An analysis of written feedback on a PhD thesis

Abstract

This paper offers an interim analysis of written feedback on a first draft of a PhD thesis. It first looks at two sources of data: in-text feedback and overall feedback. Looking at how language is used in its situational context, we then coded the feedback and developed a model for analysis based on three fundamental functions of speech: referential, directive and expressive. It was found that expressive feedback benefited the supervisee the most. The interaction between the supervisor and the supervisee played an important role for the induction of the supervisee into the academic community, and suggests a peer-to-peer model in PhD education. Finally, this paper suggests the possibility of developing a taxonomy of good feedback practices in postgraduate supervision practice in Higher Education.

Acknowledgements

We would like to indicate that the workload when preparing this article was shared equally between the authors. We wish to thank the University of Otago for funding this research. Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the ALANZ (Applied Linguistics Association of New Zealand) Symposium in Wellington, New Zealand (September 2005), at the Quality in Postgraduate Research Conference in Adelaide, Australia (April 2006), at the Improving University Teaching Conference in Dunedin, New Zealand (July 2006) (see conference website: http://www.iutconference.org/schedule.htm (retrieval date: 23 August 2006)), and at four workshops on postgraduate supervision for university staff at Universiti Putra Malaysia in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (June 2006). We wish to acknowledge the thoughtful suggestions provided by the participants. We would also like to record our appreciation to our peer group PALC, the PhD Applied Linguistics Club of Otago, Dr. Tony Harland, Dr Margaret Kiley, and to the anonymous reviewers of this journal for comments on an earlier version of this paper.

Notes

1. As mentioned above, these comments do not fall only under the expressive function of speech. For instance, the first example was triple-coded as referential/organization, directive/question, and expressive/criticism.