National University of Singapore · Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences

NUS–MOE Humanities & Social Sciences Research (HSSR)
Supervisor Experience & Improvement Survey

0% complete Answer the questions below to begin

Estimated timeunder 10 minutes for most
AnonymityResponses are anonymous. An optional contact field is provided at the end if you are willing to be contacted for clarification.

Completing & submitting. You can fill in this form offline on your device, and use the Save my draft button to keep your progress locally. When you have completed the form, you have the option of downloading a copy of your responses in a text file before submitting them.

Please note that a working internet connection will be needed at the moment you click Submit response, after which you should see a confirmation message in green.

Brief background to support grouped analysis.

1.1

For which year(s) were you an HSSR supervisor?required

Select every year in which you supervised.

If you supervised in more than one cycle, please answer the rest of the survey with your most recent cycle in mind.

2026 2025 2024 2023 2022 Other

1.2

Which FASS department(s) best describe your home discipline?required

Multiple selection accepted

Chinese Studies Communications and New Media Economics English, Literature and Theatre Studies Geography History Malay Studies Philosophy Political Science Psychology Social Work Sociology and Anthropology Southeast Asian Studies Other

1.3

Which HSSR subject area(s) did you supervise?required

Multiple selection accepted

Economics Geography History Literature in English Chinese Language & Literature Malay Language & Literature Other / interdisciplinary

1.4

Including your most recent cycle, how many HSSR supervision cycles have you completed?required

This is my first cycle 2–3 cycles 4 or more cycles

1.5

How many mentees did you supervise in your most recent cycle?required

1 2 3 4 or more

How students were matched to you, and how supervision and consultation worked.

Selection, matching & topic scoping

2.1

Please rate your agreement with the following statements regarding selection, matching, and topic scoping.required

1 = Strongly disagree · 5 = Strongly agree · N/A = Not applicable

1Strongly disagree

5Strongly agree

N/A

The student(s) matched to me were a good fit for my area of expertise.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

The application proposals gave me enough information to assess fit before accepting the match.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

Scoping the topic into a manageable and viable research project was straightforward.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

2.2

Which of the following would improve matching or topic scoping?required

Multiple selection accepted

More detailed application proposals Better information about student preparedness Greater supervisor input in matching Clearer expectations on topic scope More support for narrowing broad topics Better alignment between student interests and supervisor expertise No major changes needed Other

Supervision & consultation

2.3

Please rate your agreement with the following statements regarding your supervision and consultations.required

1 = Strongly disagree · 5 = Strongly agree · N/A = Not applicable

1Strongly disagree

5Strongly agree

N/A

The maximum of six consultations was adequate for effective supervision.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

The January–May consultation period allowed reasonable pacing.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

The consultation format I used worked well for HSSR supervision.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

My mentee(s) came adequately prepared for consultations.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

My mentee(s) demonstrated appropriate initiative and independence.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

I was able to teach the research and academic-writing skills students needed within the consultation constraints.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

2.4

Which consultation mode did you mainly use?required

Mostly face-to-face Mostly video Roughly equal mix

2.5

Which changes, if any, would improve the consultation model?required

Multiple selection accepted

Increase the consultation cap Allow limited written/email consultation More flexible consultation timeline Earlier start to consultations Clearer guidance on consultation expectations More support for less-prepared students No major changes needed Other

The common rubric and assessment process, and the AI-use policy.

Assessment & rubric

3.1

Please rate your agreement with the following statements regarding assessment and the rubric.required

1 = Strongly disagree · 5 = Strongly agree · N/A = Not applicable

1Strongly disagree

5Strongly agree

N/A

The common HSSR rubric was clear to me.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

The common rubric was a reasonable fit for my discipline.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

The rubric criteria were easy to apply consistently.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

The two-evaluator process worked smoothly.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

I had adequate guidance to certify the authenticity of the final essay.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

3.2

Where, if anywhere, did the rubric fit your discipline least well?required

Multiple selection accepted

Designing a research plan Identifying, collecting and evaluating evidence Justifying research claims Communicating research findings Equal weighting across criteria Applying one rubric across different disciplines Mark-band descriptors No major concerns Other

3.3

How could the rubric or assessment process be improved?

AI-use policyoptional

AI disclosure and acknowledgement were first required in the 2026 cycle. The three questions below are optional; skip them if AI disclosure did not apply to the cycle you are reporting on.

3.4

Please rate your agreement with the following statements regarding the AI-use policy.

1 = Strongly disagree · 5 = Strongly agree · N/A = Not applicable

1Strongly disagree

5Strongly agree

N/A

The AI-use policy and disclosure requirements were clear.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

I found it straightforward to advise students on AI disclosure.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

I could distinguish legitimate AI use from improper use.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

I felt confident detecting and addressing AI-related integrity concerns.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

Guidance and support on the AI policy were adequate.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

3.5

What was most challenging about advising on or checking AI use?

Multiple selection accepted

Understanding the policy Explaining disclosure requirements Judging legitimate versus improper use Detecting unattributed AI-generated text Identifying AI-washing Spotting fabricated citations Distinguishing proofreading from substantive rewriting Lack of tools Lack of a clear escalation process No major difficulties encountered Other

3.6

What guidance, examples, tools, or support would help supervisors manage AI use in future cycles?

