This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Medical Education, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://mededu.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
Virtual supervisory relationships provide an infrastructure for flexible learning, global accessibility, and outreach, connecting individuals worldwide. The surge in web-based educational activities in recent years provides an opportunity to understand the attributes of an effective supervisor-student or mentor-student relationship.
The aim of this study is to compare the published literature (through a critical review) with our collective experiences (using small-scale appreciative inquiry [AI]) in an effort to structure and identify the dilemmas and opportunities for virtual supervisory and mentoring relationships, both in terms of stakeholder attributes and skills as well as providing instructional recommendations to enhance virtual learning.
A critical review of the literature was conducted followed by an AI of reflections by the authors. The AI questions were derived from the 4D AI framework.
Despite the multitude of differences between face-to-face and web-based supervision and mentoring, four key dilemmas seem to influence the experiences of stakeholders involved in virtual learning: informal discourses and approachability of mentors; effective virtual communication strategies; authenticity, trust, and work ethics; and sense of self and cultural considerations.
Virtual mentorship or supervision can be as equally rewarding as an in-person relationship. However, its successful implementation requires active acknowledgment of learners’ needs and careful consideration to develop effective and mutually beneficial student-educator relationships.
For centuries, learning has primarily been undertaken with both students and teachers physically present in a classroom, with the roles and responsibilities of both being fairly well defined. Although distance learning dates back to as early as the 18th century, many supervisors have had little opportunity to reflect on how their face-to-face pedagogical skills can be transferred on the web [
Mentoring and supervision describe two different but overlapping phenomena and are often used interchangeably [
Despite the multitude of differences between face-to-face and web-based supervision and mentoring, it can be argued that most skills are similar regardless of the environment [
Transitions in learning are internal, ongoing processes in the mind [
In the era of pedagogical innovation, educators may feel under constant pressure to adapt their mentoring or supervisory strategies and embrace enhanced learning technologies that promote stimulating learning environments [
This paper starts by illuminating the relevant educational theories and frameworks of virtual education. It then draws on published literature and a small-scale reflective appreciative inquiry (AI) to understand the contributing factors identified by 5 authors engaged in successful supervisory and mentorship relationships, which have been conducted primarily on the web.
No single learning theory has arguably emerged for virtual education [
The final element,
The COI model conceptualizes effective virtual learning as a result of
Community of inquiry framework.
The methods include a critical review of published literature and thematic analyses of the authors’ views developed through conversation and captured via a qualitative survey, as shown in
The study methodology pyramid embracing an appreciative inquiry approach.
A review was performed to capture the published literature on remote supervisory relationships. The search was conducted in PubMed using the following search strategy:
Distance OR online OR remote OR virtual
AND Supervis*
AND relationship* OR guideline* OR strateg* OR tip*
NOT technological OR hardware OR software
Studies were screened for topics related to challenges and barriers in virtual learning and were included if they contained any of the following aspects: supervisory relationship, identity, pedagogy, virtual or web-based environment, and challenges.
Scoping review of published literature.
This study embraces an AI framework, which draws significantly from storytelling [
Undergraduate: MAA (supervisor) and CJ (student); relationship transitioned from face to face to virtual.
Postgraduate masters: LJ (supervisor) and MAA (student); relationship included both face-to-face and virtual elements.
PhD: LJ (supervisor) and ST (student); relationship included both face-to-face and virtual elements
PhD: LC (mentor) and HA (mentee); relationship has been purely virtual.
Describe a high-point experience during your remote supervision—a time when you felt most alive and engaged, a moment that captures your supervisory relationship at its best.
Without being modest, what is it that you most value about yourself and your role and participation in the supervisory relationship?
What are the core factors that gave or give life to this supervisory relationship without which the quality of web-based supervision would be significantly reduced?
What three wishes do you have to enhance learning opportunities from web-based supervision?
On the basis of what worked for you, what advice would you offer to other supervisory dyads?
According to Richards [
It is argued that a large part of a successful supervisor-student relationship is deeply rooted in the human interaction between the participants in the relationship [
The findings summarized below highlight the themes in the literature and from the AI approach (
Summary of thematic analysis from literature review and appreciative inquiry.
The 4 key dilemmas related to virtual supervisory relationships.
