Try for mutual respect and openness
As a supervisor, try to develop a relationship with your supervisee based on clear expectations and mutual respect from your first meeting onward. As trust develops and interpersonal or cultural differences can be discussed openly and pragmatically, think ahead and imagine what relationship you want in two, five, or ten years. Work towards that.
Early meetings provide the basis for developing student-supervisory relationships and expectations. Such meetings can demonstrate a supervisor's respect for the individual student and an interest in learning about her or his values. Early meetings should aim to:
set out a number of parameters - see Starting out; and
clarify expectations - see Clarifying expectations.
After the early meetings, but in the near future, try to:
Problems can occur in any relationship. When conflicts or problems occur, consider taking the following actions:
- Seek first to understand
- Refer to University policies
- Live up to your responsibilities
Who can I ask for help?
If you are having a conflict with your supervisee, there are a variety of people at McGill that can help, as shown in the hierarchy of help below.
The relationship can also be influenced by differences in cultural background between the student and supervisor. The expectations of supervisory and other face-to-face meetings may need additional attention with some recognition of student diversity because of different cultural understandings.
At other times, the supervisor and student might have closely related cultural backgrounds with even subtler differences, such as those between rural or urban, and American or Canadian, backgrounds. The associated political views, for example, should neither be taken for granted nor ignored as possibilities.
As a professor you have a lot of responsibilities, one of which is supervising. Remember that your work as a supervisor makes a significant difference in the life of a graduate student and it is an opportunity to develop graduate students who will go on to improve the field that you work in. In addition, there are several benefits for professors who supervise.
Supervisees from different backgrounds (academic, cultural, etc.,) may bring in new knowledge and ideas to your work.
Supervisees may provide a new perspective on old problems.
Supervisees often bring excitement and energy to their work which can be contagious.
Providing feedback and critiquing a supervisees work might help a supervisor reflect upon their own work with a more critical lens.
Supervisors can feel a sense of pride when they see their supervisee succeed.
Who can help someone over many years and in many ways?
The student-supervisor relationship can last longer than the student's time to degree, and the duration complicates the relationship. Furthermore, the people involved might have different motivations for academic study. No one person can fulfill all of the demands and achieve all the potential of graduate supervision. The one-to-one relationship can expand.
An effective student-supervisor relationship is rarely static. The relationship can be supported by other academic relationships that the student may have. If you are a supervisor, to what extent do you encourage your students to seek out other mentors and advisors? The 2012-2013 Supervisory Surveys at McGill showed that more than 85% of supervisors and supervisees agreed that supervisors should strive to be mentors and thereby offer verbal support and encouragement in addition to research guidance, yet no one person can fulfill all roles, and so one may be open to colleagues who might complement the supervisor. See this related Oxford document: Different support roles.
Beyond the first of the following characteristics from the University of Western Ontario's Western Guide to Graduate Supervision, which of these could be achieved with help from colleagues?
Trust and respect: Although both the supervisor and the student are responsible for building an environment of mutual trust and respect, the supervisor should take the lead to do so because of the power imbalance. Factors that influence the trust and respect on the supervisor's side include (a) whether feedback provided is timely and helpful, (b) how open the supervisor is to the student's consultation about academic as well as non-academic issues, and (c) the extent to which the supervisor is knowledgeable about the appropriate assistance or resources when he or she is not able to help.
Flexibility: Supervisors need to identify students' different learning styles, strengths and weaknesses, and accordingly take an individualized approach in working with them.
Availability: Supervisors make enough time for students and are approachable when help is needed.
Mentoring: Supervisors not only ensure students' progress for the degree, but encourage and support the overall development of students as academics, field experts, or other professionals.
The student-supervisor relationship can be further complicated when student and supervisor have different ideas as to the motivation behind doing the degree. For instance, not every student comes into a program because of personal intellectual interests—some for career change and some for promotion purposes. There are also students, especially in the late stages of the PhD, who decide to pursue non-academic jobs or jobs in different fields. Different ideas regarding motivations and career choices between supervisors and students may lead to tensions in student-supervisor relationships.
Other studies conducted at McGill have helped to reveal what positive or negative supervisory relationships are like from students' perspectives. This student, for example, described how her supervisor helped with her dissertation writing:
[My supervisor] is brilliant at coming up with organization...moving sections around, coming up with better subtitles, or reorganizing...[his feedback] is not written in stone either, he says "you don't have to do this" - but I have to admit I rely on him for that kind of input because he's good at it. I mean why would I beat my head against the wall coming up with something when I know that just given a ten-minute talk with him, with the suggestions, I know it is going to be much better. (Social Sciences PhD student: McAlpine, Amundsen, Paré, & Starke-Meyerring, 2006-2009)
In contrast, this student pictured her supervisor as one who never provided the guidance and support that she needed:
I don't think that [my supervisor] feels any real responsibility or—she might feel a theoretical responsibility—but there is no practical aspect to the responsibility to get me to graduate. I don't feel like … she thinks she has to do anything. (Social Sciences PhD student: McAlpine, Amundsen, Paré, & Starke-Meyerring, 2006-2009)
As a supervisor, what could you do to prevent your supervisee from feeling like the student in the quote above? The student may not be comfortable voicing their disappointment, which makes it difficult for their supervisor to notice the problem. The best solution would probably be a proactive one: prevent the problem before it arises.
