The postgraduate team take the role of supervision very seriously, and everything we say here is taken from the Code of Practice. We have summarised the main rules, but do please contact us if we’ve not covered your specific circumstances.
Composition of supervisory teams
Every student will have at least two and as many as four supervisors. All supervisors should appear on an approved list, which usually means the supervisor must hold Fellowship of the graduate school.
Academic supervisor
Every student has an academic supervisor, who must be a substantive member of University staff, ie. an employee of the University. The role of the academic supervisor is set down in the code of practice, but they would normally be an experienced member of staff who was familiar with the rules of postgraduate supervision. In particular, the academic supervisor is a point of contact for the ICM and the graduate school, and is expected to make sure the student complies with University procedures.
Supervisory split
When the supervisory team is nominated, a nominal split of supervisory responsibility is required. In most cases the share can be split as you wish, with a minimum of 10% and a maximum of 90% to each supervisor.
Previously there had been an exception with honorary staff, who received a 0% split. This policy has now been revised, and all supervisors can be awarded a representative share – so long as they obey the ‘minimum 10%, maximum 90%’ rule.
What if my preferred supervisor isn’t on the list?
When you submit your project proposal, first ICM and then the graduate school will check your nominated supervisors against the list of fellows. The proposal will be sent back if the supervisory team do not comply with the rules. The application process isn’t onerous, but it will be checked.
In a few cases, an eligible supervisor doesn’t appear on the list. Primarily, this is in cross-faculty projects where the academic is based in a different faculty. If that’s the case, they will appear on their own faculty’s list of Fellows. We hold a copy of these lists.
If one of the suggested supervisors belongs to FMS but isn’t on the list, they can apply to be added by completing an online form.
But we never had to apply for fellowship in the past!
We know that breaches of the code have been permitted in the past, but this is becoming less and less defensible. There is no reason why any would-be supervisor should not apply for Fellowship. It is a quick process, and meets University and European guidelines for good practice. If you’re still not convinced, please speak to the Dean; we in the ICM can’t approve it.
NOTE to senior members of faculty
We know that in the past, many of you have acted very successfully as sole supervisor. But by being successful, you are increasingly busy and potentially difficult for a new student to pin down in a one-to-one. The ‘2 supervisor’ rule gives the student someone else to turn to, and also gives new supervisors the opportunity to take their own first steps in supervision. We need you to make a good example to junior academics and students.
NOTE to honorary members of faculty
Your team may feel that the rules for academic supervision are unfair, particularly if you are well-placed to supervise the student without University support – and in fact you might have graduated previous students with a team of entirely honorary supervisors. This is why we want to emphasise that the rules are absolutely not a comment on supervisory ability.
Unfortunately there are occasions where students and supervisors run into difficulties that could have been avoided with a substantive academic supervisor. These include: misunderstanding of the University rules for admission; missed progression reviews; and even students who simply disappear for long periods. These and other problems make unreasonable demands on the postgraduate team and on the students, and very rarely some students fail in consequence.
Having honorary faculty members supervise PGR students is seen as a valuable contribution to the student and to the University. However the consequences of non-compliance reinforce the view that the academic supervisor is crucial in order to guarantee good practice.