Kate Day

Mastering the dissertation: lecturers’ representations of the purposes and processes of Master’s level dissertation supervision

This article reports on part of a study of dissertation work in taught Master’s courses. It focuses on presenting findings from interviews with 13 supervisors in a faculty of education concerning the normative order that they believed should prevail within the supervisory relationship, and their complex representation of student agency and of student and supervisor responsibilities. The final discussion frames central findings within a sociocultural account of learning and teaching. It highlights the duality of shaping and supporting students’ efforts that framed supervisors’ commitments and actions: i.e. it details how supervisors saw themselves as having a gatekeeping role and a commitment to align students’ work with academic standards, and at the same time a personal commitment which involved a responsibility to assist students to pursue a topic that excited their interest and to support their sense of agency.

Student perspectives on the dissertation process in a masters degree concerned with professional practice

Despite the proliferation of taught masters courses, the experiences of masters students in general have received comparatively little attention within the research literature, and the dissertation process in particular has not been investigated extensively. The present article focuses on the findings of detailed interviews with 15 professionals studying part time who had recently completed a masters dissertation in a faculty of education, and is part of a larger study that examined both student and staff perspectives. A central facet of these students’ experiences of researching and writing-up a dissertation was their representation of their own agency and how this was connected to a particular sense of personhood and a strategic approach, whilst being enabled by supervisors and supportive others. The normative order that study participants believed should prevail within the supervisory relationship is delineated and issues concerning the conceptualisation of student agency are addressed.

Engaging with Historical Source Work Practices, pedagogy, dialogue

Although primary source work is a major component of undergraduate history degrees in many countries, the topic of how best to support this work has been relatively unexplored. This article addresses the pedagogical support of primary source work by reviewing relevant literature to identify the challenges undergraduates face in interpreting sources, and examining how in two courses carefully articulated course design and supportive teaching activities assisted students to meet these challenges. This fine-grained examination of the courses is framed within a socio-cultural account of learning. The findings show how a skilful drawing of students into the interpretive/discursive practices of source analysis was associated with an epistemological reframing of historical knowledge and dialogical forms of teaching that helped the students to take forward a dialectical engagement with sources. The benefits of an ‘integrated’ approach to source work that fosters students’ affective and intellectual engagement with historical interpretive practices are highlighted.

Evaluating networked learning: developing a multi-disciplinary, multi-method approach

There has been considerable interest and activity throughout the last decade in the design and implementation of networked learning initiatives in higher education. Many of these initiatives have been evaluated subsequently at institutional or consortial/regional level and the findings disseminated. It is more unusual however to find evaluation of networked learning innovation being undertaken at sectoral level on a nationwide basis. This chapter charts the development and outlines the key characteristics of a research methodology for evaluating large-scale networked learning initiatives. The methodology was developed, and subsequently refined and adapted, through a series of evaluative research commissions undertaken by the Learning Technology in Higher Education (LTHE) Research Group in the Department of Higher and Community Education at the University of Edinburgh.