Postgraduate TEFL Students’ Perceptions towards Thesis Supervision Quality in Thailand: The Role of Expectations and Negotiation in Supervision Quality
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Despite the growing number of postgraduate students in Southeast Asian countries, specifically in Thailand, there is a shortage of studies on supervision quality in the Thai context of research supervision. This study aimed to obtain in-depth qualitative insights into postgraduate students’ perceptions of thesis supervision quality in Thailand by looking into the expectations and negotiations and their influence on supervision quality. Ten TEFL Master of Arts students who had completed their thesis between 2021 and 2022 were recruited using a purposive sampling strategy in two private universities in Thailand. The data were collected using email interviews followed by member-checking and then systematically analyzed. Students believed that all expectations should be established and negotiated clearly between the supervisors and them. Most of the students’ expectations from supervisors were about supervisors’ soft skills such as adaptability, communication, dependability from total dependency to total autonomy, listening, work ethic, and teamwork. Most participants deemed negotiation of the roles necessary and practical. The study has several theoretical and practical implications for aligning students’ expectations with the actual supervisory practices to improve the quality of thesis supervision.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Acker, S., Hill, T., & Black, E. (1994). Thesis supervision in the social sciences: Managed or negotiated? Higher Education, 28(4), 483–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01383939
Aik, C. P., Rabbani, M., & Amini, M. (2020). The association between perfectionism and social anxiety among adolescents in Selangor, Malaysia. The Journal of Health and Translational Medicine (JUMMEC), 23(1), 1–5. https://mojc.um.edu.my/index.php/jummec/article/view/21880
Alavi, M., Seng, J. H., Mustaffa, M. S., Ninggal, M. T., Amini, M., & Latif, A. A. (2019). Attention, impulsiveness, and gender in academic achievement among typically developing children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 126(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0031512518809163
Anderson, J. L. (1988). The supervisory process in speech-language pathology and audiology. Ear and Hearing, 9(4), 223. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-198808000-00019
Bahtilla, M., & Oben, A. I. (2022). International students’ perception of research supervision in the Social Sciences: The case of three comprehensive universities in China. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 46(3), 327–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2021.1945554
Basturkmen, H., East, M., & Bitchener, J. (2014). Supervisors’ on-script feedback comments on drafts of dissertations: Socialising students into the academic discourse community. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(4), 432–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2012.752728
Baydarova, I., Collins, H. E., & Saadi, I. A. (2021). Alignment of doctoral students and supervisor expectations in Malaysia. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 16(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.28945/4682
Benmore, A. (2016). Boundary management in doctoral supervision: How supervisors negotiate roles and role transitions throughout the supervisory journey. Studies in Higher Education, 41(7), 1251–1264. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.967203
Bitchener, J., Basturkmen, H., & East, M. (2010). The focus of supervisor written feedback to thesis/dissertation students. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 79–97. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2010/2/119201
Boehe, D. M. (2016). Supervisory styles: A contingency framework. Studies in Higher Education, 41(3), 399–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.927853
Boud, D., & Lee, A. (2005). Peer learning’ as pedagogic discourse for research education. Studies in Higher Education, 30(5), 501–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070500249138
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Carter, S., Miller, B., & Courtney, M. (2017). Doctoral supervision practice: What’s the problem and how can we help academics? Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice, 5(1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.14297/jpaap.v5i1.235
Cohen, A., & Baruch, Y. (2022). Abuse and exploitation of doctoral students: A conceptual model for traversing a long and winding road to academia. Journal of Business Ethics, 180(2), 505–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04905-1
Cook-Sather, A. (2006). Sound, presence, and power: “Student voice” in educational research and reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(4), 359–390. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873x.2006.00363.x
Copeland, P., Dean, D., & Wladkowski, S. (2011). The power dynamics of supervision: Ethical dilemmas. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 81, 26–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377317.2011.543041
Cornbleth, C. (1990). Curriculum in context. Falmer.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research. Pearson.
Cryer, P. (2006). The research student’s guide to success. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
Dai, Z., Wee, H. T., Ren, S., Zhang, M., Amini, M., & Wang, S. (2023). Systematic review: Factors influencing creativity in the design discipline and assessment criteria. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 12(3), 1440–1448. http://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v12i3.24530
Davis, D. (2019). Students’ perceptions of supervisory qualities: What do students want? What do they believe they receive? International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14, 431–464. https://doi.org/10.28945/4361
Emilsson, U. M., & Johnsson, E. (2007). Supervision of supervisors: On developing supervision in postgraduate education. High Education Research & Development, 26(2), 163–179.