Nasiri et al [
Previous studies have suggested that occasional informal social web-based interactions can contribute to effective virtual supervisory relationships [
Virtual platforms if anything helped me develop a stronger bond with my mentor, who is always accessible with a quick response. Our relationship dynamic shifted with time to more informal, and I felt that there was nothing that I couldn’t discuss with my mentor. This helped us not only in building trust and confidence in our relationship but also we came up with new ideas—that’s always an eureka moment.
One PhD dyad adapted the five-part temperature reading process of Satir [
The PhD student found the following about this system:
it provided room to talk and openly share feelings, the structure generated dialogue and a sense of real and equal participation new to someone from a more hierarchical system.
This combination of Satir’s communication tool [
I worked with my supervisor face-to-face prior to the pandemic and we both worked on building an informal culture of mutual trust and interest. What enhanced this relationship further was knowing that my supervisor cared about my well-being through occasional informal calls once lockdown measures were in place [...] I felt valued as a student and knew that they were there for me to develop personally and professionally.
Specific examples that facilitated the development of good supervisory relationships included a preagreed framework for authentic checking in and catching up. One of the authors described the following:
When most countries went into lockdown, my supervisor took the initiative to organise daily group virtual workout sessions with his team across the globe. I believe this was an opportunity to check in on each other and allowed me to strengthen my sense-of-belongingness to my supervisor and his research family [...] I had first-hand experience of him genuinely caring about everyone in his team in a supportive and friendly environment.
In comparison with the author’s findings, a number of studies from the literature search highlighted that differences in technological literacy between students and supervisors exacerbated the dislocation effect by disrupting the exchange of information, thereby reducing the desire for interaction [
Virtual environments provide ease of communication and global outreach [
However, the perceived drawbacks of virtual learning are arguably issues with in-person learning as well [
All authors highlighted the importance of relationship building and trustworthiness in supervisory relationships, whether in person or virtual:
I am genuinely committed to creating a relationship with my students and build trust within the confinements of the relationship. I try to convey that I am a trustworthy person, and my aim is to help them succeed. The relationship is an opportunity for meeting of minds; I may be different to my students, but it doesn’t mean I’m better than them, I occupy a hierarchical position in terms of the task but not as a human being.
Communication of feedback has been highlighted as a difficulty in a web-based environment [
As a result, giving and receiving quality feedback can be challenging and require an empathetic and reassuring skill set to achieve [
Most faculty are not taught how to conduct online relationships, give online feedback, or how to compensate for the lack of body language cues. If I want to feel sad, then I have to show you that I’m feeling sad. There is a real need for faculty development to shift towards the space between us, help people understand the nature of feedback, to internalize things and avoid future errors.
When communicating, it is important for supervisors to be aware that feedback has emotional connotations, and thus, it should be structured in an appropriate manner [
The collective experience from this AI survey highlighted that virtual meetings work best when characterized by negotiated agendas, when a safe environment is created, and where disagreements are looked for and can be constructive:
Once a student enters my academic bubble, I make it clear to them that we both have equal power dynamics; we both need to agree on agendas and next steps, and I welcome feedback from my learners. Just like the student, I love a challenge and a disagreement—this is how we can come up with innovative ideas and reflections.
I value having an agenda prior to meetings while maintaining an open relationship with my supervisor. I see it as a system of appreciation, puzzles and criticisms with recommendations based on behaviours and if there is an issue it will naturally come up [...]
The literature proposes, as agreed by the authors [
The consensus from the authors is to encourage an approach where supervisors
Trust is a key factor in social relationships and has been described as an important determinant of achievement within organizations [
According to prior work [
The results from the authors’ AI are supported by published literature that reported that adopting a social approach when working in a virtual environment, such as encouraging social discourse early in the collaboration [
One trait identified from the AI survey is that supervisors and students valued authenticity and the ability to be their
For me, the core factors that give life to this supervisory relationship are trust, knowing that this person cares appropriately, capacity to solve problems and authenticity (true-self). Trust encompasses personal, emotional and practical trustworthiness and if someone says they will do something, they will [...] Appropriate level of challenge both ways as this is where critical thinking emerges-depends on clear trust.
