“I Don’t Know, But We Will Figure it Out”: Learning Together as Advisor/Advisee
Location
3034
Format Type
Paper
Format Type
Paper
Start Date
January 2016
End Date
January 2016
Abstract
Harrison and Grant (2015) suggest that the master-apprentice model of research pedagogy should be less hierarchical. We present one case of a collaborative model and the challenges involved. Advising an adult doctoral candidate of similar age over a distance is complex. Keith, the doctoral candidate, was learning qualitative research by doing it. For Peter, the doctoral faculty advisor, the multiple case study was a challenging emergent design: a dozen interviews, some site visits, and records review. The needed skill development aspects of interviewing, for example, meant that we developed a sort of coaching relationship. Drawing from experience, Peter tried to establish a relationship of trust not based upon knowing all the answers but on authenticity. The emergent nature required that we pause and reflect regularly on what we were seeing and what Keith should do next. Facing this process as co-learners allowed us to have frank discussions engaging expertise (and lack thereof), accepting challenges, learning together, and planning the next steps together. We experienced a tension between wanting to know definitive next steps and recognizing the complexity of the emerging situation which sometimes resulted in no clear right choice for a next step. We dove in to see what would happen and then met to debrief and reflect. While the project is ongoing at the time of this submission, the reflections of both advisor and advisee may be informative to others interested in a less hierarchical approach to the research advising relationship.
“I Don’t Know, But We Will Figure it Out”: Learning Together as Advisor/Advisee
3034
Harrison and Grant (2015) suggest that the master-apprentice model of research pedagogy should be less hierarchical. We present one case of a collaborative model and the challenges involved. Advising an adult doctoral candidate of similar age over a distance is complex. Keith, the doctoral candidate, was learning qualitative research by doing it. For Peter, the doctoral faculty advisor, the multiple case study was a challenging emergent design: a dozen interviews, some site visits, and records review. The needed skill development aspects of interviewing, for example, meant that we developed a sort of coaching relationship. Drawing from experience, Peter tried to establish a relationship of trust not based upon knowing all the answers but on authenticity. The emergent nature required that we pause and reflect regularly on what we were seeing and what Keith should do next. Facing this process as co-learners allowed us to have frank discussions engaging expertise (and lack thereof), accepting challenges, learning together, and planning the next steps together. We experienced a tension between wanting to know definitive next steps and recognizing the complexity of the emerging situation which sometimes resulted in no clear right choice for a next step. We dove in to see what would happen and then met to debrief and reflect. While the project is ongoing at the time of this submission, the reflections of both advisor and advisee may be informative to others interested in a less hierarchical approach to the research advising relationship.
Comments
References:
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), 556-566.