Exploring remote supervision in higher education: Lecturers’ experiences

ABSTRACT

As remote learning continues to play a significant role in higher education, the practice of remote supervision has become a critical component of academic and research activities. This research explores lecturers’ experiences in remote supervision, shedding light on challenges and strategies to ensure effective guidance and support. A qualitative approach was adopted using a semi-structured interview guide data collection from randomly selected lecturers and analysed thematically. The study generated three themes to address the research questions. Findings revealed the multifaceted nature of remote supervision, highlighting both the advantages of flexibility and the hurdles posed by technology, communication barriers, and time management. To navigate these challenges, lecturers have developed innovative strategies, including leveraging digital tools, enhancing communication, and prioritising self-discipline. The outcomes of this research provided valuable insights for colleges seeking to strengthen remote supervision experience, thereby improving the quality of higher education in this digital age.

KEYWORDS:

• Remote supervision
• remote learning
• higher education
• lecturers
• experience

Introduction

Remote is conducting activities from a distance or any location without the physically present. Supervision refers to providing oversight, guidance, and support to students’ research at various levels of their educational careers, including Colleges of Education (CoE), university, and postgraduate students. It entails assisting students in gaining knowledge, provoking critical thinking, and learning practical skills via feedback, demonstration, and dialogue (Wisker et al., 2021). In the context of education, supervision plays a critical role in shaping students’ learning experience. Supervision provides guidance and support; it helps students navigate their academic journey and develop a deep understanding of the subject matter. Lambie and Stickl Haugen (2021) state that supervision provides structure to establish clear goals and expectations, advice, and factual information to plan and conduct research, and practical guidance and resources to teach and complete research activities. Remote supervision involves monitoring and overseeing students project or research from a remote location. The shift to remote supervision in higher education is a significant and transformative development that has changed how we approach learning (García-Morales et al., 2021; Mhlanga et al., 2022). Higher education refers to the education level that follows secondary education which includes CoE undergraduate and postgraduate education. Remote supervision in higher education is the practice of monitoring and providing feedback to students from a distance using technology-mediated communication. Technological advancement has fuelled this transition, enabling lecturers to supervise students remotely (i.e. from any location) with an internet connection. The availability of high-speed internet, robust learning management systems, and abundant educational apps (such as Duolingo, Google Classroom, EdApp, Udemy, Quizlet, etc) and resources have all contributed to this transformation, laying the foundation for remote supervision. Subsequently, global events and disruptions, most notably the COVID-19 pandemic, have been seen as a tremendous upheaval in recent years (Mahlaba, 2020; O. Opesemowo et al., 2022).

Further, the pandemic spurred a rapid and broad shift to remote supervision, requiring lecturers in higher education to quickly adapt and construct the technological and logistical infrastructure needed to support this new method of supervision (Clamen et al., 2022; Ntoutsi et al., 2020; Triemstra et al., 2021). The emergence of remote learning and supervision has been one of the most crucial aspects of this revolution. As lecturers and students try to adjust to this new reality, it becomes increasingly important to investigate the experiences, challenges, and effective strategies associated with remote supervision in higher education. Remote supervision poses a few difficulties in education and a variety of professions, including healthcare and business. One fundamental problem is the lack of in-person supervision, which might impair the supervisor’s capacity to adequately watch and appraise the student’s performance (Patel et al., 2021). Providing fast feedback and real-time support becomes more complicated without physical proximity (DeRue et al., 2008; Odutayo & Ramsaroop, 2023). Miscommunication and misinterpretation of instructions or expectations might compromise the quality of work and learning outcomes (Hertel et al., 2004; H. T. Yusuf et al., 2022).

Another difficulty is the lack of social interaction and informal communication that typically occurs in physical supervision. These interactions are critical for developing rapport, trust, and a sense of belonging between the lecturer and student, but they can be challenging to reproduce remotely (Fosslien & Duffy, 2020). Furthermore, preserving confidentiality and data security might be challenging while working remotely because fewer protections may be in place to secure sensitive data (Znaki et al., 2023). Finally, in remote supervision, supervisees may feel isolated and disconnected, impacting their mental well-being (Parry, 2023). The digital world has broadened the boundaries of traditional education, making remote supervision an essential element of the academic process. Remote supervision can increase access and inclusion in higher education (Hausman et al., 2021; Rivera-Gutierrez & Higuera-Zimbron, 2021). It allows students from various backgrounds, including distant or underprivileged locations and those with physical disabilities (Akala, 2023; O. A. G. Opesemowo & Omideyi, 2023), to participate in academic programmes. This democratisation of education represents one of the most promising aspects of the shift to remote supervision, as it reduces traditional barriers to higher education.

In addition, remote supervision offers unprecedented flexibility and convenience to lecturers and students. They can choose when and where they engage in learning, accommodating various individual schedules and preferences (H. Yusuf et al., 2018). This flexibility benefits working professionals, postgraduate students, and people with other personal or professional obligations. However, it is essential to recognise that the shift to remote supervision has not been without challenges. Lecturers have had to adapt their teaching methods to suit digital environments, facing issues related to engagement, assessment, and maintaining a quality educational experience. Similarly, students have been confronted with challenges related to self-discipline, motivation, and a potential sense of isolation when studying remotely (Hensley et al., 2022). In response to these challenges, lecturers have explored innovative pedagogical approaches to make remote supervision more engaging and effective (Kukulska-Hulme et al., 2021). These include using multimedia resources, interactive online platforms and developing new assessment forms better suited to digital learning environments.

Aside from remote supervision, some lecturers still chose hybrid models that combine in-person and remote components. These models combine traditional and remote learning, allowing students a choice and lecturers the flexibility to adapt to different supervision styles. The transition to remote supervision is an ongoing process in which higher education colleges navigate the opportunities they provide while attempting to offer their students a high-quality learning experience. Remote learning and supervision can affect students’ academic journeys in numerous ways, from managing self-discipline to coping with feelings of isolation and maintaining motivation. This study aims to provide lecturers with a more supportive and effective remote supervision system by understanding their challenges and opportunities.

Remote supervision requires more than just identifying challenges; it also involves unveiling strategies to mitigate them and enhance quality outcomes. To solve these difficulties, lecturers should devise new techniques by harnessing technology and encouraging increased student communication. These ideas are significant resources in the ongoing effort to enhance and optimise remote supervision practices in higher education. Remote supervision in higher education is a dynamic, ever-changing ecosystem. It spans geographical boundaries, provides flexibility, and caters to the demands of a varied student group. However, it brings a new set of difficulties that necessitate careful consideration.

The lecturers in higher education are the guiding forces in directing and moderating digital adaptability of supervisees under their watch. The supervisory model must be reimagined to incorporate technology and alternative approaches to ensure effective and efficient remote supervision. This research aims to provide insight into the dynamics of remote supervision, focusing on the distinct views of lecturers. Understanding their experiences in this situation is critical for defining the future of higher education because it reveals how remote supervision affects teaching and learning, identifies challenges of remote supervision in higher education, and the practical strategies adopted by the lecturers.

Research questions

1. What is the lecturers’ experience with remote supervision?

2. What are the challenges faced by lecturers during remote supervision?

3. What were the strategies adopted by lecturers?

Materials and methods

Design

The study’s research design is exploratory, using a qualitative method. It entails conducting a comprehensive interview to collect qualitative data from various lecturers using a semi-structured interview guide. In addition, open-ended interviews were undertaken to provide qualitative insights into their remote supervision experiences, challenges, and strategies. This research design aims to provide a holistic understanding of the dynamics of remote supervision in higher education. Various lecturers from different academic disciplines were chosen during the interview process. This was done to guarantee that there was a diverse variety of opinions and experiences regarding remote supervision.

Participants

All lecturers in CoE in Oyo State, Nigeria serve as the population for this study. The target population are lecturers in public-owned CoE in Oyo State, Nigeria. Oyo State is the largest city in land mass in West Africa. To have manageable data, one CoE was selected from the two public CoEs using sample random sampling techniques, which gives participants an equal opportunity to be chosen (Berndt, 2020). Choosing public over private CoE was because of the availability of different schools/facilities, lecturers’ specialisation and the mode of interaction, particularly the project supervision, which is the focus of this research. There are nine (9) schools (School of Education, School of Special Education, School of Science, School of Art and Social Sciences, School of Early Childhood and Primary Education, School of Vocational and Technical Education, School of General education, School of Adult and Non-formal education, and General Studies Education) within the selected CoE. We adopted stratified sampling to select five schools using discipline as strata. Thereafter, five lecturers (i.e. one lecturer from each selected school/faculty) were purposefully selected as a sample for this study based on the lecturers’ willingness and availability for interviews. The researchers ensured the selection process was fair and unbiased by using simple random sampling techniques (Berndt, 2020). This involved assigning a number to each selected school within the public CoE and ensuring that lecturers’ gender and experience were adequately represented in the study.

