Supervising in the digital shadows: language, technology, and emotional labor in postgraduate education: A qualitative case study.

Sibonelo Thanda Mbanjwa

doi:10.51168/sjhrafrica.v6i9.1949

Authors

Sibonelo Thanda Mbanjwa Mangosuthu University of Technology P.O. Box 12363 Jacobs 4026 Durban South Africa

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51168/sjhrafrica.v6i9.1949

Keywords:

Postgraduate supervision, Emotional labor, Digital supervision, Language barriers, Higher education, Academic writing support, South Africa

Abstract

Background
Postgraduate supervision is a cornerstone of academic success; yet, it has become increasingly complex in the digital era. In multilingual and resource-constrained contexts such as South Africa, the intersection of language barriers, technological limitations, and emotional labour complicates supervisory relationships. These challenges often lead to miscommunication, psychological strain, and a decline in academic progress. This study explored the lived experiences of postgraduate students, supervisors, and programme coordinators in navigating digital supervision, focusing on identifying challenges and opportunities for improved practice.

Methods
This qualitative case study was conducted between January and March 2024 at two South African public universities. A purposive sample of 54 participants was selected, comprising 44 postgraduate students (28 master’s, 16 doctoral), 6 academic supervisors, and 4 programme coordinators. Data collection involved 18 semi-structured interviews and two virtual focus groups. Braun and Clarke’s six-phase thematic analysis was applied, with triangulation across participant groups to enhance credibility.

Results
Participants included 20 males and 34 females, aged 25–52 years (mean = 36 years). Three key themes emerged. First, language barriers hindered effective feedback, as students with limited academic English proficiency struggled to express ideas clearly. Second, emotional labour was reported by both groups: supervisors experienced digital fatigue, while students reported isolation, anxiety, and frustration. Third, digital inequalities such as poor connectivity and low digital literacy exacerbated power imbalances, leaving students hesitant to engage fully with their supervisors.

Conclusion
Digital supervision, though flexible, intensifies existing challenges related to language, emotional well-being, and technology. Without adequate institutional support, both supervisors and students face heightened stress and reduced academic outcomes.

Recommendations
Institutions should provide structured writing support, digital supervision training, equitable infrastructure, and wellness systems to strengthen postgraduate supervision in online and hybrid environments.

Author Biography

Sibonelo Thanda Mbanjwa, Mangosuthu University of Technology P.O. Box 12363 Jacobs 4026 Durban South Africa

is a dedicated lecturer in the Department of Nature Conservation at Mangosuthu University of Technology (MUT), South Africa. He holds a Ph.D. in Environmental Science and specializes in biodiversity conservation, sustainable development, and environmental education. Dr. Mbanjwa is deeply committed to community engagement, student mentorship, and the integration of indigenous knowledge systems into conservation practices. His work bridges academia and practical application, empowering students and communities through innovative teaching, research, and outreach initiatives.

References

Ali, A., & Kohun, F. (2007). Dealing with social isolation to minimize doctoral attrition - A four stage framework. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 2, 33-49.

https://doi.org/10.28945/56

Amundsen, C., & McAlpine, L. (2009). "Learning supervision": Trial by fire. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46(3), 331-342.

https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290903068805

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.

https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

CHE. (2021). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on higher education in South Africa. Council on Higher Education. Cadman, K. (1997). Thesis writing for international students: A question of identity? English for Specific Purposes, 16(1), 3-14.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(96)00029-4

Canagarajah, A. S. (2002). A geopolitics of academic writing. University of Pittsburgh Press.

https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt5hjn6c

PMid:11796224

Cotterall, S. (2013). More than just a brain: Emotions and the doctoral experience. Higher Education Research & Development, 32(2), 174-187.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.680017

Council on Higher Education. (2021). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on higher education in South Africa. Pretoria: Council on Higher Education. Deem, R., & Brehony, K. J. (2000). Doctoral students' access to research cultures: Are some more equal than others? Studies in Higher Education, 25(2), 149-165.

https://doi.org/10.1080/713696138

Grant, B. (2003). Mapping the pleasures and risks of supervision. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 24(2), 175-190.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01596300303042

Grant, B. M. (2003). Mapping the pleasures and risks of supervision. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 24(2), 175-190.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01596300303042

Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling. University of California Press. Hughes, C., & Tight, M. (2013). The metaphors we study by: The doctorate as a journey and/or as work. Higher Education Research & Development, 32(5), 765-775.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.777031

Johnson, S., Veletsianos, G., & Seaman, J. (2020). U.S. faculty and administrators' experiences and approaches in the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic. Online Learning, 24(2), 6-21.

https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i2.2285

Johnson, S., Veletsianos, G., & Seaman, J. (2020). US faculty and administrators' experiences and approaches in the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic. Online Learning, 24(2), 6-21.

https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i2.2285

Kumalo, S. H. (2020). Decolonising the language of evaluation in South African higher education. Language Matters, 51(2), 100-117. Lee, A. (2008). How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision. Studies in Higher Education, 33(3), 267-281.

https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070802049202

Manathunga, C. (2007). Supervision as mentoring: The role of power and boundary crossing. Studies in Continuing Education, 29(2), 207-221.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01580370701424650

McAlpine, L., & Amundsen, C. (2011). Doctoral education: Research-based strategies for doctoral students, supervisors and administrators. Springer.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0507-4

McAlpine, L., & Amundsen, C. (2011). Making meaning of diverse experiences: Constructing an identity through time. In L. McAlpine & C. Amundsen (Eds.), Doctoral education: Research-based strategies for doctoral students, supervisors and administrators (pp. 173-183). Springer.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0507-4_10

Muthwii, M. J. (2004). Language planning and use in technical institutions in Kenya: Challenges and perspectives. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 17(2), 155-168.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07908310408666679

Orellana, M. L., Darder, A., Pérez, A., & Salinas, J. (2016). Improving the doctoral supervision process and the quality of the thesis using digital tools. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(3), 317-328. Tham, C. M., & Werner, J. M. (2005). Designing and evaluating e-learning in higher education: A review and recommendations. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 11(2), 15-25.

https://doi.org/10.1177/107179190501100203

Veletsianos, G., & Kimmons, R. (2020). What (some) faculty are doing about it: Voices from the trenches. EDUCAUSE Review.