RSRP in action: Systems of support for navigating the associate award

The UKCGE’s Research Supervision Recognition Programme offers an opportunity for research supervisors to develop their practice and attain official recognition for supervision through structured self-reflection. In this Q&A series, Dr Heledd Jarosz-Griffiths (Researcher Development Advisor, PGR Development at the University of Leeds) and Dr Joanna Royle (Researcher Development Manager at the University of Glasgow) will discuss creating methods of communities of support around UKCGE’s RSRP – specifically discussing writing and discussion groups – detailing what has worked well at Leeds and Glasgow, ways in which other Researcher Development Teams can create support, and the benefits of reflective practice in supervision. In Part 1 of this series, Heledd addresses creating programming around RSRP at the University of Leeds, focusing particularly on the Associate Award pathway. 

Can you please start by speaking on why you felt it was important to engage with UKCGE’s Research Supervision Recognition Programme (RSRP)? Why do you feel recognition and reflective practice is important to supervision? 

I spent 14 years working in research—first as a PhD student, then as a postdoc in Alzheimer’s Disease and Cystic Fibrosis. Over that time, I supported around 10 PhD students informally, co-supervised four master’s students, and worked with several undergraduate project students. My open, intuitive, and caring approach meant colleagues often came to me for mentoring, technical advice, or support. That kind of informal supervision became a key part of how I contributed to research groups, even if it wasn’t formally recognised. 

When I moved into my current role as a Researcher Development Advisor in 2024, I came across the Associate Award and thought, ​“How did I not know about this before?” It felt like a vital way to recognise the hidden supervision provided by so many researchers, especially postdocs and technicians. 

Although I worked across different subject areas, I realised I approached supervision in a consistent way: adapting to individuals, building trust, and creating space to learn through doing. It made me see supervision as a skill — one worth reflecting on and developing. 

For me, the Research Supervisor Recognition Program (RSRP) wasn’t just about personal recognition. It was about valuing supervision as real, meaningful work, especially when it goes unnoticed. That’s what motivated me to support others and to think more about how institutions can make space for reflective practice as part of everyday supervision. 

How we supervise shapes how we lead. Reflecting on that can change how we support others, build relationships, and work together in research. 

You have begun creating systems of support at your institutions, aiding applicants and staff members looking to engage with RSRP. How have you implemented communities or systems of support at your institution? What have been the challenges in creating these support mechanisms?

Not long after applying for the Associate Award myself, I felt a strong responsibility to support others, especially researchers on fixed-term contracts and in technical roles who often take on significant supervisory responsibilities without formal recognition. That became the motivation behind setting up a pilot support scheme at my institution. 

The first pilot, launched in 2024 ahead of the June submission window, combined structured guidance with practical support. I curated key UKCGE resources and walked participants through the process, but also created space for them to actually do the work by embedding ​“shut up and write” sessions. This helped ease the feeling of ​“where do I even begin?” Several participants went on to submit strong applications. 

A key challenge early on was around eligibility. Many weren’t sure if their supervisory experience counted, particularly at the Master’s level. Reflecting on my own journey, where master’s supervision had been pivotal in developing my supervisory practice, I worked with UKCGE to help influence a change in the criteria. Associate Award applicants can now include Master’s by Research supervision, provided doctoral supervision remains the focus of the application, making the award more accessible to the researchers I wanted to support. 

In the lead-up to the October deadline, I ran a second iteration with small refinements. Then in January 2025, I launched a more structured version: a webinar to clarify expectations, followed by four biweekly workshops. The format now includes peer-to-peer discussions guided by reflective questions, a Padlet for tracking progress, and space to talk openly about supervision. 

The programme is still evolving, but the impact is clear. Participants feel more confident, better supported, and more recognised. For me, building that kind of reflective, supportive community has been one of the most rewarding parts of this work. 

Could you please speak to what types of support have been the most useful at your institution? What hasn’t worked as well? 

At the University of Leeds, we already had some useful resources in place like a dedicated Teams space for supervisors, access to the Epigeum online course, and targeted workshops, including sessions delivered by UKCGE representatives like Stan Taylor. These helped outline the expectations for the RSRP and gave people a starting point. 

But I realised these resources weren’t enough on their own. For researchers in fixed-term or technical roles who may not see themselves as ​“formal” supervisors. The bigger challenge was finding the time, headspace, and confidence to reflect on their supervisory work. That’s where cohort-based support really made a difference. 

The most effective elements have been those that create space to think. The protected writing time, peer conversations, and reflective prompts to help articulate thoughts and practice. This kind of environment helps people realise they’re not alone, and that their contributions matter, even if they’ve gone unrecognised. 

One thing that didn’t work as well early on was the short timescale. The first pilot ran over six weeks, which built momentum but didn’t leave much space for deeper reflection or community-building. That’s why I shifted to a longer format, aligned with UKCGE’s submission windows, which gives participants more breathing room. 

Initially, I focused on people like me, those in research or technical roles without formal recognition. But I’ve since realised that early-career academics also need support, especially those who haven’t yet seen a doctoral student through to completion. I’m now looking at how to adapt the offer to include them too. 

What practical steps can institutions take to support reflective practice in supervision, and what benefits have you seen through your own initiatives? 

Encouraging reflective practice means more than just telling people it’s important; it’s about creating the time, space, and support to make it possible. That’s where initiatives like the RSRP really come into their own. 

At Leeds, I’ve found that protected time, especially through ​“shut up and write” sessions, is a simple but powerful way to help supervisors get started. It adds structure, reduces pressure, and, when combined with clear expectations and a sense of community, makes the process far more approachable. 

Through the RSRP support programme, I’ve seen researchers gain a clearer understanding of their supervisory approach in terms of what matters to them, how they support students, and where they want to grow. For many, it’s the first time they’ve stepped back to reflect. This builds confidence and often helps them recognise their leadership potential. It’s also deeply validating, particularly for those whose roles haven’t been formally acknowledged. 

One aspect that’s been especially powerful is the supervisory observation. Watching a colleague’s supervision session has sparked honest reflection and conversations about different approaches and challenges. Participants often say it helped them see their own practice more clearly and gave them practical ideas to take forward. Peer interaction has also been a key strength. Sharing experiences builds a supportive dynamic that often continues beyond the RSRP process. 

Looking ahead, I’m developing a North-West network to connect institutions and share best practice. One idea is to invite Associate Award applicants from different institutions to join shared sessions. There’s real potential for cross-institutional learning and community-building that supports supervisors at all stages. Institutions have a real opportunity to embed reflective practice into the culture of research supervision, and support like this is a great place to start.