Data collection

The data were collected using a Semi-Structured Interview Guide (SSIG), allowing flexibility in the questions and enabling participants to express their unique perspectives and experiences under remote supervision. This approach was adopted to ensure the participants felt comfortable sharing their thoughts and capturing a wide range of insights. The semi-structured format also allowed follow-up questions to delve deeper into specific topics, providing a more comprehensive understanding of remote supervision. An average of 19 minutes were spent conducting online interviews (via Microsoft Teams) based on study objectives used to develop the SSIG. In addition, the flexibility of the SSIG resulted in rich and diverse responses, adding depth to the research findings. However, the online interviews were transcribed and recorded in an analytical format.

Data analysis

Thematic analysis was employed to uncover common themes and patterns from participants’ responses in the qualitative data obtained from the interviews conducted by the researchers (Braun & Clarke, 2020). This method provides a comprehensive and complete understanding of the issues that lecturers are confronted with in remote supervision and the tactics they use to overcome these challenges. The researchers employed open coding to identify themes alongside the text. The first coding framework was formed using open coding, then the transcripts’ themes were analysed, and comparable categories were grouped to conduct the final coding framework. After finalising the coding framework, we analysed the data individually. Each researcher carefully examined the transcripts, marking relevant sections and identifying emerging themes. Once the initial analysis was completed, the researchers exchanged findings and discussed discrepancies or differing interpretations. Through thorough deliberation and consensus-building, we ultimately reached an agreement on the final set of themes that accurately captured the essence of the data.

Ethical authorisation

The College of Education Ethical Committee granted the researcher’s ethical approval. We obtained permission from the head of the department to obtain the data. Before gaining consent, the researchers ensured all participants were adequately briefed about the study’s goals and procedures. Likewise, the promise was made to the participants that their involvement was entirely voluntary and that they could leave at any time. The security and anonymity of the participants’ data were emphasised during the consent process, protecting their privacy and well-being throughout the research. However, we took additional measures to protect the participants’ rights during the study by implementing strict protocols to ensure that the data gathered were solely for research purposes and not shared with unauthorised individuals or organisations. The participants’ identities were kept confidential with unique identification codes, ensuring their personal information remained anonymous. Also, we offered every participant a clear explanation of the study’s purpose and potential benefits. Any questions or concerns raised by the participants were answered promptly and transparently, ensuring their comfort and understanding throughout the research process. As a result of adhering to these strict protocols, the study’s integrity and the participants’ privacy were upheld.

Results

Theme one: Development

The researcher interviewed respondents based on their experiences regarding remote supervision. Many respondents submitted that they use remote supervision willingly or because of external influence. Participant One reported that ‘seeing my colleagues adopting remote supervision makes me feel obsolete, and I had no choice but to make use of it’. ‘The COVID-19 pandemic made me use remote supervision due to my students’ desire to continue their research and complete the research to finish up the programme at the appropriate time’, as submitted by Participant Five.

The researcher also enquired about the form of remote supervision being employed. They didn’t provide a straightforward response as many claimed they employed visual remote supervision while others reported hiring audio-visual remote supervision. The participants reported using visual remote supervision to ensure effective communication between the supervisor and the person being supervised. ‘Audio allows for real-time interaction, allowing the supervisor to provide clarity on grey areas, guidance, and feedback’ with the aid of voice call, and the student(s) gets to pay for the cost as submitted by Participant Three. Likewise, Participant Two maintained that ‘it is useful in situations where visual supervision may not be possible or necessary, such as conducting phone-based supervision using WhatsApp call’. Contrarily, participants who employed audio-visual remote supervision did so because students struggled with research and required step-by-step explanations. They also used Zoom, Google Meet, Microsoft Teams, WhatsApp Video, and Telegram to supervise remotely. ‘I feel comfortable with WhatsApp because it is easy to setup Participant Four stated’. In eagerness, Participant Three jumped in and said, ‘I am biased towards Zoom because it was the first virtual teaching platform, and it has been very effective in supervision’. My students lamented about the data consumption and high cost of internet data, so they preferred me to use WhatsApp for supervision, as contributed by Participant One.

Lecturers’ opinions towards remote supervision were cheerful as they asserted that it eliminates traditional face-to-face supervision with students. They stated further that remote supervision can greatly benefit various students’ learning needs based on their capabilities. They argue that it offers numerous advantages, such as increased flexibility, not being physically on campus for both students and lecturers and the ability to leverage technology for enhanced research experiences. This is so because by adopting remote supervision, lecturers and students can access various materials online simultaneously. To buttress their submissions, Participant Four said, ‘I do not have to be on campus all the time to attend to my students’ research’. Participant Two argued that since I started using remote supervision, I quickly catch students who directly copy from the internet”. Lastly, remote supervision enables me to read my students’ research on my phone without having to use my PC, ” stated Participant One.

I found so many writing tools through remote supervision, which has improved me and my students’ writing abilities.

Theme two: Costs

The participants all agreed that they have difficulties or challenges with remote supervision. They identified the high data purchase cost, data consumption rate increase, and epileptic power supply. Some participants expressed frustration with internet connectivity’s inconsistent or irregular stability that prevented them from accessing and reading their students’ research submissions. As a result, the fluctuation in internet reliability becomes particularly frustrating whenever they are present and eager to review the academic work presented by their students. In addition to causing frustration, participants cannot access and evaluate their students’ submissions promptly due to the unpredictable nature of their internet connection. As stated by Participant Two, ‘It is cheaper to purchase cooking gas than to buy data for browsing, he said jokingly’. Conversely, participant Five stated that ’the way network providers charge for data usage, it puts holes into an individual’s pocket (pouch). It’s quite expensive’. Similarly, Participant Three complained that ‘the rate of internet data consumption is like a hurricane’.

Other participants identified challenges such as inadequate technical know-how on the part of both lecturers and students, erratic data services, the etiquette of virtual learning, little or no support from university authority, and high cost of remote supervision software such as Microsoft Word, Grammarly, Mendeley or Endnote and Turnitin. Individually, the participants submitted that the applications listed also played a role in adequately adopting remote supervision for academic purposes. No matter the usefulness of an instructional package software, the parties’ (lecturers and students) inadequacies in using it make it a burden. ‘I am over golden-jubilee age, but I am still more proficient with ICT than some of my students’, as reported by Participant One. As such, it gets discouraging to promote the use of ICT when the end-users are ill-equipped. In the same vein, some lecturers, especially the older ones, feel it’s too late to learn the use of ICT for academic purposes. They believe the paper supervision approach that has worked for them all these years is adequate. Participant Four added, ‘Some of my colleagues can’t even operate their smartphones, and you expect them to operate computer systems; you are a jester’. The high cost of remote supervision software also hinders the effective adoption of remote supervision. ’My salary cannot take me home, and you expect me to use a large portion to purchase some of this software. How do you expect my family to survive?’ Participant Three lamented. Further issues relating to clear communication with students to address difficulties were brought to fall. ‘A student of mine called me in the middle of the night to get clarifications regarding my comments on their project; I declined and gave a stern warning for such never to reoccur’, as mentioned by Participant Four.

Theme three: Institution support

Conclusively, the participants identified possible effective strategies that can be implemented to proffer solutions to the challenges of remote supervision. They identified improvements in technology infrastructure on the part of college administrators. At least on campus, provisions should be made for high-speed internet access and reliable communication tools to ensure seamless connectivity and interaction between supervisors and those being supervised. ”Internet connectivity, cost of data consumption and stable power supply should not be the lecturers’ concern while on campus. This should be the university’s responsibility ”, as Participant Four submitted. In the same vein, they should also have training programmes and workshops for both supervisors and individuals being supervised to enhance their proficiency in using remote communication tools and platforms effectively. Participant Two pointed out that “most lecturers over the age of fifty are technology migrants, and necessary support systems should be provided to assist them in dealing with their inadequacies, and regular check-ins and feedback sessions to maintain consistent communication and provide support and guidance as needed by the lecturers.

University authorities should subsidise the cost of remote learning on the part of lecturers and students by subscribing to some of the available remote supervision software. Most of the software available has partnership agreements with colleges to reduce costs. ‘I use free software for supervision, and most of them have limited functionality’, Participant One indicated. Other possible solutions are using collaborative tools, encouraging flexibility and adaptability to accommodate students’ technological challenges, and developing translucent and standardised procedures and protocols to ensure well-defined expectations, responsibilities, and communication methods for all parties involved.

Discussion

This study explores lecturers’ experiences in remote supervision in higher education. The study generated three themes. The first theme was titled ‘development’. It was discovered that a significant portion of the participants disclosed that they engaged in remote supervision on their volition or due to external factors influencing their decision-making processes to do so, as supported by Mhishi et al. (2022). The COVID-19 pandemic was one of these external causes, forcing many educational colleges to switch to remote learning. Despite initial hurdles, the participants indicated that remote supervision had some good consequences, which has helped improve their use of technology skills. The improvement in supervision, writing skills, and capacities of both lecturers and students was one of the necessary conclusions. Because they had more time to evaluate and analyse the assignments, many lecturers articulated various reasons for willingly opting for remote supervision, citing benefits such as flexibility, convenience, and increased efficiency. For instance, some lecturers highlighted how remote supervision allowed them to manage work commitments while maintaining a healthy work-life balance. They appreciated the freedom to supervise remotely, allowing them to allocate time effectively and efficiently across multiple responsibilities, including family commitments and personal endeavours.

Additionally, some lecturers believed that remote supervision enabled them to access a broader pool of supervisees beyond geographical boundaries. This wider pool of supervisees brought diverse perspectives and experiences, enriching the learning and development (Odutayo, 2023). Moreover, remote supervision allowed lecturers to foster a global perspective and promote intellectual understanding with supervisees from different cultural backgrounds. Supervisors and supervisees could easily communicate, share resources, and exchange ideas through digital platforms.

Participants reported dissatisfaction with the high cost of internet data plans, making it difficult to access remote supervision tools and resources. Similarly, the poor connectivity in some regions hindered their ability to engage in real-time supervision, leading to delays and interruptions in their work. The lack of infrastructure, such as a reliable power supply and adequately equipped facilities, further exacerbated their difficulties in implementing remote supervision effectively. A significant concern of the participants was the high cost of remote supervision, which hindered their ability to receive the support and guidance they needed. The report of Treceñe (2022) and Iglesias-Pradas et al. (2021) also alienate the barriers of remote supervision, involving the loss of personal interaction and rapport between lecturers and students. Remote supervision may hinder the development of solid mentor-mentee relationships (Ayanwale et al., 2023; Fehintola et al., 2023; Lasater et al., 2021; Mullen, 2021; Pollard & Kumar, 2021; Wilson & Huynh, 2020), impacting students’ engagement and learning experiences.

The study of Wisker et al. (2021) presented further shreds of evidence of remote supervision during the COVID-19 global pandemic in five dimensions ranging from intellectual/cognitive dimension where remote supervision may hinder the depth of intellectual engagement and critical thinking between supervisors and doctoral students. The instrumental dimension may limit access to resources and facilities necessary for research and experimentation; the professional/technical dimension poses challenges in terms of maintaining effective communication and providing timely feedback in a remote setting, and personal/emotional dimensions highlight the challenges of building rapport and trust between supervisors and supervisees without face-to-face interactions, and finally the ontological dimension raises challenges related to the sense of belonging and identity formation for doctoral students in remote supervision context. Likewise, the report of Guerin and Aitchison (2021) presented in their study ‘doctoral writing and remote supervision: what the literature tells us’ that supervision commonly explains that remote candidates require more direct, explicit instruction on how to develop research writing skills than their on-campus counterparts, claiming that best practice in distance supervision requires a planned and organised approach to writing development. The challenges of remote supervision could be traced to infrastructural gaps or deficits that could hamper the quality of education in Nigeria (O. A. G. Opesemowo, 2023; O. A. G. Opesemowo et al., 2023). Poor network connectivity, lack of internet access, and inadequate power supply are some of the infrastructural gaps that could hinder the effectiveness of remote supervision in Nigeria. These challenges can lead to disruptions in remote supervision, difficulty accessing learning materials, and limited interaction between supervisors and supervisees. As a result, the quality of education may suffer, exacerbating the existing educational inequalities in the country (Adelana et al., 2023; Adewuyi & Dwarika, 2023).

