Doctoral student supervision in a managerial climate

Abstract

This paper is organized around a single interview with an academic colleague who was asked to reflect on his changing experience of Ph.D. supervision. Material from the interview is used to raise some questions about the nature of responsible supervision in the humanities and social sciences, and the ways in which the possibilities for responsible supervision in the UK are constructed by the effects of the audit culture in higher education (HE). Specifically, the interview is used to examine and illustrate concerns about the implications of the audit culture for the quality of doctoral work, for equity in students’ access to and experience of doctoral study, for the autonomy of students and supervisors and for the nature of academic professionalism. In conclusion, it is argued that whatever procedures are in place to regulate student–supervisor relationships, there will inevitably be benefits and costs in terms of quality and equity: the challenges are to find forms of accountability that are less costly and for those with an interest in responsible supervision to be sensitive to the many ways in which quality and equity can be put at risk by well‐intentioned procedures.