Postgraduate research candidature support, support of supervisory teams, and assistance with examination and assessment requirements are some of the crucial elements in a successful postgraduate student’s study experience. While there is a large body of research on Doctoral supervision, less is available on Master’s level supervision and support. Benchmarking studies that gauge the quality of higher education processes and practices, are gaining momentum as a research tool, and reflective mechanism for enhancing student experiences at higher education institutions. This paper reports on a small-scale study that used a holistic benchmarking framework at a research-intensive New Zealand university, in an effort to gauge the quality of the level of postgraduate Master’s research student support and supervision. Twenty-three academics and 17 students completed the survey, which assessed key performance indicators (KPIs): student support; postgraduate candidature development; student supervision; and assessment and examination support. Both students and academics were happy with orientation and induction, but students felt more information was needed regarding possible changes to research. Overall academics and students had confidence in the level of academic research guidance. Although academics felt assessment policies and procedures were explicit, students were not always in agreement. Moreover, students thought that evaluative feedback on their experience should be gathered more frequently. The findings suggest that, in broad terms, the university in question is tracking well and meeting most of the benchmarking principles and their associated KPIs. However, both academics and students highlighted areas where the University can improve practices to better support the experience of Master’s research students.

研究生研究候选人支持、监督团队的支持以及考试和评估要求的协助是成功研究生学习体验的一些关键要素。虽然有大量关于博士监督的研究，但关于硕士水平的监督和支持的研究较少。衡量高等教育过程和实践质量的基准研究作为研究工具和反思机制正在获得动力，以增强学生在高等教育机构的体验。本文报告了一项在新西兰研究密集型大学使用整体基准框架的小规模研究，旨在衡量研究生硕士研究生支持和监督水平的质量。23 名学者和 17 名学生完成了调查，评估了关键绩效指标 (KPI)：学生支持；研究生候选人发展；学生督导；以及评估和考试支持。学生和学者都对迎新和入职感到满意，但学生们觉得需要更多关于研究可能改变的信息。全体学者和学生对学术研究指导水平有信心。尽管学术界认为评估政策和程序是明确的，但学生并不总是达成一致。此外，学生们认为应该更频繁地收集关于他们经历的评价反馈。调查结果表明，从广义上讲，有关大学的跟踪情况良好，并符合大多数基准原则及其相关的 KPI。