Finally, the lecturers provided solutions to address the challenges of remote supervision. Some of these strategies include improving infrastructural gaps like high-speed internet access, ensuring an uninterrupted power supply, and training lecturers on remote supervision platforms. Lecturers emphasised the importance of creating a supportive and engaging virtual learning environment for students. This involved implementing interactive online tools and resources, fostering regular communication and feedback, and promoting peer collaboration. This finding corroborated the study of Nasiri and Mafakheri (2015), who indicated further strategies of remote supervision, such as implementing virtual office hours, where supervisors set specific times during the working week to have open discussions with students via emails, chat, and audio/video conferencing; addressing language and technical gaps via effective communication strategies, such as providing language support and ensuring both supervisor and supervisee have the necessary computer systems and software for remote interactions. Relan et al. (2018) further concur with this result and further strategies for the challenges of remote supervision like regular check-ins via internet telephony (e.g. Skype) to maintain communication and provide guidance to students remotely, utilising video conferencing technology like Skype, Google meet, or Microsoft Team to enable face-to-face interactions and address more detailed queries and assistance etc.

Conclusion and recommendations

Exploring lecturers’ experiences in remote supervision with higher education reveals a dynamic landscape shaped by technological advancement, pandemic, and evolving educational paradigms. As educators navigated the shift from traditional in-person supervision to remote modalities, their insights elucidated multifaceted aspects of this transition. Lecturers emphasised diverse challenges, including high internet data cost, lack of personal connections with students, and adapting pedagogical strategies to virtual environments. Simultaneously, they underscored the opportunities technology provides, emphasising its role in enhancing flexibility, accessibility, and innovation in supervising students’ projects.

This study illustrates the pivotal role of technology in reshaping supervision practices but also considers digital equity, technology literacy, and the imperative for inclusive learning environments. Lecturers’ perspectives underscored the need for ongoing professional development and institutional support to harness the full potential of remote supervision. The findings signify a paradigmatic shift in higher education, advocating for a hybrid approach that amalgamates the strengths of both in-person and remote supervision models. Ultimately, this research underscores the necessity for continuous adaptation, collaborative exploration, and pedagogical innovation to optimise remote supervision, ensuring robust and effective mentorship for students in contemporary educational landscapes.

Limitations of the study

This study was restricted to research supervision, focusing on lecturers’ experiences. Another study can be conducted on the experiences of the students. Also, this study was limited to lecturers in CoE supervising students’ research projects; more studies can be carried out in other higher learning institutions, like universities or polytechnics. In terms of the sample size, more sample sizes could be included to increase the generalisability of the findings. Additionally, the study was conducted within a specific geographical location, which may limit the generalisability of the results to a broader population. Future research could consider including participants from different regions to provide a more comprehensive understanding of research supervision experiences.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.

Notes on contributors

Oluwaseyi Aina Gbolade Opesemowo

Oluwaseyi Aina Gbolade Opesemowo is a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Science and Technology Education, Faculty of Education at the University of Johannesburg, South Africa. His research interests include educational assessment in higher education, psychometrics, and developing and validating research instruments.

Habeeb Omoponle Adewuyi

Adewuyi Habeeb Omoponle is a postdoctoral research fellow in the Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Education at the University of Johannesburg, South Africa. His area of expertise is educational psychology, developmental psychology, and counselling.

Adesegun Olayide Odutayo

Odutayo Adesegun Olayide is a postdoctoral researcher at the Department of Childhood Education, Faculty of Education at the University of Johannesburg, South Africa. His research focuses on teacher education, curriculum development, pedagogical delivery, and economics education.

Udeme Samuel Jacob

Udeme Samuel Jacob is a lecturer in the Department of Special Education, Faculty of Education at the University of Ibadan, Nigeria and a postdoctoral researcher in the Faculty of Education, University of Johannesburg, South Africa. His research interest cut across the education of persons living with disabilities, management of aggressive behaviour, and inclusive education.