[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-595345-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-595345-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","making-supervision-relationships-accountable-graduate-student-logs","Making supervision relationships accountable - graduate student logs","","Making graduate supervision accountable challenges a long-standing humanities and social sciences model built on personalised apprenticeship and “charismatic authority”. The article explains how legitimacy in this relationship relied on belief in the supervisor’s extraordinary scholarly qualities, echoed through the supervisee’s performance and thesis defence. It argues that in mass higher education, and across professions beyond academia, the traditional implicit norms become inadequate for many candidates lacking socialisation into research culture, especially those marginalised by dominant academic practices.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/making-supervision-relationships-accountable-graduate-student-logs/595345/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/making-supervision-relationships-accountable-graduate-student-logs/595345.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Blitz","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-01","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",5,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What traditional model of graduate supervision does the text describe?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"It describes a personalised apprenticeship model where the supervisor inducts the student into the “mysteries” of research through observation, feedback, and the student’s own early efforts.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How does “charismatic authority” shape the supervision relationship?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The supervisee selects the supervisor for extraordinary scholarly qualities, and the relationship succeeds only if the student’s work demonstrates the supervisor’s influence is worth believing.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Why does the author argue the traditional model can no longer work?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"In mass higher education and in professions beyond academia, many supervisees are not sufficiently socialised into the demands of scholarly research culture, making implicit norms inadequate, particularly for marginalised candidates.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},595345,1792892167,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,100,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":55,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":30,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":111,"preview_page_count":4},24464137899374,"https://us-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2","Making supervision relationships accountable: graduate student logs  \nAnna Yeatman  \nMacquarie University  \nIntroduction  \nGenerally speaking, in the humanities and social sciences, the graduate student supervision relationship has been left to a traditional apprenticeship model, where the established ‘master’ inducts the new apprentice into the ‘mysteries’ of the craft. The academic apprentice has been left to learn by two methods: observing how the master does research, and, more broadly, being an academic; and, learning from his own beginner’s experience of doing sustained academic research, where the master is expected to give feedback to the apprentice’sideas as these are delivered in both oral and written form. This is a highly personalised relationship. The transmission of the craft occurs through the apprentice producing work which gives witness tohowhe has been inducted into the craft by the master. The quality of this witness depends on what is an ineffable and fundamentally religious conception of the apprentice’sinsight into how the supervisor exemplifies the academic craft of scholarship and research. It is the genius of the apprentice which is responsible for how he takes up into his own creative powers the exemplary virtues and skills of the master.  \nThe traditional mode of graduate student supervision has been governed by what Weber (1948, 295-297) terms “charismatic authority”:  \n‘Charismatic authority’...shall refer to a rule over men, whether predominantly external or predominantly internal, to which the governed submit because of their belief in the extraordinary quality of the specific person ... The legitimacy of their rule restson the belief in and the devotion to the extraordinary, which is valued because it goes beyond the normal human qualities... The legitimacy of charismatic rule thus rests upon the belief in magical powers, revelationsand hero worship. The source of these beliefs is the ‘proving’ of the charismatic quality through ... victories and other successes, that is, through the welfare of the governed ... Charismatic rule is not managed according to general norms, either traditional or rational, but, in principle, according to concrete revelations and inspirations, and in this sense, charismatic authority is ‘irrational’(Weber, 1948, pp 295-296) .  \nThe supervisee selects the supervisor on the basis of his charisma––that is, his extraordinary qualities as a scholar-researcher. In this case, the nature of the relationship if it is to be a successful one requires that the belief in the charismatic quality of the individual works in both directions. In order for the charisma of the supervisor to prove to be worth believing in, the work of the supervisee has to be of a quality as to testify to the value of the supervisor’s influence. In short, if the relationship is to be counted a success, the supervisee has to demonstrate by his own charismatic scholarly quality that he is worthy to be supervised by this supervisor. In this sense, his is a scholarly discipleship. The heroic quality of the supervisor is echoed in and attested toby the heroic quality of the supervisee, especially once the latter has passed the final test, the submission and––in university systems influenced by the German model––the public defence of his thesis ina way that is found to be acceptable by his examiners.  \nI have used the masculine personal pronoun to characterise both terms of this relationship because it has been one that fitted universities in their elite and masculinist phases of history when PhD candidates were a tiny few and represented a select élite of aspirant academics.  \nThe charismatic authority of the research apprenticeship was expressed further in a paternalistic personalism whereby the supervisor extended the hospitality of his home (and the domestic services of his wife) to his chosen disciples. They in turn were tacitly expected to bea living testimony to the scholarly genius of the supervisor in ","cbCaiiGHz4CpmCTG","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiiGHz4CpmCTG","pdf",24278,"English","# Introduction\n## Traditional apprenticeship and personalised supervision\n## Charismatic authority and its accountability logic\n## Discipleship, defence, and mutual legitimacy\n## Limitations of the traditional model in mass higher education","[{\"question\":\"What traditional model of graduate supervision does the text describe?\",\"answer\":\"It describes a personalised apprenticeship model where the supervisor inducts the student into the “mysteries” of research through observation, feedback, and the student’s own early efforts.\"},{\"question\":\"How does “charismatic authority” shape the supervision relationship?\",\"answer\":\"The supervisee selects the supervisor for extraordinary scholarly qualities, and the relationship succeeds only if the student’s work demonstrates the supervisor’s influence is worth believing.\"},{\"question\":\"Why does the author argue the traditional model can no longer work?\",\"answer\":\"In mass higher education and in professions beyond academia, many supervisees are not sufficiently socialised into the demands of scholarly research culture, making implicit norms inadequate, particularly for marginalised candidates.\"}]","Making supervision relationships accountable - graduate student logs | PDF",1792080956]