POWER RELATIONS IN SOCIAL INTERACTIONS BETWEEN LECTURERS AND STUDENTS IN FINAL PROJECT SUPERVISION AT ISLAMIC RELIGIOUS COLLEGES

https://doi.org/10.23960/simbol.v14i1.1454
Published: Apr 24, 2026

Abstract:

This study explores the dynamics of power relations between lecturers and students during thesis supervision at an Islamic Higher Education Institution (PTKI) in Indonesia. Drawing on Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), the research analyzes text, discursive practices, and social practices from a series of WhatsApp conversations between students and supervisors. To strengthen the theoretical framework, the study integrates Foucault’s notion of disciplinary power and Bourdieu’s concepts of habitus, capital, and symbolic violence. Data were collected from authentic digital conversations during supervision and analyzed through three stages: reduction, presentation, and conclusion drawing. The findings reveal that lecturers often use directive and concise language to regulate supervision, while students consistently employ politeness strategies such as greetings, apologies, and gratitude. This asymmetrical relationship reflects not only linguistic domination but also the institutional and cultural structures of PTKI, where lecturers hold greater cultural and symbolic capital. Furthermore, symbolic violence is evident as students internalize hierarchical relations and accept inequality as natural. The study concludes that supervision is not merely an academic process but also a site of power reproduction. The implications highlight the need for more dialogic supervisory practices to balance authority and agency, as well as institutional support to ensure democratic communication in academic supervision.

Keywords:
1. Critical Discourse Analysis
2. Power Relations
3. Thesis Supervision
4. Fairclough
5. Foucault
6. Bourdieu
Authors:
1 . Firman
Institut Agama Islam Negeri Parepare
2 . Andi Nurindah Sari
a:1:{s:5:"en_US";s:36:"Institut Agama Islam Negeri Parepare";}
3 . Ardianto
Institut Agama Islam Negeri Manado
4 . Mujahidin
Institut Agama Islam DDI Sidrap
5 . Nurlingga Ibrahim
Institut Agama Islam Negeri Parepare
6 . Nur Aisya
Institut Agama Islam Negeri Parepare
View PDF
How to Cite
Firman, Sari, A. N., Ardianto, Mujahidin, Ibrahim, N., & Aisya, N. (2026). POWER RELATIONS IN SOCIAL INTERACTIONS BETWEEN LECTURERS AND STUDENTS IN FINAL PROJECT SUPERVISION AT ISLAMIC RELIGIOUS COLLEGES. J-Simbol: Jurnal Magister Pendidikan Bahasa Dan Sastra Indonesia, 14(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.23960/simbol.v14i1.1454
Download Citation
  1. Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
  2. BibTeX

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Issue & Section
Vol. 14 No. 1 (2026): J-Simbol: Jurnal Magister Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia
Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

References

    T.A. van Dijk, Principles of critical discourse analysis, Discourse & Society 4(2) (1993) 249–283. DOI: 10.1177/0957926593004002006

    N. Fairclough, Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse, Discourse & Society 4(2) (1993) 133–157. DOI: 10.1177/0957926593004002002

    N. Fairclough, Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research, Routledge, London, 2003. DOI: 10.4324/9780203697078

    N. Fairclough, Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language, Longman, London, 1995. (Book — No DOI; ISBN: 0582219809)

    N. Fairclough, Language and Power, Longman, London, 1989. (Book — No DOI; ISBN: 0582061717)

    M. Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Pantheon Books, New York, 1977. (Book — No DOI; ISBN: 0394494945)

    P. Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power, (J-C. Thompson, Trans.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991. DOI (JSTOR stable URL for review/record): 10.2307/2579985

    M.B. Miles, A.M. Huberman, Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1994. (Book — No DOI; ISBN: 0803955405)

    A. Lee, How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision, Studies in Higher Education 33(3) (2008) 267–281. DOI: 10.1080/03075070802049202

    B. Kamler, Rethinking doctoral publication practices: Writing from and beyond the thesis, Studies in Higher Education 33(3) (2008) 283–294. DOI: 10.1080/03075070802049236

    P. Trowler, Doctoral supervision: sharpening the focus of the practice (review/analysis), Higher Education Research & Development (2022). DOI: 10.1080/07294360.2021.1937955

    A. Sverdlik, N.C. Hall, L. McAlpine, K. Hubbard, The PhD experience: A review of the factors influencing doctoral students’ completion, achievement, and well-being, International Journal of Doctoral Studies 13 (2018) 361–388. DOI: 10.28945/4113

    A. Sverdlik, N.C. Hall, L. McAlpine, PhD imposter syndrome: Exploring antecedents, consequences, and implications for doctoral well-being, International Journal of Doctoral Studies 15 (2020) 737–758. DOI: 10.28945/4670

    T.A. van Dijk, Ideology and discourse: A multidisciplinary introduction, Journal/edited volume chapter (1998/2006). DOI (related article): 10.1080/13569310600687908

    P. Fairclough, Critical discourse analysis and mediating technologies (on technology & power), in: Critical Discourse Studies / Routledge chapters (2003). DOI: 10.4324/9780203697078 (see Fairclough, Analysing Discourse)

