EVALUATING CHALLENGES ON SUPERVISORY PRACTICE AT THE NATIONAL

UNIVERSITY OF LESOTHO: THE PERCEPTIONS OF FINAL-YEAR MASTER’S

STUDENTS

Ramakatsa L.C MONAHENG – ramakatsarcl@gmail.com

Abstract

Supervisory practice is the most significant activity that universities follow in the

production of people of high caliber predictable to participate with expertise in the

country’s development. Academia needs to put more focus on supervision that

contributes to understanding the research pedagogy as that is likely to reinforce

supervisors’ and students’ knowledge of research procedures. The current study

investigated perceptions of supervisory practice on final-year students’ research

development at the National University of Lesotho (NUL). The sample of the

study was comprised of 35 master’s students and 7 supervisors from seven

faculties constituting NUL. Findings reveal that students perceive supervisors as

not taking their supervision work seriously. Poor provision of timely feedback is

the sign reported in the findings of the current study contributing to many students

not completing their research on time. Study findings also show that supervisors

do not provide emotional support to students during the progression of research

development. The study recommends frequent seminars, presentations, and

workshops for postgraduate students. Also, the study recommends regular

workshops for supervisors to equip them with advanced supervision skills.

Another recommendation is that collaborative supervision practice be initiated to

enhance postgraduate supervision at NUL.

1
 Keywords: supervisory practice, co-supervision, feedback, supervisee,

supervisor.

Introduction

The university lecturers are predicted to perform diverse activities, including teaching, lecturing,

tutoring, and engaging in students’ supervision of theses, dissertations, and research projects

(Helfer & Drew, 2019). Supervision is a method that involves actions made to approve the

accomplishment of research objectives by supervisors (Castro-Rodriguez & Rojas-Ortega, 2022).

A supervisor is a person who guides a thesis, dissertation, and/or research project from scratch to

the end in partnership with the student guaranteeing the foundation and submission of the

research development (Yousuf, Salam, Islam, & Salam, 2019). On the other hand, Davis (2020)

explains the term supervisor as referring to a doctoral degree holder allocated by the university to

administer the students’ advancement on thesis, dissertation, and research projects while also

facilitating their relations with the academic domain.

Towards the end of a degree program, students are expected to produce completed research work

under the supervision of an academic expert, also acknowledged as a supervisor. To ensure good

practice, supervisors must have good relationships with the students he or she is supervising

(Malunda, Atwebembeire, & Ssentamu, 2023). Significantly, supervisors must first discuss the

way they want to guide the research development process with the students. This means there

must be a mutual agreement between the supervisor and the student on how the research process

is going to be carried out. The supervisors must bear in mind that one of their major

responsibilities is to guide students to complete research problems they have identified. In this

case, supervisors are expected to be the advisors throughout the research process, not the

2
decision-makers. Besides, the students must feel free to ask questions or make any other

suggestions relating to their research work. Cekiso, Tshotsho, Masha, and Saziwa (2019) suggest

that if a supervisor builds a wall between him and his supervisee, the situation can lead to where

the student opting to drop out or take a longer time than expected to complete the research

exercise.

One of the factors determining the completion of the research project in universities is the

limited possession of research skills among supervisors. This may lower rates of postgraduate

graduations in many universities, including NUL, if not addressed through the frequent

organization of supervision workshops meant to empower the supervision skills of supervisors.

Massyn (2023) opines that research management requires supervisors with relevant skills,

including social skills which permit them to approach students under their supervision with

admiration. Lack of research knowledge and skills among supervisors at the postgraduate level

of study triggers hatred between the student and the supervisor, which in the end underwrites

tailoring future workforces that may not be able to participate in research development activities

in the workplace (Tlali, Chere-Masupha, Sebatane, & Khalanyane, 2022). Many students come

to continue higher education with good intentions that one day they shall see their graduation,

but this wish is likely to be tarnished by poor supervisory practices and make students have

undesirable perceptions towards their supervisors.

It cannot be taken for granted that supervisors come from different universities with different

supervision practices, and that can persuade each supervisor to still prefer supervising students’

studies similarly to how they have been supervised while in school. Therefore, unless NUL

presents clear regulations guiding the uniform process of supervision, supervisors are more likely

to manage research writing in any way they feel comfortable with. Al-Muallem (2018) purports

3
that as a face-to-face interaction, the supervision process requires a clear line of demarcation to

avoid unnecessary misunderstandings that may arise during the course. The omission to cater for

a clear agenda that guides the journey of research destructs students’ motivation towards

completing theses or dissertations in time (Mason, Morris & Merga, 2020). Interviewed

postgraduate students confirmed that NUL has not yet provided them with stipulated regulations

determining research supervision at any level of study. This means a high risk of victimization

among students when failing to meet supervisors’ requirements and expectations. Sangani,

Bassir, and Jalali (2017) argue that universities must have clear guidelines determining both the

student’s and a supervisor’s commitment throughout the process of research development.

Presentation of clear rules for research supervision should be given to students by the university

before commencing the research writing indicating clear terms of reference that ensure the

supervisors’ accessibility and matured communication between them and the supervisees in set

times of consultation (Heerala. 2015).

Professional communication regarding how the research journey is going to be undertaken may

improve the exchange of feedback provision between the supervisors and students. Thus, both

parties will abide by the given schedule on dates of submission and feedback. Obilor (2019)

explains feedback to mean a piece of exact information about the assessment between the

observation of a student’s performance or information when presenting a certain mission and the

expected standard. It can be deduced that most students keep the dates for submitting their work

to the supervisors, but due to other commitments, supervisors are more likely to delay providing

feedback to the supervisees. Feedback that takes time to reach students may discourage them

from committing to research work. McFadzien (2015) indicates that effective feedback should be

time-appropriate, effective, detailed, descriptive, present tactics for upgrading, and occur as

4
discussion and consultation. Henderson, Ryan, Boud, Dawson, Phillips, Molloy, and Mohoney

(2019a) point out that effective feedback is the feedback that learners use to make sense of their

performance and upgrade the excellence of their act and their learning approaches. Timely

provided feedback can allow students to reflect on their marks and understand their strengths as

well as identify areas requiring improvement. Thus, the availability of supervision guidelines is

likely to improve the way supervisors provide students under their supervision with feedback

(Bayona-Ore, 2021), which will deny supervisors a chance to relax in the beginning phases of

the research process as it happens to others (McFadzien, 2015).

Many questions may be asked about how the process of supervision allocation goes within NUL

faculties: What are the allocation criteria? Do lecturers choose to supervise, or it is one of their

duties? Some supervisors may show a low level of interest in their work, which discloses them

as lacking research-related skills while one may also feel like some supervisors are forced to do

their job. To avoid challenges like these, it is argued that supervisors be equipped with research

skills through workshops, and faculty meetings where they share experiences to enhance

supervision of research exercises at NUL. Minayo (2019) highlights that the beginning of term

group discussions among professors, supervisors, and lecturers enhance supervision practice. It is

the responsibility of tertiary institutions to ensure that supervisors receive regular training and

workshops before and after the allocation of supervisees (Wong, Wong, & Lung, 2022; Ribau,

2020). Therefore, regular supervisors’ meetings to discuss common challenges encountered

during the process of research development can uplift the spirit of offering excellent research

supervision practice at NUL.

Research Methodology

5
The research was carried out at the National University of Lesotho (NUL), which offers both

undergraduate and postgraduate degrees. The target population of the study was the final-year

postgraduate students at NUL. The sample of the study was composed of 35 master’s students

from the six faculties of NUL, which are Agriculture, Education, Health Sciences, Humanities,

Law, and Social Sciences. A purposive sampling strategy was utilized to select 5 master’s

students from each faculty to give their views about the current challenges regarding supervisory

practices at NUL. Purposive sampling as a non-probability sampling technique (Nyimbili &

Nyimbili, 2024), allowed me to select only those participants that I believed could satisfy the

objectives of the current study. To get to all anticipated participants, the first approached students

informed the researcher about others in different faculties, hence, completing the snowball

sampling method. Dragan and Isaic-Maniu (2013) hold that snowball sampling is a non-

probability sampling method that counts on recommendations from originally selected

participants to other persons believed to know what the research is all about. The study also used

semi-structured interviews to collect information from the participants, Ruslin, Mashuri, Rasak,

Alhabsyi, and Syam (2022) point out that these interviews can be used in the form of face-to-

face talks where open-ended questions are answered. The data was analyzed using Interpretative

Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) to express the views of respondents regarding the research

supervisory practice of postgraduate degrees at NUL. Fragkiadaki (2022) describes IPA as a

qualitative method that uses semi-structured interviews to understand the lived experiences of

individuals.

Results

Effectiveness of Research Supervision Practice at NUL

6
The results of this study uncovered that research supervision at NUL fails to show uniformity,

which also indicates nonexistent of clear guidelines. Law student 5 expresses:

I can’t measure whether the way I supervise my students is effective or not

because there’re no written principles that I followed during the process

of research supervision.

He adds:

I always use the way I believe will lead my students to complete their

research projects and pass, which has never been a problem.

Master’s Economics student 4 states:

The problem of supervision in our institution starts from undergraduate

where the majority of supervisors rely on their way of supervision, which

eventually affects some students negatively, particularly those who are

slow learners as we know that university in most faculties offers research

classes on a semester basis.

Master’s Philosophy student 1 expresses:

I think supervision practice in this institution isn’t given priority from the

undergraduate level of study because I remember while at the

undergraduate level of study, we’re introduced to research methodology in

the third year, second semester.

She adds:

7
 The time wasn’t enough for us to understand exactly the essence of

research development, and now at the postgraduate level, I encounter a

lot of challenges in completing my thesis.

Master’s Sociology student 3 indicates:

It is our responsibility as supervisors to encourage the establishment of

guidelines for research supervision both at undergraduate and

postgraduate levels.

She adds:

The availability of guidelines for research supervision at NUL is likely to

benefit both supervisors and students as it’ll mitigate the alarming rate of

students’ incomplete research projects.

Impact of Co-Supervision on Postgraduate Research

The findings of the current study showed that one of the factors contributing to poor supervision

practices at NUL is the limited co-supervision culture, which slows down the timely completion

of students’ theses. Sociology student 1 expresses:

There’s a great need for our university to adopt the collective method of

supervision as that can improve students’ understanding of research.

He adds:

The absence of co-supervision exposes students to acts of victimization by

some supervisors and most students end up taking more years to complete

research studies.

8
Education student 2 expounds:

The disadvantages of aligning with one supervisor are many, but one of

the key disadvantages is when such a supervisor doesn’t take her job

seriously and always misses consultations.

Law student 3 expresses:

One supervisor can hinder your progress and contribute to your failure to

complete research development.

Agriculture student 1 articulates:

I think team supervision can help a lot of students to progress smoothly in

thesis development because one supervisor may not students’ work

seriously, which means some students are likely to fail to finish their thesis

on time.

She adds:

Many students who don’t graduate with a second degree in a stipulated

time I think have experienced the effect of one supervisor in their studies.

Nursing student 4 states:

Co-supervision can help many students to complete their thesis in time

because in professions like nursing, we need people who’re

knowledgeable in research methodology and those who’re more

knowledgeable in general nursing to speed up our research development.

9
Agriculture student 3 says:

I think students like us who most of the time conduct experimental

research need more than two supervisors because sometimes supervisors

encounter difficulty in managing applications, such as SPSS for instance.