In our experiences, for trust to grow, the supervisor may need to acknowledge the student’s individual needs and circumstances and offer guidance. Relationships in which the student feels truly valued and their supervisor has their best interests at heart may lead to more trusting relationships. Work ethics and maintaining a shared goal between the mentor and the learner, as well as a willingness to be open and embrace different ideas and cultural strategies, may all be successful ways to establish trust:
Shared interest in the project and in an output that will contribute to the knowledge base is a quality without which online supervision may be significantly reduced.
Measuring trust quantitatively is difficult because of the complexity of the construct. The literature on building trust within virtual environments is particularly focused on trust within a team setting as opposed to individual relationships [
A further, more complex theme highlighted is
I think it is quite vital to recognise learners’ prior experiences and different personal and professional identities. One of my students, though a medical student, took a year to undertake an intercalated science degree. Recognising and valuing their identities helped me guide their talent and creativity
This is in line with studies by Costello [
Linked with the theme of identity is
The AI highlighted that the authors concur with the consensus in literature regarding the configuration of the traditional definition of canonical knowledge, the power and expertise of the teacher, and the passivity and role of the students that has resulted from the virtual environment [
Given my extensive experience in virtual pedagogy, I believe that formalising a learning contract where the student plays an active partner role is important to enhance their online learning opportunities [...] I would like the student to share who they are, what they need from me and what they want from me.
Remote supervision tends to bring together parties from different geographical regions and cross-cultures; thus, there is a growing realization that cultural differences and intercultural communication are important factors in supervisory relationships. The literature has highlighted that social and cultural differences may influence interactions between students and supervisors [
In one student-supervisor relationship, the student (ST) was more accustomed to a teacher-centered approach and initially found it difficult to engage in conversation and discuss their opinions with the supervisor as this was not culturally acceptable for them. Therefore, it required an open discussion regarding their roles in the relationship and management of expectations. Although it has been suggested that students who adopted a collectivistic model of learning experienced greater isolation [
In my hierarchical culture, Tamil, students are expected to be passive. When I was invited to express my opinion by my supervisor, it was the first time a teacher asked me to do this. I felt that was the best moment of my educational journey and motivated me to be more interactive in the supervision.
Both parties in the relationship may find it helpful to have an awareness of the other member’s cultural norms and any differences that may potentially cause conflict. The authors recommend that both parties adopt an inquisitive nature and an acknowledgment that learning does not take place in people’s heads alone; it takes place in people’s hearts and in their lives.
There are a few limitations to this study. Although the AI study design was not aimed at generalizing our findings to other educational contexts, this study triangulated the experiences of students, mentors, and supervisors at 3 different institutions in the United Kingdom and the United States. We hope our approach is better assessed by what it conveys in terms of plot, participants, and place while convincing readers of its representativeness. Our small-scale questionnaire, although not validated, was designed to highlight themes and provide preliminary data for more inclusive research in the future.
Further larger scale research using a validated questionnaire across a greater number of institutions is needed to demonstrate whether themes identified are common among supervisory relationships and present in those beyond these authors and their respective institutions. In addition, future studies could usefully address disparities in access to technology, the influence this is likely to have on supervisory relations, and ways in which digital inequalities can be addressed.
Drawing on published literature and a small-scale AI, our study identified key dilemmas that enable us to perceive our virtual supervisory and mentoring relationships as effective and beneficial. Virtual environments can be as rewarding as in-person relationships and provide innovative opportunities, including global outreach and flexibility, ease of communication, and the potential ability to reduce time, cost, hierarchy, and stress related to physical presence in the workplace.
Our findings propose suggestions to enhance web-based learning experiences, which actively acknowledges learners’ needs, especially in areas related to effective communication, cultural differences, self-identity recognition, and trust building. Careful consideration of these key dilemmas, all of which can act as barriers to an effective supervisory relationship, should be encouraged and recognized for the successful development of effective and mutually beneficial virtual student-educator relationships. However, future inclusive research on ways to manage and address these key dilemmas of virtual pedagogical relationships is needed.
The rapid proliferation of distance learning poses an excellent opportunity for institutions to invest in developmental activities that not only inform but also engage and prepare both students and supervisors for the web-based environment. By investing in formative web-based pedagogy and faculty development initiatives, institutions can empower both learners and faculty to reach their full potential [
appreciative inquiry
community of inquiry
None declared.