Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1 Department of Nursing, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University
2 Department of Medical‑Surgical Nursing, Iran University of Medical Sciences
3 Nursing Care Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Student–supervisor conflict is inevitable in an academic setting. The purpose
of the present study aimed to argue that using intelligent interaction as an appropriate strategy to
manage the student–supervisor conflict in Iranian nursing schools.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This qualitative study was a part of larger grounded theory research.
Data were collected by conducting a semi‑structured interview with nine nursing students and five
supervisors who were selected by purposeful sampling in the current investigation. Data analysis
was done through the recommended method of Corbin and Strauss (2015).
RESULTS: Intelligent interaction was extracted as one of the main categories for managing
student–supervisor conflict. Intelligent interaction consisted of four subcategories including use a
logic strategy, competent role play, flexible and smart selection, and getting help from other sources.
CONCLUSION: Intelligent interaction is an appropriate strategy to resolve and manage the
supervisor–student conflict in the Iranian academic setting. It is suggested that universities
must consider intelligent interaction in developing a policy‑procedure process for managing the
student–supervisor conflict in Iranian academic settings.
Keywords
Management 2010;1:90‑110.
2. McKibben L. Conflict management: Importance and implications.
Br J Nurs 2017;26:100‑3.
3. Beheshtifar M, Zare E. Interpersonal conflict: A substantial factor
to organizational failure. Int J Acad Res Bus Soc Sci 2013;3:354‑62.
4. Dooba IM, Downe AG, Jaafar J, editors. Unpacking Supervisors’
Tacit Knowledge of Research Supervision. National Postgraduate
Conference (NPC) 2011. IEEE; 2011.
5. Adrian‑Taylor SR, Noels KA, Tischler K. Conflict between
international graduate students and faculty supervisors: Toward
effective conflict prevention and management strategies. J Stud
Int Educ 2007;11:90‑117.
6. Bani Asadi A, Zarghami Hamrah S. Critical inquiry of
supervisor‑student academic relationship in the course of
dissertation writing: From the perspective of students of
philosophy of education. J New Thoughts Educ 2015;11:125‑48.
7. de Kleijn RA, Mainhard MT, Meijer PC, Pilot A, Brekelmans M.
Master’s thesis supervision: Relations between perceptions of the supervisor – Student relationship, final grade, perceived
supervisor contribution to learning and student satisfaction. Stud
High Educ 2012;37:925‑39.
8. Behimehr S, RiahiniaN, MansourianY. The problems of dissertation
writing process, according to library and information science
students` viewpoint. J Acad Librariansh Inf Res 2014;48:39‑59.
9. Rezaeian M. The bilateral responsibilities of supervisor and
student in writing a thesis. J Med Educ Dev 2010;4:49‑55.
10. Attaran M, Zeinabadi H, Tolabi S. Supervisor selection and
student‑supervisor relation: PhD graduates perspectives.
J Curriculum Stud 2009;4:281‑308.
11. Ives G, Rowley G. Supervisor selection or allocation and continuity
of supervision: Ph.D. Students’ progress and outcomes. Stud
Higher Educ 2005;30:535‑55.
12. Grevholm B, Persson LE, Wall P. A dynamic model for education
of doctoral students and guidance of supervisors in research
groups. Educ Stud Math 2005;60:173‑97.
13. Mainhard T, van der Rijst R, van Tartwijk J, Wubbels T. A model
for the supervisor – Doctoral student relationship. High Educ
2009;58:359‑73.
14. Odena O, Burgess H. How doctoral students and graduates
describe facilitating experiences and strategies for their thesis
writing learning process: A qualitative approach. Stud High Educ
2017;42:572‑90.
15. Pyhalto K, Keskinen J. Exploring the fit between doctoral students’
and supervisors’ perceptions of resources and challenges vis‑à‑vis
the doctoral journey. Int J Dr Stud 2012;7:395-414.
16. Wadesango N, Machingambi S. Post graduate students’
experiences with research supervisors. J Sociol Soc Anthropol
2011;2:31‑7.
17. Mizani M, Khabiri M, Honari H, Sajjadi N. The problems of
writing physical education theses for master graduate students
of selected universities. J Sport Manage 2013;5:149‑69.
18. Walker M, Thomson P. The Routledge Doctoral Supervisor’s
Companion: Supporting Effective Research in Education and the
Social Sciences. Abingdon: Routledge; 2010.
19. Masek A, editor Establishing Supervisor‑Students’ Relationships
Through Mutual Expectation: A Study from Supervisors’ Point of
View. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering.
IOP Publishing; 2017.
20. Thompson DR, Kirkman S, Watson R, Stewart S. Improving
research supervision in nursing. Nurse Educ Today 2005;25:283‑90.
21. Faramarzineya Z, Valavi P, Naimzadeh A. Conflict Management
and the Priorities of Students Strategy at the Conflict with
Professors. International Conference on Management. Shahid
Chamran University of Ahvaz; 2014.
22. Corbin J, Strauss A. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques
and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Los Angles:
Sage Publication; 2015.
23. Anney V. Ensuring the quality of the findings of qualitative
research: Looking at trustworthiness criteria. J Emerg Trends
Educ Res 2014;5:272‑81.
24. Ghorbanalizadeh Ghaziani F, Moadi M, Khodaparast Sareshkeh S.
Comparison of conflict management strategies of physical
education office managers based on some demographic
characteristics. Ann Appl Sport Sci 2013;1:12‑8.
25. Dargahi H, Mousavi S, Araghieh Farahani S, Shaham G. Conflict
management and its related strategies. Payavard Salamat
2008;2:63‑72.
26. Nili MR, Nasr AR, Akbary N. A study of guidance quality of
supervisors on dissertations of postgraduate students. Train Learn
Res 2007;1:111‑22.
27. Gill P, Burnard P. The student‑supervisor relationship in the phD/
Doctoral process. Br J Nurs 2008;17:668‑71.
28. Heath T. A quantitative analysis of PhD students’ views of
supervision. High Educ Res Dev 2002;21:41‑53.
29. Ray S, Marakas G. Selecting a doctoral dissertation supervisor:
Analytical hierarchy approach to the multiple criteria problem.
Int J Dr Stud 2007;2:23‑32.
30. Mohammadi A, Azizinejad H, Sakebi SM, Gyasi E. Examination of
the Criteria for Graduate Students of Ilam University in the Choice
of Supervisor. International Conference on Modern Research
Results in Sciences, Engineering and Technology; Mashhad; 2016.
31. Bozorg H, Khakbaz A. Hidden supervisor: The emergent
curriculum of advising graduate students thesis (case study:
Training science course). Res Curriculum Plann 2013;10:38‑50.
32. Noordam B, Gosling P. Mastering Your Ph. D.: Survival and
Success in the Doctoral Years and Beyond. New York: Springer;
2006.
33. Emami Meibodi A, Kamali Dehkordi P. Writers in Academic
Dissertations. Vol. 245‑246. Political and Economic Ettelaat; 2007.
p. 238‑43.
)