Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Basics of Caring Research pp 79–90Cite as

A Caring Supervisor

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Bold Visions in Educational Research ((BVER))

Abstract

This chapter describes the elements of caring supervision of doctoral theses. The purpose is to describe the best practices and challenges of supervision especially from the supervisor’s perspective. The analysis is based on the author’s extensive experience as a supervisor and related data obtained for research and developmental purposes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Aitchison, C., & Lee, A. (2006). Research writing: Problems and pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 265–278. doi:10.1080/13562510600680574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkins, M., & Brown, G. (1988). Effective teacher in higher education. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, I. K., & DeJong, P. (2005). Engagement through complimenting. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 16(1–2), 51–56. doi:10.1300/J085v16no1_11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Booth, W. C., Clombs, G. G., & Williams, J. M. (2003). A craft to research. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D., & Lee, A. (Eds.). (2009). Changing practices of doctoral education. London & New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, J. P., & Hoobler, J. M. (2006). Subordinate self-esteem and abusive supervision. Journal of Managerial Issues, 18(3), 340–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caffarella, R. S., & Barnett, B. G. (2000). Teaching doctoral students to become scholarly writers: The importance of giving and receiving critiques. Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 39–52. doi:10.1080/030750700116000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, K., Schunn, C., & Charney, D. (2006). Commenting on writing. Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts. Written Communication, 23(3), 260–294. doi:10.1177/0741088306289261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costley, C., & Stephenson, J. (2009). Building doctorates around individual candidates’ professional experience. In D. Boud & A. Lee (Eds.), Changing practices of doctoral education (pp. 171–186). London & New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cryer, R. (2003). The research student’s guide to success. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, D., Pearson, M., Saha, L. J., & Spear, R. H. (1994). Establishing effective PhD supervision. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delamont, S., Atkinson, P., & Parry, O. (2000). Supervising the PhD. A guide to success. London: Society for Research into Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. (1989). Interpretative interactionism (Applied Social Research Methods Series, Vol. 16). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dill, D., Mitra, S., Jensen, H., Lehtinen, E., Mäkelä, T., Parpala, A., Pohjola, H., Ritter, M. A., & Saari, S. (2006). PhD training and the knowledge based society: An evaluation of doctoral education in Finland. International Postgraduate Students Mirror 2006. Helsinki: Finnish Higher Education Evaluation Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doncaster, K., & Lester, S. (2002). Capability and its development: Experiences from a work-based doctorate. Studies in Higher Education, 27(1), 91–101. doi:10.1080/03075070120099395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunleavy, P. (2003). Authoring a PhD. How to plan, draft, write and finish a doctoral thesis or dissertation. Hampshire: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, K., & Shockley-Zalabak, P. (2001). Trust in top management and immediate supervisor: The relationship to satisfaction, perceived organizational effectiveness, and information receiving. Communication Quarterly, 49(4), 382–398. doi:10.1080/01463370109385637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, M. V., & Dell, D. M. (1986). Dimensionality of supervisor roles: Supervisors’ perceptions of supervision. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33(3), 282–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eraut, M. (2004). Informal learning in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education, 26(2), 247–273. doi:10.1080/158037042000225245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, T., & Kamler, B. (2005). The need for counter-scrutiny: Taking a broad view of doctoral education research. Higher Education Research and Development, 24(2), 115–118. doi:10.1080/07294360500062805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, T. (2009). The “write” skills and more: A thesis writing group for doctoral students. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 33(2), 285–297. doi:10.1080/03098260902734968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flint, A. S., Kurumada, K. S., Fisher, T., & Zisook, K. (2011). Creating the perfect storm in professional development: The experiences of two American teachers and a university research team. Professional Development in Education, 37(1), 95–109. doi:10.1080/19415250903425502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golde, C. M. (2000). “Should I stay or should I go?”: Student descriptions of the doctoral attrition process. Review of Higher Education, 23(2), 199–227. doi:10.1353/rhe.2000.0004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golde, C. M. (2007). Signature pedagogies in doctoral education: Are they adaptable for the preparation of education researches. Educational Researcher, 36(6), 344–351. doi:10.3102/0013189X07308301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golding, C., Sharmini, S., & Lazarovitch, A. (2014). What examiners do: What thesis students should know. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(5), 563–576. doi:10.1080/02602938.2013.859230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, B. M. (2005). Fighting for space in supervision: Fantasies, fairytales, fictions and fallacies. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 18(3), 337–354. doi:10.1080/09518390500092483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, H., & Powell, S. (2005). Doctoral study in contemporary higher education. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halse, C. (2011). ‘Becoming a supervisor’: The impact of doctoral supervision on supervisors’ learning. Studies in Higher Education, 36(5), 557–570. doi:10.1080/03075079.2011.594593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, T. (2002). A quantitative analysis of PhD students’ views of supervision. Higher Education Research & Development, 21(1), 41–53. doi:10.1080/07294360220124648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, S. (1997). Examining the examiners: An analysis of examiners’ reports on doctoral theses. Studies in Higher Education, 22(3), 333–347. doi:10.1080/03075079712331380936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamler, B. (2008). Rethinking doctoral publication practices: Writing from and beyond the thesis. Studies in Higher Education, 33(3), 283–294. doi:10.1080/03075070802049236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kearns, H., Gardiner, M., & Marshall, K. (2008). Innovation in PhD completion: The hardy shall succeed (and be happy!). Higher Education Research & Development, 27(1), 77–89. doi:10.1080/07294360701658781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, V., & Stracke, E. (2007). An analysis of written feedback on a PhD thesis. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(4), 461–470. doi:10.1080/13562510701415433

    Google Scholar 

  • Lea, M., & Street, B. (2000). Student writing and staff feedback in higher education: An academic literacy’s approach. In M. Lea & B. Stieres (Eds.), Student writing in higher education. New contexts (pp. 32–46). Buckingham: Society for Research in Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lian, H., Ferris, D. L., & Brown, D. J. (2012). Does power distance exacerbate or mitigate the effects of abusive supervision? It depends on the outcome. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), 107–123. doi:10.1037/a0024610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindén, J., Ohlin, M., & Brodin, E. M. (2013). Mentorship, supervision and learning experience in PhD education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 639–662. doi:10.1080/03075079.2011.59526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lladó, A. P., Soley, L. F., Fraguell-Sansbelló, R. M., Pujolras, G. A., Planella, J. P., Roura-Pascuale, N., Martinez, J. J. S., & Montoro-Morenog, L. (2014). Student perceptions of peer assessment: An interdisciplinary study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(5), 592–610. doi:10.1080/02602938.2013.860077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Määttä, K. (Ed.). (2012). Obsessed with the doctoral theses. Supervision and support during the dissertation process. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malfroy, J., & Yates, L. (2003). Knowledge in action: Doctoral programmes forging new identities. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 25(2), 119–129. doi:10.1080/1360080032000122606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manathunga, C. (2007). Supervision as mentoring: The role of power and boundary crossing. Studies in Continuing education, 29(2), 207–221. doi:10.1080/01580370701424650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliam, E., Lawson, A., Evans, T., & Taylor, P. G. (2005). Silly, soft and otherwise suspect: Doctoral education as a risky business. Australian Journal of Education, 49(2), 214–227. doi:10.1177/000494410504900208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mullins, G., & Kiley M. (2002). “It’s a phD, not a Nobel prize”: How experienced examiners assess research theses. Studies in Higher Education, 28(49), 369–386. doi:10.1080/0307507022000011507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, L., & Lawrence, B. (2008). The basis of critique of practitioner-based enquiry. In L. Murray & B. Lawrence (Eds.), Practitioner-based enquiry: Principles for postgraduate research (pp. 18–41). London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, R., & Moore, S. (2006). The handbook of academic writing. A fresh approach. New York, NY: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (2008). Thesis and dissertation writing in a second language. A handbook for supervisors. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, C. (2005). New variant PhD: The changing nature of the doctorate in the UK. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27(2), 189–207. doi:10.1080/13600800500120018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parry, S. (2007). Disciplines and doctorates. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philips, M., & Pugh, D. (2003). How to get a PhD. A handbook for students and their supervisors. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rae, I. D. (2002). False start for the PhD in Australia. Historical Records of Australian Science, 14, 129–141. doi:10.1071/HR02009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rimé, B. (2009). Emotion elicits the social sharing of emotion: Theory and empirical review. Emotion Review, 1(1), 60–85. doi:10.1177/1754073908097189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination. Theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shavelson, R. J. (2007). Assessing student learning responsibly: From history to an audacious proposal. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 39(1), 26–33. doi:10.3200/CHNG.39.1.26-33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stracke, E., & Kumar, V. (2010). Feedback and self-regulated learning: Insights from supervisors’ and PhD examiners’ reports. Reflective Practice, 11(1), 19–32. doi:10.1080/14623940903525140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S., & Beasley, N. (2005). Handbook for doctoral supervisors. London & New York, NY: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178–190. doi:10.2307/1556375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tracy, K. (1997). Colloquium. Dilemmas of academic discourse. Advances in discourse processes 60. New Jersey, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uusiautti, S., & Määttä, K. (2011). Love for work as the way towards well-being. Global Journal of Human Social Science, 11(9), 63–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins Jr., C. E., & Scaturo, D. J. (2014). Proposal for a common language, educationally-informed model of psychoanalytic supervision. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 34(6), 619–633. doi:10.1080/07351690.2014.924374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitelock, D., Faulkner, D., & Miell, D. (2008). Promoting creativity in PhD supervision: Tensions and dilemmas. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 3(2), 143–153. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2008.04.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willemyns, M., Gallois, C., & Callan, V. (2003). Trust me, I’m your boss: Trust and power in supervisor–supervisee communication. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(1), 117–127. doi:10.1080/09585190210158547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winter, R., Griffiths, M., & Green, K. (2000). The “Academic” qualities of practice: What are the criteria for a practice-based PhD? Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 25–37. doi:10.1080/030750700115993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wisker, G., Robinson, G., Trafford, V., Warnes, M., & Creighton, E. (2003). From supervisory dialogues to successful PhDs: Strategies supporting and enabling the learning conversations of staff and students at postgraduate level. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(3), 383–397. doi:10.1080/1356251030900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, T., & Cochrane, R. (2000). Factors influencing successful submission of PhD theses. Studies in Higher Education, 25(2), 181–195. doi:10.1080/713696139

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Kaarina Määttä
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Lapland, Finland

    Satu Uusiautti

  2. University of Lapland, Finland

    Kaarina Määttä

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Sense Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Määttä, K. (2016). A Caring Supervisor. In: Uusiautti, S., Määttä, K. (eds) The Basics of Caring Research. Bold Visions in Educational Research. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-597-5_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-597-5_6

  • Publisher Name: SensePublishers, Rotterdam

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-6300-597-5

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation