Abstract:
Supervision in higher education can be perceived as a pedagogical relationship between an expert with a novice researcher who work together to achieve a goal. Feedback is embedded in and lies at the core of supervision - it can be argued that much of the communication between students and supervisors involves feedback. Indeed, feedback is impactful on students' learning. The impact of feedback lies in the focus and the way it is addressed. If students are to be successful in undertaking independent research projects, they must possess and/or acquire the necessary self-regulatory skills, attitudes and behaviours that will enable them to monitor and improve the quality of their work in an ongoing manner. To this end, it is argued that feedback, in particular, dialogic feedback is a critical aspect of the supervisory experience and a catalyst for developing independent, self-regulating learners. Following an interpretive inquiry, specifically a case study design, the present study explored the understandings and experiences of students and supervisors with reference to supervision and feedback within the undergraduate final year project (FYP) supervisory process in a public university in Malaysia -Universiti Gemilang (UG) (pseudonym). Four student-supervisor pairs, each pair from a different programme (chemistry, mathematics, culinary arts and marketing) were involved in the study. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, observations, field notes and the collecting of documents/artefacts. The findings highlighted supervision of the FYP at UG was perceived and practised as a traditional, supervisor-centric process. Local cultural expectations had a major impact on the perceptions of students and supervisors about their roles, responsibilities and expectations in the relationship. Such beliefs were also reflected in their understandings and experiences of feedback; that is, feedback understandings and practices in the FYP echoed practices associated with the traditional feedback paradigm. The present study revealed that strong hierarchical roles between students and supervisors as well as their limited feedback literacy mediated their understandings and experiences of supervision and feedback. As such, the purpose of the FYP as a learning opportunity for students to develop critical and analytical thinking skills, independent learning and self-regulation did not appear to be realised.
