethical considerations

Theme 1: engagement

Curious observation

Evaluation with reality

Theme 2: supervision climate

Challenging shortcomings

Role ambiguity

Various performance

Theme 3: maturation

Reflection in action

Reflection on action

The core variable: interactive accountability

Strengths and limitations of the study

Implications of the study

Availability of data and materials

Acknowledgments