Attitudes vs. expertise
Although supervisors often encourage their mature and competent students to relate to them as peers, the students are sometimes anxious about meeting the expectations of an equal. Perhaps it correlates that students place less value on the supervisor's expertise than on attitude and other affective dimensions of the relationship.
Time together and comfort level at McGill
Both graduate students and supervisors at McGill are generally satisfied with how they relate to each other. For example, the 2012-2013 Supervisory Surveys indicate that nearly 70% of the 1389 student participants are satisfied with the amount of time that they spend interacting with their supervisors. 88% are comfortable or somewhat comfortable discussing academic questions or issues with their supervisors, and 64% discussing non-academic issues (personal or professional). On the supervisors' side, 90% of responding supervisors "agreed" or "somewhat agreed" that they felt comfortable talking about non-academic questions and issues with their supervisees.
Supervisees as near peers
Research at the university suggests that some supervisors tend to treat students as if they are colleagues or peers, especially in the students' later phases of the PhD. This student, for example, said that he had been treated as a peer by the members of his supervisory committee:
We behaved together like peers through the entire length of my [study]…. I mean [I recognize] that there are absolute differences and that they have responsibilities that are different from mine, but [professor name], for example, who has been on the committee … for three years has been saying, "You are not somebody that I have to worry about. ...I know that you'll just go and do your thing and you'll do a good job and you can send me things when you want some feedback and that's it." So that's how he treated me for the whole way. And [my supervisor said this as well] because he knew that I would just do the work on my own and I didn't need him to sort of spend much time, hold my hand or anything like that. (Social Sciences, PhD student)
However, students who are treated like peers do not always feel like peers, as this student articulated:
[The interaction between me and my supervisor is a] mentor-learning kind of situation. I think that his perception is that I'm moving into a more equal kind of position with him as I come very close to completion and I'm looking for a job...we've done presentations together and he's talked about doing a book together—things like that indicate to me that he thinks of me, or is beginning to think of me, as an equal, but I don't think I will ever feel that way.... I just don't think I will ever see myself on equal footing with him. (Social Sciences PhD student: McAlpine, Amundsen, Paré, & Starke-Meyerring, 2006-2009)
Affective dimensions preferred over scholarly proficiency
One particularly interesting finding of the studies on the ideal supervisor is that it is the affective dimensions that candidates value the most highly in their supervisors (e.g., support, availability, interest and enthusiasm). Issues of technical know-how are usually rated somewhat lower down on the list of desirable characteristics.
Research (Wisker, 2005) also suggests that a productive relationship arises from a process of discussion based on agreed goals and values such as:
an understanding of the expectations of the other;
shared commitment to the supervisee's success; and
Regarding the last item, possibly the most commonly reported difficulty for students relates to communication difficulties with supervisors. Establishing sound and productive communication early, and regularly reviewing communication strategies, can help avoid some of the more distressing situations in which students and supervisors find themselves. While many such situations can be resolved, it is sometimes appropriate to consider supervisor change. While it is difficult to get local figures, a student survey (Heath, 2002) demonstrated that it was not as rare as frequently thought. Heath reported that:
18% of students had a change in principal supervisor; and
11% of students had a change in the co-supervisor.
Further, the change was not always the result of student concern.
52% of changes were due to supervisor departure;
10% to a change in topic; and
only 13% were linked to a breakdown in relations.
Students frequently report their fear at initiating change, not understanding that changes do happen and can be mutually beneficial. Procedures do exist to smooth the transition (e.g., on the Planning for Success page of this website) because students do not wish to be left in limbo for too long while new relationships are arranged.
2012-2013 Supervisory Surveys. Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies: McGill University.
Heath, T. (2002). A quantitative analysis of PhD students' views of supervision. Higher Education Research and Development, 21(1), 41-53.
McAlpine, L., & Amundsen, C. (2010-2013). Developmental trajectories of doctoral candidate through new appointee: A longitudinal study of academic identity construction. Unpublished data.
Wisker, G. (2005). The good supervisor: supervising postgraduate and undergraduate research for doctoral theses and dissertations. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Chen, S. (2012). Making sense of the public PhD dissertation defense: A qualitative multi-case study of education students' experiences. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, McGill University, Montreal.
Deuchar, R. (2008) Facilitator, director or critical friend?: Contradiction and congruence in doctoral supervision styles. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(4), 489-500.
Mainhard, T., van der Rijst, R., & van Tartwijk, J. (2009). A model for the supervisor-doctoral student relationship. Higher Education, 58(3), 359-373.
Taylor, S., & Beasley, N. (2005). A handbook for doctoral supervisors. London: Routledge.