He adds:

When there’re two supervisors, one specializing in quantitative stance and

the other one in qualitative that can make students’ lives simple

throughout the research development process.

Sociology student 5 states:

I’ve experienced the problem of late provision of feedback from my

supervisor, which made me realize that there’s a need for more than one

supervisor so that they push each other to provide feedback at a promised

time.

Influence of Late Feedback on Research Development

The present study revealed that many students reported delayed feedback from supervisors to be

a problem that affects them mostly. Law student 2 explains:

I don’t know what to say about feedback from our supervisors, because I

don’t know whether it takes so long for them to give the comments they

made back to us due to work overload or what.

She adds:

10
 Generally, I’m not happy with the longer time it takes for one to get

feedback from the supervisor, which eventually demoralizes me.

Philosophy student 3 expounds:

I think the issue of feedback that takes too long from the supervisors is a

bit disturbing, and maybe students are complaining because they get

promises from the same supervisors that they’ll receive feedback on a

certain date but that doesn’t happen.

He adds:

So, I think a supervisor and the student must develop a schedule that’ll

guide them throughout the research process so that they don’t blame

supervisors.

Law student 2 articulates:

Late feedback is one of the major problems affecting students to the extent

that they end up not graduating on time, for instance, I know two of my

colleagues who didn’t graduate because their work was returned late to

deal with supervisors’ comments.

Agriculture student 5 states:

I don’t see myself graduating this year because it takes a long time before

I get feedback from my supervisor, and if things go like this it’ll be my

second year not completing my thesis.

Supervisors’ Attitudes towards the Supervisees

11
The findings of this study established that many students reported arrogant behavior of some

supervisors who would treat them badly when they did not understand some parts of their

research work, particularly, the methodology. Agriculture student 1 states:

I’ve noticed that when I don’t understand certain parts of my proposal,

especially methodology, there’s where I annoy my supervisor, and that

makes me feel bad.

Nursing Student 5 stipulates:

Negative attitudes are mostly seen in lecturers, especially when you fail to

understand what they’re explaining to you, and I think they need to know

that we’re supervised because we lack knowledge in research.

Economics student 1 states:

Our supervisors believe that we’re properly introduced to research

methodology, which is not the case. And they get bored when you struggle

with certain parts of the research development.

Sociology student 4 articulates:

Some students don’t enjoy research writing and end up failing or dropping

out because of the way supervisors treat them.

He adds:

I think supervision is one of the things that needs supervisors with unique

interpersonal skills so that they understand that it’s natural that a person

may not understand everything at the same time.

12
 Discussions

The findings of the present study reveal that NUL’s supervisory practice has not been effective

from the undergraduate level of education, and this is visible when students face several

challenges after transitioning into the postgraduate level of study. This was reported by

participants who indicated that at the postgraduate level of study, they are expected to be

independent in research writing with minimal support from supervisors. These findings are

consistent with the recent study by Ngulube (2021), which established that universities must

ensure effective practices of research supervision practice at all levels of study.

The current study uncovered that co-supervision is not a common practice at NUL, but few

students who experienced it mentioned that it is beneficial when supervisors understand their

positions in the whole process, that is when the co-supervisor accepts that the main supervisor

oversees the research journey. These findings are in tandem with Ngulube (2021) who showed

that even though co-supervision is not preferred by most supervisors, it can be helpful to both the

supervisors and the supervisee in various dimensions. The findings in this study further indicated

that team supervision was approved by students who conducted quantitative studies rather than

those who carried out qualitative studies. Students who pursued the quantitative studies revealed

that supervisors shared their expertise, which helped students to progress smoothly with their

research writing. These findings are in line with Taylor (2019) who revealed that collaborative

supervision reduces students’ stress of relying on a single supervisor, which also helps in

exposing them to a wider choice of know-how. Moreover, Noer (2019) showed that co-

supervision improves the probability of finishing the research writing on time.

