Exploring Doctoral Supervision in Law Education: Perspectives in Teaching and Pedagogy

Tasnim Ahmed

doi:10.32890/mjli2025.22.1.1

Authors

Tasnim Ahmed School of Law, Liverpool John Moores University, United Kingdom

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2025.22.1.1

Keywords:

Pedagogy, PhD supervision, auto-ethnographic study, law doctoral supervision

Abstract

Purpose - This paper explores the pedagogical practices employed in supervising law PhD students within law schools. The study adopts an auto-ethnographic approach to investigate the beliefs of both supervisors and students regarding teaching, learning, research and supervision.

Methodology - An overarching auto-ethnographic method was used to examine the perspectives of students and supervisors on teaching, learning, research and supervision. Data collection spanned eight months and followed a multi-step process. The first set of data was obtained through a focus group comprising five supervisors from the Business and Law Faculty. The second set of data involved naturalistic observations of three supervisory meetings per supervisor and their respective students. The final set of data was collected through the observation of five student annual progression panel proceedings, focusing on the same five students whose supervisory sessions were previously observed.

Findings - The observations revealed five distinct pedagogical approaches to teaching within the supervisory context. Additionally, participants’ beliefs were found to be interconnected, allowing for the identification of orientations. Participants aligned with a particular orientation exhibited a unique set of beliefs. It was noted that a supervisor’s choice of orientation influences the overall pedagogical approach adopted during supervision. Each orientation incorporated an element of teaching, highlighting the integral role of teaching within supervisory practices.

Significance - The findings have significant implications for faculty professional development, particularly for staff involved in doctoral supervision. They provide insights into the dynamics of student learning during interactions between staff and students throughout the doctoral journey. These insights can inform future supervision training programmes, offering valuable guidance to novice supervisors and enhancing the overall doctoral supervision experience.

References

Adams, G. (2019). A narrative study of the experience of feedback on a professional doctorate: A kind of flowing conversation. Studies in Continuing Education, 41(2), 191-206. https:/doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2018.1526782

Adams, T. (2008). A review of narrative ethics. Qualitative Inquiry, 14(2), 175-194. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800407304

Adkins, B. (2009). PhD pedagogy and the changing knowledge landscapes of universities. Higher Education Research and Development, 28(2), 165-177. https:/doi.org/10.1080/0729436090272 5041

Agricola, B. T., Prins, F. J., Van Der Schaaf, F. M., & Van Tartwijk, J. (2020). Supervisor and student perspectives on undergraduate thesis supervision in higher education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 65(5), 877-897. https://doi.org/101080/00313831.2020.1775115

Aitchison, C., & Lee, A. (2010). Writing in and out: Doctoral writing as peer work. In M. Walker & P. Thomson (Eds.), The Routledge Doctoral Supervisor’s Companion: Supporting effective research in education and the social sciences (pp. 260-270). Routledge.

Akerlind, G., & McAlpine, L. (2017). Supervising doctoral students: Variation in purpose and pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education, 42(9), 1687-1698. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079. 2015.1118031

Anderson, L. (2006). Analytic autoethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35(4), 373395. https://doi.org/10.1177/08912416052804

Arup, C. (2008). Research assessment and legal scholarship. Legal Education Review, 18(1), 31-54. https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.6205

Ashour, S., El Rafae, G., & Zaitoun, E. (2021). Post pandemic higher education: Perspectives from university leaders and educational experts in the UAE. Higher Education for the Future, 8(2), 219-38. https://doi.org/10.1177/234763112111007261

Bastalich, W. (2017). Content and context in knowledge production: A critical review of doctoral supervision literature. Studies in Higher Education, 42(7), 1145-1157. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 03075079.2015.1079702

Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Sampson, J. (1999). Peer learning and assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(4), 413-426. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293990240405

Boud, D., & Lee, A. (2008). Changing practices of doctoral education. Routledge.

Brew, A. (2001). Conceptions of research: A phenomenographic study. Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), 271-285. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070120076255

Brew, A., & Peseta, T. (2009). Supervision development and recognition in a reflexive space’ In D. Boud & A. Lee (Eds.), Changing Practices of Doctoral Education (pp.126-139). Taylor & Francis Group.

Bruce, C., & Stoodley, I. (2013). Experiencing higher research supervision as teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 38(2), 226-241. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.576338

Burns, R., Lamm, R., & Lewis, R. (1999). Orientations to higher degree supervision: A study of supervisors and students in education. In A. Holbrook & S. Johnston (Eds.), Supervision of Postgraduate Research in Education (pp.55-74). Australian Association for Research in Education.

Buttery, E. A., Richter, E. M., & Walter, L. F. (2005). An overview of the elements that influence efficiency in postgraduate supervisory practice arrangement. International Journal of Education Management,19(1), 7-26. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540510574920

Clegg, S., & Gall, I. (1998). The discourse of research degrees supervision: A case study of supervisor training. Higher Education Research and Development, 17(2), 323-332. https://doi.org/10.108 0/0729436980170305

Clegg, S., & Stevenson J. (2013). The interview reconsidered context, genre, reflexivity and interpretation in sociological approaches to interviews in higher education research. Higher

Education Research & Development, 3(21), 5-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.7502

Connell, R., & Manathunga, M. (2012). On doctoral education: How to supervise a PhD 1985-2011. The Australian Universities Review, 54(1), 5-9.

Craswell, G. (2007). Deconstructing the skills training debate in doctoral education. Higher Education Research & Development, 26(4), 377-391. https//doi.org/10.1080/07294360701658591

Cryer, R., Hervey, T., & Sokhi-Bulley, B. (2011). Research Methodologies in EU and International Law. Hart Publishing.

Dixon, K., & Hanks, H. (2010). From poster to PhD: The evolution of a literature review. In M. Walker., & P. Thomson (Eds.), The Routledge Doctoral Supervisor’s Companion: Supporting effective research in education and the social sciences (pp.51-65). Routledge.

Dowling, R., & Wilson, M. (2017). Digital doctorates? An exploratory study of PhD candidates’ use of online tools. Innovations in Education in Education and Teaching International, 54(1),76-86. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2015.1058720

Fenge, L. A. (2012). Enhancing the doctoral journey: The role of group supervision in supporting collaborative learning and creativity. Studies in Higher Education, 37(4), 401-414. https://doi.org /10.1080/03075079.2010.520697

Fillery-Travis, A., & Robinson, L. (2018). Making the familiar strange – a research pedagogy for practice. Studies in Higher Education, 43(5), 841-853. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018. 1438098

Fine, G. (1993). Ten lies of ethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 22(3), 267-294. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241693022003001

Firth, A., & Martens, E. (2008). Transforming supervisors? A critique of post-liberal approaches to research supervision. Teaching in Higher Education, 3(3), 279-289. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 13562510802045303

Fisher, E., Lange, B., Scotford, E., & Carlene, C. (2009). Maturity and methodology: Starting a debate about environmental law scholarship. Journal of Environmental Law, 21(2), 213-250. https://doi.org/10.1093/jel/eqp

Franke, A., & Arvidsson, B. (2011). Research supervisors’ different ways of experiencing supervision of doctoral students. Studies in Higher Education, 36(1), 7-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 03075070903402151

Goodall, H. L. (2008). Writing The New Ethnography. Altra Mira.

Green, B., & Lee, A. (1995). Theorizing postgraduate pedagogy. Australian Universities’ Review, 38(2), 40-45.

Green, B., & Lee, A. (1999). Educational research, disciplinarity and postgraduate pedagogy: On the subject of supervision. In A. Holbrook., & S. Johnston. (Eds.), Supervision of postgraduate research in education (pp. 207-223). Australian Association for Research in Education.

Gregersen, E. (2019). The lived experience of a university law clinic supervisor: An autoethnographic inquiry. Doctoral thesis. Northumbria University.

Guerin, C., Kerr, H., & Green, I. (2015). Supervision pedagogies: Narratives from the field. Teaching in Higher Education, 20(1), 107-118. https://doi.org/101080/13562517.2014.957271

Harrision, S., & Dwyer, R. (2014). Alleviating isolation: Research in the conservatoire. Music Education Research, 17(2), 201-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2014.930115

Harrison, S., & Grant, C. (2015). Exploring of new models of research pedagogy: Time to let go of master-apprentice style supervision? Teaching in Higher Education, 20(5), 564-566. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2015.1036732

Harwood, N. I., & Petric, B. (2018). Experiencing master’s supervision: Perspectives of international students and their supervisors. Routledge.

Henderson, E. F. (2018). Anticipating doctoral supervision: (Not) bridging the transition from supervisee to supervisor. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(4), 403-418. https://doi.org/10. 1080/13562517.2017.1382466

Hernandez, K., Ngunijiri, F., & Chang, H. (2010). Living auto-ethnography: Connecting life and research. Journal of Research Practice, 6(1), 1-17.

Holdsworth, S., & Hegarty, K. (2015). Towards a praxis of sustainability education in universities. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 9(3/4), 205-226. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJISD.2015.071861

Jones, E. (2017). One size fits all? Multiple intelligences and legal education. The Law Teacher, 51(1) 56-68. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069400.2015.1082238

Jones, S. H. (2005). Autoethnography: Making the personal political. In N. K. Dennzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed., pp.763-791). Sage.

Jorgenson, J. (2002). Engineering selves: Negotiating gender and identity in technical work. Management Communication Quarterly, 15(3), 350-380. https://doi.org/10.1177/08933189021 53002

Khan, T., & Mikuska, E. (2023). The relationship between the supervisors and the supervisees: Experiences of PhD completers. Journal of Applied and Technical Educational Sciences, 12(4) 1-12. https://doi.org/10.24368/jates335

Khosa, A., Burch, S., Osdil, E., & Wilkin, C. (2020). Current issues in PhD supervision of accounting and finance students: Evidence from Australia and New Zealand. The British Accounting Review, 52(5), 100874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2019.100874

Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Eds.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 202-251). Cambridge University Press.

Lee, A. (2007). Developing effective supervisors: Concepts of research supervision. South African Journal of Higher Education, 21(4), 680-693.

Lee, A. (2008). How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision. Studies in Higher Education, 33(3), 267-281. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070802049202

Lee, A. (2018). How can we develop supervisors for the modern doctorate? Studies in Higher Education, 43(5), 878-890. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1438116

Lo, V. (2022). The currency and relevancy of confucian pedagogy in doctoral supervision. Bond Law Review, 34(3), 1-13. https://doi.org/53300/001c.38545

Loughnan, A., & Shackel, R. (2009). The travails of postgraduate research in law. Legal Education Review, 19(1), 99-132. https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.6218

Loxley, A., & Kearns, M. (2018). Finding a purpose for the doctorate? A view from the supervisors. Studies in Higher Education, 43(5), 826-840. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1438096

Manathunga, C. (2009). Supervision in a contested space: A response. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(3), 341-345. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510902990242

McCallin, A., & Nayar, S. (2011). Postgraduate research supervision: A critical review of current practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(1), 63-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2011. 590979

McWilliam, N., Yeung, T., & Green, A. (2018). Law students’ experiences in an experiential law and research program in Australia. Legal Education Review, 28(1) 1-23. https://doi.org/10. 53300/001c.6364https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.6364

Mewburn, I., Guerin, C., & Aitchison, C. (2021). Networks as learning environments for doctoral education. In A. Lee & R. Bongaardt (Eds.), The future of doctoral research (pp. 193-204). Routledge.

Mey, G., & Mruck, K. (2010). Interviews. In G. Mey & K. Mruck (Eds.), Handbuch qualitative forscung in der psychologie (pp. 423-435). Springer.

Moorhouse, B. L. (2020). Adaptations to a face to face initial teacher education course ‘forced’ online due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46(4), 609-611. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1755205

Mullen, C., Fish, V., & Huntiger, J. (2010). Mentoring doctoral students through scholastic engagement: Adult learning principles in action. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 34(2), 179-197. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098771003695452

Murphy, N., Bain, J., & Conrad, L. (2007). Orientations to research higher degree supervision. Higher Education, 53(2), 209-234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-005-5608-

Murphy, M.P. A. (2020). Covid-19 and emergency eLearning: Consequences of the securitization of higher education for post-pandemic pedagogy. Contemporary Security Policy, 41(3), 492-505. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2020.1761749

Nordentoft, H. M., Thomsen, R. M., & Wichmann-Hansen, G. (2013). Collective academic supervision: A model for participation and learning in higher education. Higher Education, 65(5), 581-593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9564

Pearson, M., & Brew, A. (2002). Research training and supervision development. Studies in Higher Education, 27(2), 135-150. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070220119986c

Pokhrel, S., & Chhetri, R. (2021). A literature review on the impact of Covid-19 pandemic on teaching and learning. Higher Education for the Future, 8(1), 133-141. https://doi.org/10.1177/2347631 120983481

Ridgway, A. (2022). Love, Loss and a Doctorate: An autoethnography of grieving while writing a PhD. Higher Education Research & Development, 42(1), 230-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436 0.2021.2019202

Sandri, O. (2020). What do we mean by ‘pedagogy’ in sustainability education? Teaching in Higher Education, 27(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1699528

Smith, B. (2001). (Re) framing research degree supervision as pedagogy. In A. Bartlett & G. Mercer (Eds.), Postgraduate Research Supervision Transforming (R)Elations (pp. 25-41). Peter Lang.

Slavin, R. (1990). Co-operative learning: Theory, research and practice. Pearson.

Spry, T. (2001). Performing auto-ethnography: An embodied methodological praxis. Qualitative Inquiry, 7(6), 706-732. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780040100700605

Topping, K. (2005). Trends in peer learning in educational psychology. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631-645. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500345172

Tomaselli, K., Dyll, L., & Francis, M. (2008). ‘Self’ and ‘other’ auto-reflexive and indigenous ethnography. In N. K. Denzin, Y. S. Lincoln & L. T. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies (pp. 347-372). Sage.

Tsaoussi, A. (2020). Using soft skills courses to inspire law teachers: A new methodology for a more humanistic legal education. The Law Teacher, 54(1), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069400. 2018.1563396

Vehvilainen, S., & Lofstrom, E. (2016). I wish I had a crystal ball: Discourses and potential for developing academic supervising. Studies in Higher Education, 41(3), 508-524. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.942272

Vereijken, M. W. C., Van der Rijst, M., Van Driel, J., & Dekker, F. (2018). ‘Novice supervisors’ practices and dilemmatic space in supervision of student research projects. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(4), 522-542. http: doi.org/1080/13562517.2017.1414791

Walker, M. (2010). Doctoral education as ‘capability’ formation. In M. Walker & P. Thomson (Eds.), The Routledge Doctoral Supervisor’s Companion: Supporting Effective Research in Education and the Social Sciences (pp. 29-37). Routledge.

Wei, J., Carter, S., & Deborah, L. (2019). Handling the loss of innocence: First time exchange of writing and feedback in doctoral supervision. Higher Education Research and Development, 38(1), 157-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1541074

Wichmann-Hansen, G., Thomsen, R., & Nordentoft, H. M. (2015). Challenges in collective academic supervision: Supervisors’ experiences from a master programme in guidance and counselling. Higher Education, 70(1), 19-33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9821-

Wisker, G., Robinson, G., & Shacham, M. (2007). Postgraduate research success. Communities of practice involving cohorts, guardian supervisors and online communities. Innovation in Education in Teaching International, 44(3), 301-320. https://doi.org/10.1080/1470329070148 6720