Klyngevejledning af specialestuderende

Resumé

Universitetsvejledning har traditionelt været karakteriseret ved at finde sted i ”et lukket rum” som en dyadisk interaktion mellem en studerende og en vejleder. Inden for de senere år er der kommet mere fokus på klyngevejledning, defineret ved en vejleder, der superviserer foran en gruppe af studerende. Der er kun begrænset med forskning om klyngevejledning, men et norsk studie har påpeget fordelene ved en kombineret effekt bestående af klyngevejledning i kombination med studenterkollokvier og individuel vejledning (Dysthe, Samara & Westrheim, 2006). Formålet med indeværende projekt var at undersøge, hvorledes klyngevejledning optimalt set bør tage form i forbindelse med specialeskrivning. På baggrund af interviews med klyngedeltagerne blev det konkluderet, at det er essentielt, at der forventningsafstemmes inden forløbet påbegyndes, at strukturen for klyngen ekspliciteres for alle klyngedeltagere, samt at alle deltagere engagerer sig og overholder og efterlever reglerne og strukturen for klyngen. Derudover blev det konkluderet, at der som udgangspunkt kun bør tilbydes klyngevejledning, men at dette i visse tilfælde kan kombineres med korte individuelle vejledningsgange, hvis en studerende har brug for specifikke råd og vejledning. Derudover bør vejleder opfordre til, at de studerende mødes uden vejleder i et uformelt forum mellem de enkelte vejledningsgange. University supervision has traditionally been characterized as a dyadic interaction between one student and one supervisor that takes place ‘behind closed doors’. Recently, there has been a greater focus on so-called joint supervision, defined as supervision of a group of students by one supervisor. Little research has been carried out on the effects of joint supervision, but one Norwegian study concluded that it can be advantageous to combine joint supervision with student colloquia and individual supervision. The purpose of the present study was to investigate which form joint supervision should take in relation to students writing their master theses. Based on qualitative interviews with the participating students it was concluded that matched expectations prior to starting the supervision are crucial for a successful group. Further, the structure of the joint supervision should be recognized and adhered to by all participants, and all students should be engaged in and conform to the rules and the structure of the supervision. It was further concluded that the students should only be offered joint supervision, i.e. no individual supervision, unless a student is in need of specific supervision and guidance. Finally, the supervisor should request that the students meet up without their supervisor in an informal forum between the joint supervision sessions.