MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Postgraduate Students' Perceptions of Effective Supervision Practice in an Open-Distance e-Learning Environment

2025· article· en· W4414536990 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thulani Andrew Chauke

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of e-learning & distance education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMentorshipThematic analysisNonprobability samplingQualitative researchPerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study is to explore the perceptions of postgraduate students in open distance e-learning (ODeL) institutions regarding what constitutes effective supervision practices that contribute to their academic success. This study adopted a qualitative research approach, sampling 10 postgraduate students pursuing their master’s degrees in an ODeL environment through purposive sampling. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews and analysed using thematic analysis. The findings revealed that clear communication and feedback, supportive relationships, and active engagement are key elements of effective supervision in ODeL, enhancing postgraduate students' academic success. Supervisors play a crucial role by providing both academic and emotional support through mentorship and motivation, fostering student achievement. The study recommends that supervisors hold regularly scheduled online meetings with their students, as this practice can significantly improve the effectiveness of supervision in ODeL. Additionally, the study highlights the importance of providing training for supervisors in humanising pedagogy, specifically designed for ODeL contexts. This training aims to equip supervisors with the necessary skills to effectively engage with students from diverse cultural backgrounds. It also emphasises the importance of teaching supervisors to respect students regardless of their educational background, beliefs, or cultural differences. Keywords: Postgraduate students, perceptions, effective supervision, open-distance e-learning, students L’objectif de cette étude est d’explorer les perceptions d’étudiants de cycles supérieurs inscrits dans des établissements de formation ouverte et à distance (FOAD) concernant les pratiques de supervision efficaces qui contribuent à leur réussite universitaire. Cette recherche a adopté une approche qualitative en sélectionnant, par échantillonnage raisonné, dix étudiants inscrits à un programme de maîtrise en FOAD. Les données ont été recueillies au moyen d’entretiens semi-dirigés et analysées de manière thématique. Les résultats révèlent que la communication claire et les rétroactions constructives, des relations de soutien ainsi qu’un engagement actif sont des éléments clés d’une supervision efficace en FOAD, pour favoriser la réussite des étudiants. Le rôle des superviseurs s’avère crucial, puisqu’ils offrent un soutien à la fois académique et émotionnel, grâce au mentorat et à la motivation, ce qui stimule la persévérance et la réussite des étudiants. L’étude recommande que les superviseurs tiennent des rencontres en ligne régulières avec leurs étudiants, car cette pratique peut améliorer significativement l’efficacité de la supervision en FOAD. Elle souligne également l’importance d’offrir une formation aux superviseurs en pédagogie humanisante, spécifiquement conçue pour les contextes de FOAD. Une telle formation vise à doter les superviseurs des compétences nécessaires pour interagir efficacement et respectueusement avec des étudiants issus de diverses cultures, quelles que soient leurs origines éducatives, leurs croyances ou leurs différences culturelles. Mots-clés: étudiants de cycles supérieurs, perceptions, supervision efficace, formation ouverte et à distance, réussite universitaire.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.425 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of e-learning & distance educationSame topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207