Everett, J. E., Miehls, D., DuBois, C., & Garran, A. M. (2011). The developmental model of supervision as reflected in the experiences of field supervisors and graduate students. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 31(3), 250–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/07325223.2013.782458
Gatfield, T. (2005). An investigation into PhD supervisory management styles: Development of a dynamic conceptual model and its managerial implications. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27(3), 311–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800500283585
Gatfield, T., & Alpert, F. (2002). The supervisory management styles model. In T. Herrington (Ed.), Research and development in higher education Vol. 25: Quality conversations (pp. 263–273). Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA).
Geng Q., Amini, M., Binti Hashim, S. N. A., & Zhu, M. (2024). The mediating roles of academic self-efficacy and learning interest in the relationship between teaching style and math behavior engagement among junior high school students in China. PLoS ONE, 19(10), Article e0311959. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0311959
Grant, B. (1999, July 12–15). Walking on a rackety bridge: Mapping supervision [Paper presentation]. HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, Australia.
Grossmann, M. (2021). How social science got better: Overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197518977.001.0001
Gube, J., Getenet, S., Satariyan, A., & Muhammad, Y. (2017). Towards “operating within” the field: Doctoral students’ views of supervisors’ discipline expertise. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 12, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.28945/3641
Gunnarsson, R., Jonasson, G., & Billhult, A. (2013). The experience of disagreement between students and supervisors in PhD education: A qualitative study. BMC Medical Education, 13(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-13-134
Gurr, G. M. (2001). Negotiating the “Rackety Bridge”—a dynamic model for aligning supervisory style with research student development. Higher Education Research & Development, 20(1), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/07924360120043882
Haag, P., Shankland, R., Osin, E., Boujut, É., Cazalis, F., Bruno, A., Vrignaud, P., & Gay, M. (2018). Stress perçu et santé physique des doctorants dans les universités françaises [Perceived stress and physical health of doctoral students in French universities]. Pratiques Psychologiques, 24(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prps.2017.04.005
Harvey, L., & Askling, B. (2003). Quality in higher education. In R. Begg (Ed.), The dialogue between higher education research and practice (pp. 69–83). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-48368-4_6
Hemer, S. R. (2012). Informality, power and relationships in postgraduate supervision: Supervising PhD candidates over coffee. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(6), 827–839. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.674011
Hunter, K. H., & Devine, K. (2016). Doctoral students’ emotional exhaustion and intentions to leave academia. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 11, 35–61. https://doi.org/10.28945/3396
Ives, G., & Rowley, G. (2005). Supervisor selection or allocation and continuity of supervision: PhD students’ progress and outcomes. Studies in Higher Education, 30(5), 535–555. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070500249161
Jensen, R., Maini, M., Falk Nilsson, E., & Lundahl, L. (1991). Forskarhandledningens psykologi [Research supervision psychology]. Lunds Universitet.
Kaufman, J., & Schwartz, T. (2004). Models of supervision: Shaping professional identity. The Clinical Supervisor, 22(1), 143–158. https://doi.org/10.1300/j001v22n01_10
Koon, W. C., Siau, C. S., Fitriana, M., Fariduddin, M. N., Amini, M., Chu, S. Y., Ravindran, L., & Ibrahim, N. (2023). Hofstede’s cultural values as factors influencing Malaysian university students’ attitude toward helpseeking: A preliminary study. Malaysian Journal of Public Health Medicine, 23(2), 28–35. http://Mjphm.Org/Index.Php/Mjphm/Article/View/1627
Lee, A. (2010). New approaches to doctoral Supervision: Implications for educational development. Educational Developments, 11(2), 18–23.
Lee, A., & Green, B. (2009). Supervision as metaphor. Studies in Higher Education, 34(6), 615–630. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070802597168
Li, Y., Hyland, F., & Hu, G. (2017). Prompting MEd students to engage with academia and the professional world through feedback. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 26, 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.02.005
Manathunga, C., & Goozée, J. (2007). Challenging the dual assumption of the ‘always/already’ autonomous student and effective supervisor. Teaching in higher education, 12(3), 309–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/13601440500099977
Mantai, L. (2019). “A source of sanity”: The role of social support for doctoral candidates’ belonging and becoming. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14, 367–382. https://doi.org/10.28945/4275
McCulloch, A. (2010). Excellence in doctoral supervision: Competing models of what constitutes good supervision. In M. Kiley (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2010 quality in postgraduate research conference (pp. 175–186). The Centre for Educational Development and Academic Methods, the Australian National University.