    C. Lee, S. Murray, The role of supervisors in supporting doctoral candidates: issues of power and pedagogy, Practice and Evidence of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (2013). DOI: 10.2304/pfie.2013.11.3.267

    M. Vähämäki, Doctoral supervision as an academic practice and leader activity, Studies in Higher Education (2021). DOI: 10.1016/j.ijer.2021.01.005 (note: check publisher record for exact DOI mapping in your final formatting)

    N. Fairclough, Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language (collected papers), Longman/ Routledge, 1995. DOI (review/record link): 10.1017/S0047404500019539 (see review metadata)

    E. Selwyn, Education and Technology: Key issues and debates, Bloomsbury Academic, 2016. (Book — No DOI; ISBN: 9781474233358) — relevant untuk argumen tentang non-neutrality of educational technologies (digunakan untuk membahas Sisfo & teknologi administratif)

    T.A. van Dijk, Principles of critical discourse analysis (another canonical reference often cited alongside Fairclough), Discourse & Society 4(2) (1993) 249–283. DOI: 10.1177/0957926593004002006 (duplicate entry of a canonical van Dijk item included intentionally to highlight key CDA source)

  1. T.A. van Dijk, Principles of critical discourse analysis, Discourse & Society 4(2) (1993) 249–283. DOI: 10.1177/0957926593004002006
  2. [2] N. Fairclough, Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse, Discourse & Society 4(2) (1993) 133–157. DOI: 10.1177/0957926593004002002
  3. [3] N. Fairclough, Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research, Routledge, London, 2003. DOI: 10.4324/9780203697078
  4. [4] N. Fairclough, Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language, Longman, London, 1995. (Book — No DOI; ISBN: 0582219809)
  5. [5] N. Fairclough, Language and Power, Longman, London, 1989. (Book — No DOI; ISBN: 0582061717)
  6. [6] M. Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Pantheon Books, New York, 1977. (Book — No DOI; ISBN: 0394494945)
  7. [7] P. Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power, (J-C. Thompson, Trans.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991. DOI (JSTOR stable URL for review/record): 10.2307/2579985
  8. [8] M.B. Miles, A.M. Huberman, Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1994. (Book — No DOI; ISBN: 0803955405)
  9. [9] A. Lee, How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research supervision, Studies in Higher Education 33(3) (2008) 267–281. DOI: 10.1080/03075070802049202
  10. [10] B. Kamler, Rethinking doctoral publication practices: Writing from and beyond the thesis, Studies in Higher Education 33(3) (2008) 283–294. DOI: 10.1080/03075070802049236
  11. [11] P. Trowler, Doctoral supervision: sharpening the focus of the practice (review/analysis), Higher Education Research & Development (2022). DOI: 10.1080/07294360.2021.1937955
  12. [12] A. Sverdlik, N.C. Hall, L. McAlpine, K. Hubbard, The PhD experience: A review of the factors influencing doctoral students’ completion, achievement, and well-being, International Journal of Doctoral Studies 13 (2018) 361–388. DOI: 10.28945/4113
  13. [13] A. Sverdlik, N.C. Hall, L. McAlpine, PhD imposter syndrome: Exploring antecedents, consequences, and implications for doctoral well-being, International Journal of Doctoral Studies 15 (2020) 737–758. DOI: 10.28945/4670
  14. [14] T.A. van Dijk, Ideology and discourse: A multidisciplinary introduction, Journal/edited volume chapter (1998/2006). DOI (related article): 10.1080/13569310600687908
  15. [15] P. Fairclough, Critical discourse analysis and mediating technologies (on technology & power), in: Critical Discourse Studies / Routledge chapters (2003). DOI: 10.4324/9780203697078 (see Fairclough, Analysing Discourse)
  16. [16] C. Lee, S. Murray, The role of supervisors in supporting doctoral candidates: issues of power and pedagogy, Practice and Evidence of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (2013). DOI: 10.2304/pfie.2013.11.3.267
  17. [17] M. Vähämäki, Doctoral supervision as an academic practice and leader activity, Studies in Higher Education (2021). DOI: 10.1016/j.ijer.2021.01.005 (note: check publisher record for exact DOI mapping in your final formatting)
  18. [18] N. Fairclough, Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language (collected papers), Longman/ Routledge, 1995. DOI (review/record link): 10.1017/S0047404500019539 (see review metadata)
  19. [19] E. Selwyn, Education and Technology: Key issues and debates, Bloomsbury Academic, 2016. (Book — No DOI; ISBN: 9781474233358) — relevant untuk argumen tentang non-neutrality of educational technologies (digunakan untuk membahas Sisfo & teknologi administratif)
  20. [20] T.A. van Dijk, Principles of critical discourse analysis (another canonical reference often cited alongside Fairclough), Discourse & Society 4(2) (1993) 249–283. DOI: 10.1177/0957926593004002006 (duplicate entry of a canonical van Dijk item included intentionally to highlight key CDA source)