Therefore, my supervision approach is student-led, similar to my overall teaching approach. I am fortunate that several of my Honours students became my Master’s students and then moved on to start their PhDs with me. A level of trust builds up over time. In one example, an Honour’s student of mine in 2019 completed his MA RD with me in 2021 and is now nearing completion of his PhD. Additionally, this PhD student and I have co-authored various pieces together, guest edited a special issue of the South African Journal of International Affairs together and contributed an article within it, and guest-lectured together for the Department of International Relations and Cooperation - all on issues of terrorism and counterterrorism. Through supervision, I aim to contribute to the development of emerging scholars in my discipline. However, growing supervision loads characterised by traditional one-on-one models are untenable as something must surely fall through the cracks. Because of the complexity of the postgraduate supervision environment, I work with two other teaching and learning models in my supervision depending on context: cohort supervision and team supervision. I find value in the cohort supervision model, which is based on the principles of scaffolding, conversational theory and cooperative learning (van Biljon et al., 2014). I have co-hosted four RISCRISE doctoral schools or ‘Knowledge labs’ (one in-person in 2019 and three online in 2021, 2022 and 2023). These two-week-long multidisciplinary References de Lange, N., Pillay, G., & Chikoko, V. (2011). Doctoral learning: a case for a cohort model of supervision and support. South African Journal of Education, 31(1), 15-30. 10.15700/saje.v31n1a413 Dominguez-Whitehead, Y., & Maringe, F. (2020). A Cross-National Analysis of PhD Models. International Journal of Comparative Education and Development, 22(3), 233–245. Kiley, M. (2017). Reflections on Change in Doctoral Education: An Australian Case Study. Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education, 8(2), 78–87. McKenna, S. (2017). Crossing conceptual thresholds in doctoral communities. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(5), 458–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2016. 1155471 Nkoane, M. M. (2014). Revisiting pedagogic practices: A case for sustainable learning environments for postgraduate supervision studies: Part 1: Exploration of the critical relationship between higher education and the development of democracy in South Africa. South African Journal of Higher Education, 28(3), 697–706. https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC159158 van Biljon, J., van Dyk, T. &L. Naidoo (2014). Towards increasing supervision capacity: The pyramid cohort supervision model, SACLA 2014, June 25-26, 2014, Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Watts, J. (2010). Team supervision of the doctorate: managing roles, relationships and contradictions. Teaching in Higher Education,15(3), 335–339. schools are a mixture of live lectures from experts in different fields and practical exercises, for example, Padlet exercises or group work developing infographics based on the PhD study, doctoral feedback sessions, and a final reflection session. The schools brought together South African doctoral students from UJ and the University of Pretoria usually and students from other countries, such as Mexico, Colombia, Luxembourg, the United States, Germany, and Canada, to share their doctoral studies in 10-minute PPT pre-recorded videos. After this, I and a team of professors and doctoral students will provide feedback and engage in peer reviews of the videos in a live session. We managed to circumvent any language barriers as RISC-RISE comprises multilingual members who were always on-site to translate if required. We hosted all schools after 15:00 SAST to accommodate as many students globally as possible. Team supervision is characterised by three or more supervisors attached to a doctoral study. I have participated in team supervision before. It is a helpful way to reduce a student’s time to completion by adding expert eyes and minds to a study, bringing in multidisciplinary views that can fill gaps and assist with study flow and original contribution, and helping to ensure a steady pace despite supervisors’ varying schedules. Watts (2010, p. 1) asserts that using teams for doctoral supervision “…depends to a large extent on the mediated management of complex variables such as individual conduct, collective action, technologies, space and communication”. I found this statement to be true. I have had a negative experience with team supervision where the synergy and energy between the supervisors was off. I felt this impacted my ability to co-supervise to my full potential. It is a cautionary tale in terms of the pitfalls of team supervision. Ultimately, my intuition guides me on which model to adopt, and the student in front of me is the primary guide; in other words, what are the needs I aim to serve? I have stepped in as a co-supervisor to salvage a stagnant study. Although the student was then able to complete and graduate, I was mindful that the student had not had a good experience previously, and this weighed on me throughout the remainder of the student’s journey. Witnessing the student happily graduate reminded me that supervision is not only a responsibility but also a privilege. Teaching Innovation for the 21st Century | Showcasing UJ Teaching Innovation Projects 2024 31
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjU1NDYx