Nakkeeran, N., & Zodpey, S. P. (2012). Qualitative research in applied situations: Strategies to ensure rigor and validity. Indian Journal of Public Health, 56(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-557x.96949
Parry, S., & Hayden, M. (1999). Experiences of supervisors in facilitating the induction of research higher degree students to fields of education. In A. Holbrook & S. Johnston, Supervision of postgraduate research in education (pp. 35–53). Australian Association for Research in Education.
Petersen, E. B. (2007). Negotiating academicity: Postgraduate research supervision as category boundary work. Studies in Higher Education, 32(4), 475–487. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070701476167
Petre, M. (2010). The unwritten rules of PhD research. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
Phillips, E. (1992). The PhD: Assessing quality at different stages of its development. In O. Zuber-Skerritt (Ed.), Starting research: Supervision and training (pp. 119–136). Tertiary Education Institute, University of Queensland.
Pugh, D. S. (2014). How to get a PhD: A handbook for students and their supervisors. Open University Press.
Pitchforth, J., Beames, S., Thomas, A., Falk, M., Farr, A., Gasson, S., Thamrin, T., & Mengersen, K. (2012). Factors affecting timely completion of a PhD: A complex systems approach. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 12(4), 124–135.
Roach, A., Christensen, B. K., & Rieger, E. (2019). The essential ingredients of research supervision: A discrete-choice experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(7), 1243–1260. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000322
Roberts, L. D., & Seaman, K. (2018). Good undergraduate dissertation supervision: Perspectives of supervisors and dissertation coordinators. International Journal for Academic Development, 23(1), 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144x.2017.1412971
Sadeghi, K, Khajepasha, A. S. (2015). Thesis writing challenges for non-native MA students. Research in PostCompulsory Education, 20(8), 357–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2015.1063808
Sieo, W. M., Amini, M., Lee, K. F., Lin, S. E., Tee, J. N., & Siau, C. S. (2022). Reading strategies in teaching and learning English as a foreign language: A mixed-method study. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 30(2), 475–499. https://doi.org/10.47836/pjssh.30.2.04
Solo, C. (2019). Supervising students in emerging adulthood: Modeling use of self in developmentally informed supervision. Clinical Social Work Journal, 47(1), 72–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-018-0674-5
Spear, R. (2000). Supervision of research students: Responding to student expectations. Australian National University.
http://hdl.handle.net/1885/41534
Stracke, E., & Kumar, V. (2020). Encouraging dialogue in doctoral supervision: The development of the feedback expectation tool. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 15, 265–284. https://doi.org/10.28945/4568
Tangen, J. L. (2018). Learning styles and supervision: A critical review. The Clinical Supervisor, 37(2), 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/07325223.2017.1388897
Tăușan, L. (2016). The student-centred paradigm and the optimization of the learning process. In E. Soare & C. Langa (Eds.), Education facing contemporary world issues: Proceedings of the Edu World (pp. 380–388). https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2017.05.02.47
Taylor, S. E. (2012). Changes in doctoral education: Implications for supervisors in developing early career researchers. International Journal for Researcher Development, 3(2), 118–138. https://doi.org/10.1108/17597511311316973
Torka, M. (2018). Projectification of doctoral training? How research fields respond to a new funding regime. Minerva, 56(1), 59–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-018-9342-8
Vereijken, M. W. C., van der Rijst, R. M., van Driel, J. H., & Dekker, F. W. (2018). Novice supervisors’ practices and dilemmatic space in supervision of student research projects. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(4), 522–542. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1414791
Wan, C. D., Sirat, M., & Razak, A. D. (2018). Education in Malaysia towards a developed nation. ISEAS Yusof Ishak Institute. http://hdl.handle.net/11540/8901
Watson, D., & Blair, E. (2020). Adjusting supervisory practices to suit student needs. In E. Blair, D. Watson, & S. Raturi (Eds.), Graduate research supervision in the developing world (pp. 95–109). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429282232-8
Wright, A., Murray, J. P., & Geale, P. (2007). A phenomenographic study of what it means to supervise doctoral students. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6(4), 458–474. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2007.27694946
Zaheer, M., & Munir, S. (2020). Research supervision in distance learning: Issues and challenges. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 15(1), 131–143. https://doi.org/10.1108/aaouj-01-2020-0003
Zeng, X., Ravindran, L., & Amini, M. (2023). Teaching critical thinking to Chinese students in English as a foreign language writing class: A review. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 12(3), 1735–1744. https://ijere.iaescore.com/index.php/IJERE/article/view/24699/13675