Programme administration and support, and your overall view of the cycle.

Administration, communication & support

4.1

Please rate your agreement with the following statements regarding administration and support.required

1 = Strongly disagree · 5 = Strongly agree · N/A = Not applicable

1Strongly disagree

5Strongly agree

N/A

The January briefing prepared me adequately for my role.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

Liaison with the Teacher-Coordinator was effective.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

Guidelines, templates, and timelines were clear.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

The workload was reasonable relative to the recognition provided.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

FASS/MOE support was responsive when needed.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

4.2

Which changes would most improve administration and support?required

Multiple selection accepted

Clearer guidelines/templates Better briefing/onboarding Improved Teacher-Coordinator liaison Clearer timelines and deadlines Better workload recognition Reduced administrative burden More responsive support channels Better support for first-time supervisors No major changes needed Other

Overall experience

4.3

Overall, how satisfied were you with your HSSR supervision experience in your most recent cycle?required

1Very dissatisfied 2Dissatisfied 3Neither 4Satisfied 5Very satisfied

4.4

How likely are you to supervise HSSR again under a similar examinable model?required

1Very unlikely 2Unlikely 3Neither 4Likely 5Very likely

4.5

What did you find most rewarding?required

Multiple selection accepted

Mentoring a motivated student Seeing a student develop as a researcher Shaping a viable research topic Teaching research and academic-writing skills Intellectual engagement with the topic Contributing to JC–university outreach Professional recognition Other

4.6

What did you find most burdensome?required

Multiple selection accepted

Time required outside consultations Consultation constraints Student unpreparedness Teaching foundational skills from scratch Applying the rubric Authenticity certification AI-related issues Administrative workload Inadequate recognition Other

These questions ask what you did to interest your mentee(s) in FASS, how they responded, and your ideas for the new model.

5.1

Beyond the research itself, to what extent did you introduce your mentee(s) to studying at FASS or in your discipline?required

Not at all Briefly, when it came up To some extent Actively and in some depth

5.2

What did you do to introduce FASS or your discipline to your mentee(s)?required

Multiple selection accepted

Described what studying the discipline at NUS FASS is like Shared career or further-study pathways in the Humanities and Social Sciences Highlighted specific FASS programmes, majors, or modules Connected their research interest to a possible major Shared my own academic or career journey Invited them to a talk, event, or campus visit Encouraged them to consider FASS for university Did not do any of the above Other

5.3

Please rate your agreement with the following statements regarding your mentees.required

1 = Strongly disagree · 5 = Strongly agree · N/A = Not applicable

1Strongly disagree

5Strongly agree

N/A

My mentee(s) were receptive when I spoke about studying at FASS or in my discipline.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

My mentee(s) showed genuine interest in majoring in a Humanities or Social Sciences subject.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

In my experience, students who take HSSR are generally not inclined to pursue a Humanities or Social Sciences major.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

HSSR gave me meaningful opportunities to interest students in FASS.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

I would welcome a more active role in introducing students to FASS during HSSR Enrichment.

1 2 3 4 5 N/A

5.4

Which faculty-level activities could help use HSSR Enrichment to attract students to FASS?required

Multiple selection accepted

A pre-supervision briefing or seminar introducing FASS and its disciplines A post-supervision engagement or showcase session A closing symposium where students present their research Talks by FASS faculty or alumni on HSS pathways A panel of current FASS undergraduates A campus visit, or a library / facilities tour Information on FASS admissions and scholarships Continued mentoring or contact beyond the research period None / not needed Other

5.5

What else could help HSSR Enrichment more actively attract students to FASS?

We would value your ideas, even allowing that the student profile may change under the new model.

Your views on the move to the new enrichment model, plus optional contact details.

6.1

Please rate your agreement with the following statements regarding the move to HSSR Enrichment.required

1 = Strongly disagree · 5 = Strongly agree

1Strongly disagree

5Strongly agree

Moving to a non-examinable enrichment model is a positive direction for HSSR.

1 2 3 4 5

I would be interested in mentoring under the new HSSR (Enrichment) model.

1 2 3 4 5

6.2

Which current elements should be retained?required

Multiple selection accepted

Individual supervisor–student mentoring Structured research-skills development Topic scoping to supervisor expertise Extended Essay or substantial written output Defined consultation structure Teacher-Coordinator liaison AI disclosure/authenticity practices Common assessment framework Other

6.3

What should be changed or dropped?required

Multiple selection accepted

Examinable H3 grading requirement Six-consultation cap Consultation format restrictions Current rubric structure Second-evaluator requirement Current timeline Current matching process Current workload recognition arrangements Current AI guidance Other

6.4

What is the single most important lesson from your most recent HSSR cycle that should shape the 2027 Enrichment model?

Before you submit

★

Optional follow-up

Optional. Leaving these blank keeps your response fully anonymous.

NameEmail

✓

Response received

Thank you for your time and for your contribution to HSSR. Your feedback has been recorded and will inform the design of the HSSR (Enrichment) model from 2027.

A copy of your responses has also been kept on this device, and you can download it for your own records.