Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This essay reveals authentic student critique on supervision, suggesting insights into power dynamics in higher education.
This essay introduces a method for collecting student feedback that I developed to obtain authentic critique on my supervision of four undergraduate dissertations in English Literature. The subsequent reflection integrates concepts of creative writing and literary analysis. With autotheoretical underpinnings, it adopts a subjective perspective, embracing personal experiences and emotions. After outlining the method of ‘free-writing elevator feedback’, I delve into the unfiltered student comments on my supervision. Drawing from my previous experience in five national higher education (HE) systems, I discuss what the supervisees’ horizon of expectations taught me, a Scandinavian newcomer to the UK, about student-teacher power relations in British HE. A critique directed at my lack of expertise in the dissertation subject sparked a personal reflection process, yielding surprising creative insights – as did the feedback validating my relational and emancipatory supervision style. I close the essay by addressing the risks and shortcomings associated with the use of the uncensored feedback method – its ethical implications, psychoanalytical caveats and professional repercussions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Elina Mikkilä (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: