Mapping evidence of postgraduate research supervision experiences at higher education institutions in Africa: A scoping review protocol

Background

Postgraduate research supervision is a formal process of academic development and support that is an integral component of successful postgraduate studies and professional development in higher education Holtman and Mukwada.¹ Early definitions of postgraduate supervision described it as an active process of teaching, support and mentorship of students pursuing postgraduate studies towards recognised qualifications at honours, masters and doctoral levels.^2,3 Pearson and Brew⁴ state that the research supervision process helps students evolve into independent researchers and scholars, equipped to work in various settings, whether in academia, research or industry. The postgraduate supervision process thus requires a blend of academic and interpersonal skills. This includes guiding students through the research process by providing insights on proposal preparation, methodological choices and publication of research findings. Nulty, Kiley⁵ state that research supervisors are responsible for providing the academic guidance to ensure scientific merit of research studies. Moreover, they should also create an environment of holistic support that encourages successful completion of the research.⁶

Approaches to postgraduate supervision vary widely and include traditional one-on-one mentorship, group supervision, cohort supervision, and more recently, digital or distance supervision.⁷ These models reflect an adaptation to the evolving needs of the global student body and the increasing demand for flexibility in higher education. The traditional model of supervision encompasses the provision of structured guidance and mentorship by a single supervisor who provides one-on-one advice, feedback, and support throughout the research process.⁸ This model emphasizes a personal and directive relationship, focusing on developing the student’s skills and knowledge in a specific field. While this approach can be beneficial, it may lead to students becoming overly dependent on their supervisors for guidance throughout the research process.

Team supervision, involves multiple supervisors contributing diverse expertise and perspectives to the postgraduate research process.^9,10 This model benefits students by offering a broader base of knowledge and support, encouraging interdisciplinary thinking and potentially leading to more innovative research outcomes. Team supervision is useful in programs where students are working on related topics as it allows for peer mentoring and support.¹¹ This subsequently instils a culture of collaboration and peer led critical engagement. Similarly, the participatory or co-supervision approach involves students more actively in the supervision process, emphasizing their role in setting goals, decision-making, and managing their research projects.¹² This approach aims to develop students’ independence and self-regulation skills, preparing them for future academic or professional roles.¹³ Each of these models can be adapted to the specific needs of the student and the requirements of the program, ensuring that the supervision process is supportive, effective, and conducive to producing high-quality academic work. Likewise, distance supervision is becoming increasingly prevalent with the rise of digital learning platforms and advancement of technology as it allows for supervision via online platforms.¹⁴ This method is beneficial for students who are remote or part-time, providing flexibility while maintaining rigorous academic oversight through regular virtual meetings and the use of digital communication tools.

The role of postgraduate supervisors in ensuring quality research and successful postgraduate outcomes, cannot be overemphasised.¹⁵ In recent years, postgraduate research supervision has become a topical matter of discussion in the global higher education landscape.¹⁴ In regions like Europe and Australia improved training and monitoring of supervisors has been Initiated.^16–18 Moreover, significant policy changes have been made to regulate the responsibilities of supervisors. International trends in postgraduate supervision inclusive of certain regions in Africa, are increasingly advocating for a shift towards more collaborative and integrative approaches. These include cohort supervision, peer mentoring, and integrated frameworks that combine various elements of traditional and modern supervisory models.¹⁹ Seiden Hyldegård and Jensen²⁰ support the notion of group supervision as a means to enhance supervision skills, which can positively influence postgraduate students’ writing. The advantages of group supervision include providing support, access to resources, quick thinking practice, encouragement to write, and professional growth opportunities.²¹

Despite this growing paradigm shift and inherent focus on university education and training globally, African universities vary in practices related to the adoption of systematic and current approaches to postgraduate supervision. There is evidence to suggest that the practice of postgraduate supervision in Africa is largely rooted in the traditional, individualistic model.²² Moreover, the successful adoption of alternative and new approaches to postgraduate supervision remains hindered by contextual challenges related to availability of resources, funding and high staff-student turn over.²³ Conversely, Pillay and Balfour²⁴ have alluded to finding variety of postgraduate research supervision practices and models which arise from supervisors ideological commitments and personal experiences. In such instances, there is exists a continuum - from a traditional model where there is deep, intense attachment to the one-to-one relationship on one end. On the other end may also exist hybrid model where-in the supervisory practices may be reconfigured based on varying contextual dynamics.

In the South African context, there has been substantial growth in postgraduate enrolment rates since 1994, however this has not reflected in graduations of doctoral candidates, which are still lower than the rates expressed in the National Development Plan 2030 (NDP).²⁵ Postgraduate supervision remains pivotal to the successful graduation of students from their postgraduate program.²⁶ The changing landscape in higher education created new sets of challenges for the supervision process, which includes work which are more interdisciplinary and students requiring expertise from supervisors that they may lack. The current supervision model employed in South Africa is more of a traditional apprenticeship model, characterised by one-on-one supervision, however there is a call to move more towards collaborative supervision approaches such as group or team supervision.²⁵ The changing landscape in higher education in South Africa has led to a set of challenges experienced by both the supervisor and student in the supervision relationship.

