Colleague supervision of in-house masters dissertations

Introduction: This study explored the issues and challenges facing supervisors required to act as a supervisor to their fellow educators’ research dissertations. This situation often stems from the need to enhance the research profile of Faculty staff. For example, the studies of Porter and Mansour (2003) and Ried and Fuller (2005) identify the need to enhance research outputs of nurse educators. However, where there is no critical mass of experienced researchers as is the case in many Nursing Faculties nationally and internationally it becomes a difficult issue to provide the research support needed. Methods: In-depth interviews were undertaken with students (n=7) and their supervisors (n=5) in order to explore the experiences of Faculty staff that have successfully completed an in-house masters’ level dissertation when being supervised by a fellow member of staff. Results: A wealth of qualitative data was obtained which was subject to a thematic analysis. Findings revealed that the majority of student and supervisors had a positive supervisory experience. However, many student respondents said they felt uncomfortable with the assessment aspect where they felt they were under ‘public’ scrutiny in Faculty meetings. Conversely the supervisors felt that on occasions students did not take the established norms of any supervisory relationship seriously enough causing tensions in the relationship. Discussion: Generally the literature gives numerous accounts of what constitutes good supervisory practice but less about what the actual experiences of students and research supervisors are. However, Denicolo (2004) relates that colleague supervision is special on a number of counts. For example, colleague supervision gives the potential for further role conflicts that both parties have to contend with. This study gives indications of how Faculty policies and practice may be developed so as to enhance student and supervisor experiences of MSc dissertation supervision