The findings of this study further showed that most students expressed dissatisfaction with the

late provision of research feedback by the supervisors, which came after a long time with

13
questions than suggestions on the way forward. The above findings are collaborative with several

studies (Nangimah & Wallden, 2023; Cekiso et al., 2019; Moskicheva et al, 2015; Heeralal,

2015), which established that most supervisors do not work within the time frame they agreed

upon with the supervisees when coming to the provision of feedback. Nangimah and Wallen

(2023) showed that when supervisors provide feedback, it comes to students after a long time

with unclear expectations, which adds frustration and willingness to drop out. The current study

revealed that some of the master’s degree students who were supposed to have graduated in a

previous year reported they could not because they did not get feedback from their respective

supervisors on time. These findings are in tandem with Henderson et al. (2019a) when specifying

that ineffective feedback can bring students to unbearable situations hindering them from

achieving things they envisage in life.

Regarding poor feedback, this research uncovered that many students felt supervisors failed to

show effective support during the development of their thesis. The findings of this study

indicated that supportive supervision in the case of NUL is compromised to the extent that

students confirm it to be minimal. These findings are in association with Marshall and Fehringer

(2013) who reveal that failure to endorse mentorship with effective communication during the

research development signifies poor supportive supervision. Another research by Rugut (2017)

shows that sympathetic supervision reflects on the smooth relationships existing between the

student and the supervisor. Further findings from the current study revealed that poor

relationships were confirmed by some students who experienced tension caused by disagreement

that erupted during the research. These findings align with Rugut (2017) who established that

unresolved tension between the supervisor and the student, may result in depression that is likely

to deter the completion of a thesis. Also, the study uncovered that not all students experienced

14
unsupportive supervision during the research project development. Some students in the current

study showed that their supervisors never caused them stress because they were supportive

throughout the research development. These findings are in tandem with the study carried out by

Mhunpiew (2013), which revealed that supervisors who understand their roles and take students’

work seriously are less likely to stress supervisees.

Moreover, participants reported that supervisors did not take them seriously as they would

request consultations with their supervisees, which they would miss without any explanation.

That was reported by students as one of the factors that demoralized and discouraged them from

taking their academic activities seriously. These findings are in tandem with Helfer and Drew

(2019) who indicate in their study that lack of participation of supervisors in scheduled

consultations stresses students as they fear they will not complete their projects on time. The

existing study also established that students were not happy with the arrogant behavior

emanating from their supervisors during the process of research development. This finding is

supported by Tladi and Seretse (2022) who reveal that during the research progression,

supervisors can be annoyed with the supervisees to the extent that sometimes they delay giving

them feedback. They also argue that the dissatisfaction of students about their supervisors may

be noticed when supervisors do not listen to suggestions from students. In general, the findings

of the current study uncovered the ineffective supervisory practice at NUL, which must be

revisited for future academic excellence.

Conclusion

The current study concludes that the supervisory practice of the National University of Lesotho

(NUL) needs to be reassessed as many participant supervisees are not happy about it. Moreover,

this study concludes that the way NUL supervises postgraduate students, particularly, at the

15
master’s level is not effective, and its ineffective feedback principle demoralizes students. This

research decides that the supervisors’ arrogance and limited organization of research-related

workshops for supervisors determine the completion of the study, which is always beyond the

scheduled time. This study resolves that co-supervision can improve supervision preparation that

also enhances students’ knowledge and skills in research writing while on the other hand,

ensuring timely completion of students’ research development. Another conclusion from the

current study reveals that poor provision of feedback to students hinders the progression of

research, particularly, when there is a lack of communication between the supervisor and the

supervisee. The current research concluded that the delay of feedback from supervisors

contributed to the situation where some students are repeating a year of study. Another

conclusion drawn from the findings of the present study is that the non-existent of clear

supervision guidelines encourages each supervisor to implement his or her supervision style,

which somehow affects NUL's academic reputation. The present study further accomplishes

minimal support, such as emotional support from supervisors during the journey of research

advance. Some students reported having developed depression during the research journey,

which they associate with too much stress developed during research development. Precisely,

this study realizes that students can spend the whole process of research writing unhappy with

their supervisors’ aggression and laziness. Therefore, there is nothing in place at NUL to assist

the practice of research supervision, and this increases the rates of unfinished research projects

among postgraduate students.

References

Al-Muallem, A. (2015). Research Supervision: Faculty Perspectives. [Doctoral Thesis, The

University of Sydney]. https://core.ac.uk

16
Bayona-Ore, S. (2021). Perceptions of Postgraduate Students on the Relationship Between

Thesis Development and Performance of a Supervisor. Journal of Turkish Science

Education, 18(4), 559-573. http://www.tusedorg

Castro-Rodriguez, Y., & Rojas-Ortega, R. (2022). Dental Graduates’ Views on the Bachelor

Thesis Supervision Process. Odontoestomatologia, 24(39).

https://doi.org/10.2259/ode2022n39e218

Cekiso, M., Tshotsho, B., Masha, R., & Saziwa, T. (2019). Supervision Experiences of

Postgraduate Research Students at One South African Higher Education Institution.

South African Journal of Higher Education, 33(3), 8-25. https://dx.doi.org/10.20853/33-

3-2913

Davis, D. (2020). The Ideal Supervisor from the Candidates’ Perspective: What Qualities Do

Students Actually Want? Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44(9), 1220-1232.

https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2019.1669772

Dragan, I., & Isaic-Maniu, A. (2013). Snowball Sampling Completion. Journal of Studies in

Social Sciences, 5(2), 160-177. https://core.ac.uk

Fragkiadaki, E. (2022). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Theory, Method, and

Research (2nd Ed.). Qualitative Methods in Psychology Bulletin, 54-58.

https://repository.worktribe.com

Helfer, F., & Drew, S. (2019). Students’ Perceptions on Doctoral Supervision: A Study in an

Engineering Programme in Australia. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14, 499-

524. https://doi.org/10.28945/4368

17
Heerala, R.J.H. (2015). Improving Postgraduate Supervision in an Open and Distance Learning

Environment: A Case Study at the College of Education, University of South Africa.

South African Journal of Higher Education, 29(3), 87-100.

https://journals.co.za/doi/pdf/10.10520/EJC176234

Henderson, M., Ryan, T., Boud, D., Dawson, P., Phillips, M., Molloy, E., & Mahoney, P. (2019a).

conditions that Enable Effective Feedback. Higher Education Research and

Development, 38(7), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1657807

Malunda, P.N., Atwebembeire, J., & Ssentamu, P.N. (2023). Research Supervision as an

Antecedent to Graduate Student Progression in the Public Higher Institutions of Learning

in Uganda. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research,

20(5), 73-95. https://doi.org/10.26803/ij/ter.20.5.5

Marshall, A., & Fehringer, J. (2013). Supportive Supervision in Monitoring and Evaluation with

Community-Based Health Staff in HIV Programmes: A Case Study from Haiti.

www.measreevaluation.org

Mason, S., Morris, I., & Merga, M.K. (2020). Institutional and Support for the Thesis by

Publication. Australian Journal of Education, 65(1), 55-72.

http://doi.org/10.1177/0004944120929065

Massyn, L. (2023). The Well-Being of Academics and Some Implications for Research

Supervisors: A Scoping Review. Journal for New Generation Sciences, 21(1), 62-73.

https://journals.co.za

McFadzien, N. (2015). Why is Effective Feedback So Critical in Teaching and Learning?

Journal of Initial Teacher Inquiry, 1, 16-18. http://hdl.handle.net/10092/11439

18
Mhunpiew, N. (2013). A Supervisor’s Roles for Successful Thesis and Dissertation. US-China

Education Review A, 3(2), 119-122. https://file.eric.ed.gov

Minayo, M.C. (2019). Thesis Supervision as Professional Work. https://www.scielo.br

Moskvicheva, N., Bordovskaia, N., & Darinskaya, L. (2015). Role of Students’ and Supervisors’

Interaction in Research Projects: Expectations and Evaluations. Procedia-Social

Behavioural Sciences, 171(2015), 576-583.

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/82506808.pdf

Nangimah, M., & Wallden, R. (2023). How Supervisors Provide and Students React to EAL

Thesis Supervision: Voices from Sweden and Indonesia. Sec. Higher Education, 8.

https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1118436

Ngulube, P. (2021). Postgraduate Supervision Practices in Education Research and the Creation

of Opportunities for Knowledge Sharing. Problems of Education in the 21st Century,

79(2), 255-272. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/21.76.255

Noer, R.A. (2019). International Joint Supervision: A Breakthrough to Promote Effective Master

Thesis Writing. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 8(6), 262-

266. www.ijstr.org

Nyimbi, F., & Nyimbi, L. (2024). Types of Purposive Sampling Techniques with their Examples

and Application in Qualitative Research Studies. British Journal of Multidisciplinary and

Advanced Studies, 5(1), 90-99. https://www.researchgate.net

Obilor, E.I. (2019). Feedback and Students’ Learning. International Journal of Innovative

Education Research, 7(2), 40-47. www.seahiaj.org

19
Ribau, I. (2020). Doctoral Supervision and PhD Students’ Perceptions About the Supervision

Process in a Young European University. Universal Journal of Educational Research,

8(1), 36-46. http://www.hrpub.org

Rugut, C.K. (2017). The Nature of Postgraduate Student-Supervisor Relationship in the

Completion of Doctoral Studies in Education: An Exploration in Two African

Universities. [Master’s Thesis, Nelson Mandela University]. https://cermesa.uol.de/wp-

content/uploads/2018/05/CORNELIUS-KIPLETING-RUGUT.pdf

Ruslin., Mashuri, S., Rasak, M.S.A., Alhabsyi, F., & Syam, H. (2022). Semi-Structured

Interviews: A Methodological Reflection on the Development of a Qualitative Research

Instrument in Educational Research. IOSR Journal of Research and Method in Education

(IOSR-JRME), 12(1), 22-29. www.iosrjournals.org

Sangani, H.R., Bassir, S.I., & Jalali, L. (2018). An Effective Supervisory Model to Help MA

English Students in the Process of Writing Their Thesis. International Journal of Applied

Linguistics and English Literature, 6(1). https://journals.aiac.org.au

Taylor, S. (2019). Good Supervisory Practice Framework. UK Council for Graduate Education.

https://www.otago.ac.nz/

Tlali, T., Chere-Masopha, J., Sebatane, E., & Khalanyane, T. (2022). Challenges Controlling

Postgraduate Supervision at the National University of Lesotho: Supervisors’

Perspectives. International Journal of African Higher Education, 9(6), 22-39.

https://www.researchgate.net

Tladi, L.L., & Seretse, T.E. (2021). Students’ Perceptions of Postgraduate Research Supervision

at Botswana Open University. https://www.researchgate.net

20
Wong, P.Y.J., Wong, K.L., Ghoh, C., & Lung, Y.M. (2022). Supervision of Supervisory Practice:

From Idea to Practice. International Social Work, 00(0), 1-14.

https://journals.sagepub.com

Yosuf, H.T., Odutayo, A.O., & Tuoyo, A.O. (2022). Effectiveness of Teaching Practice

Supervision as Perceived by Student-Teachers in Ilorin Metropolis, Nigeria. Journal of

Educational Sciences, 6(3), 312-319. https://jes.ejournal.unri.ac.id/index.php/JES

21