Supervisors in South Africa face many challenges in relation to postgraduate supervision. Some of the challenges include; lack of adequate training and support; reliance on their own supervision experience as a means of preparation; heavy workloads on top of supervision expectations; the massification of postgraduate education leads to challenges in maintaining quality supervision while simultaneously increasing the quantity of throughput; time constraints lead to supervisors not having adequate time for reflection, personal development or attending developmental opportunities; all of these challenges faced by supervisors raises concerns and influences the quality of supervision they are able to provide.^27,28 In light of these challenges and the changing landscape of postgraduate supervision needs, there is a call for structured support, training and development of supervisors^26,28

Given the current state of challenges that supervisors experience in South Africa, it is not surprising that postgraduate students would also have their own set of challenges. Some of the challenges raised by postgraduate students in relation to supervisions include; the poor communication between the supervisor and student, this is especially true for students who are situated further away from the university and in rural areas. Students also feel that the feedback that they receive from their supervisors are not adequate to their needs or in some cases, amount of lack of feedback. Students also often feel that they do not receive enough support from their supervisors during the course of the program. Some of the more concerning challenges highlighted by students are the unethical practices of supervisors.²⁶

While substantial evidence exists on postgraduate supervision experiences from the South African context, there is a need for greater awareness on postgraduate supervision experiences in other contexts of the African continent. Moreover, the experiences of postgraduate research supervision are not clearly understood from the experiences of all academic stakeholders involved in the supervision process, this includes postgraduate masters and doctoral students, academics and research support staff. This scoping review thus seeks to consolidate evidence on the experiences of postgraduate supervision in the African higher education context. The mapping of this empirical evidence may generate a more comprehensive understanding on the range of postgraduate supervision practices adopted in the region. Additionally, it may provide deeper insights on contextual barriers, success and best practices related to the adoption of various postgraduate supervision models in the region.

Methods

This scoping review will map evidence of postgraduate supervision experiences at higher education institutions in Africa. The scoping review methodological framework by Arksey and O’Malley²⁹ will be used to guide the review. The review will thus comprise of the following steps as guided by the framework: (1) identification of the review question, (2) identification of the relevant studies, (3) selection of relevant studies, (4) charting the data, (5) collating, summarizing and reporting the results.

Selection of eligible studies

Search results of electronic articles to be will be exported to Covidence Five independent reviewers will the carryout the title, abstract and full text screening whilst also removing duplicates that were not identified by Covidence. Articles that meet the inclusion criteria will be included for full text review and independent screening will be done by the five reviewers. Consensus will be established by discussion among the reviewers and an arbitrator will be sought in instances of disagreement. The articles selection process will be documented using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow chart – see Figure 1. The selection of eligible articles will be guided by the following inclusion and exclusion criteria:

Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram.

Discussion

The aim of this scoping review is to map and synthesize evidence on postgraduate supervision experiences at higher education institutions in Africa. Presently research on postgraduate supervision experiences in countries like Malaysia and Pakistan allude to student’s challenges navigating the research process, models of research supervision adopted by academics and the need for understand the range of available postgraduate supervision approaches required for different students’ needs.^32,33 In the African context empirical evidence reports on experiences of post graduate supervision from the perspective on students, particularly those at PhD level and supervisors within specified postgraduate research disciplines.³⁴ There is also evidence to suggest varying practices and challenges related to postgraduate research supervision processes and practices.³⁵ Moreover contextual research highlights the need for collaborative efforts my stakeholders to ensure quality of research supervision practices so that postgraduate students can contribute significantly to addressing societal issue through their research.³⁶ Tlali, Chere-Masopha³⁷ further argue that supervisors should be capacitated through relevant training to execute the role and that supervisory guidelines be reviewed and benchmarked against best practices in the field.

Despite the availability of reasonable empirical data on this subject, experiences of postgraduate research supervision are not holistically understood from the perspective of all relevant stakeholders within the African higher education context. The proposed review thus seeks to address this gap by mapping the range of empirical evidence on postgraduate supervision experiences from various academic stakeholders namely postgraduate Masters and PhD students, research supervisors and research support staff.

In this regard, it hoped that the review may highlight several themes associated with postgraduate supervision experiences, including supervisor-student relationships, different models of supervision practices, and barriers from the different disciplines and fields of postgraduate research. It is also anticipated that the review will highlight gaps in the current literature, potentially leading to further research areas. The proposed findings may thus have implications for policy and practices related to postgraduate supervision in the African higher education context. This is significant in the African context due to a rapidly advancing higher education landscape and the role of high-quality supervision in the success of postgraduate students.