With the increasing demand for doctoral education, co-supervision, understood as the formally agreed supervision of a research student by two or more academics in doctoral programmes, has become common practice in postgraduate circles in the UK. If supervision with one supervisor is complex due to personal, academic, ethical and sometimes crosscultural issues, having two supervisors makes this process sufficiently challenging in practice to be specifically investigated in research, not least because of the additional communication issues. However, co-supervision is under-explored in the academic literature. In this article we look at the experience of co-supervision as reported by co-supervisors and those supervised by them in a UK University Department within an Arts and Social Sciences Faculty, and aim to contribute to the literature on co-supervision by considering cosupervisors' and their supervisees' perspectives on co-supervision practices. Amid a general welcoming of the practice, with both parties seeing co-supervision entailing learning opportunities-for co-supervisors, learning from colleagues; for the supervisees, learning from two experienced researchers-we report shared and specific concerns of these two groups. Time is a concern for both groups, but in different ways. Particularly interesting is the issue of harmony between the co-supervisors, including in feedback, the desirability of which will be perceived differently within any co-supervisor-supervisee relationship. The need for awareness-raising for co-supervisors as regards what their supervisees may feel but may not articulate may be greater for co-supervision than solo-supervision arrangements, given the additionally complex web of institutional and interpersonal relationships co-supervision entails.

Autoethnography is the study of culture through the study of self (ELLIS, 2004; ELLIS et al, 2011). In this paper, we explore the value of autoethnography in the study of academic literacies. We draw on our own experiences as ethnographers and autoethnographers of literacy to provide illustrative examples. We show how autoethnography has provided a fresh understanding of the role of place and space in developing academic writing across countries and between English and Spanish (OLMOS-LÓPEZ, 2019). We discuss the value of team autoethnography in researching academic writing (TUSTING et al., 2019). And we reflect together on our own journey of development as academic writers, showing how a mentoring relationship has been part of both of our trajectories. The paper aims to argue for the value of autoethnography as an approach to studying academic literacy practices, particularly in providing insight into identity and personal experience.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract