Exploring doctoral students’ perceptions of language use in supervisory written feedback practices – because “feedback is hard to have”

Abstract

The mastery of academic writing is essential in doctoral writing. Supervisory feedback provides opportunities for students to improve their writing. It is a communicative tool that can be categorised based on fundamental functions of speech: referential, directive, and expressive. This study provides some understanding of the impact that language and speech functions have on the learning experiences of doctoral students. Sources of data are oral interviews with each student, and their supervisor’s written feedback on drafts of that student’s thesis. Analysis of the feedback provided useful insights into the type of feedback the student considered useful for their development. The students found value in all three types of feedback. In particular, expressive types of feedback often led to an emotional reaction, as students viewed praise, criticism and opinions as motivating or challenging. We argue that expressive types of feedback can play an important role for developing academic writing. This study assists supervisors to acquire a higher level of language awareness so they are better equipped to provide feedback that supports the academic writing and overall learning of their students.

Encouraging Dialogue in Doctoral Supervision: The Development of the Feedback Expectation Tool

“…Our survey data confirm the need for studies that acknowledge the emotional impact of feedback in any learning and teaching context including doctoral education (Stracke & Kumar, 2016). Candidates show a high level of awareness of their emotions and the need to manage them.…”

“…Another contentious area in feedback practices is the emotion attached to feedback. Feedback has socio-emotional connotations (Aitchison & Mowbray, 2013;Can & Walker, 2011;Carter & Kumar, 2017;Stracke & Kumar, 2016;Wang & Li, 2011). At times, a supervisor may not know whether a candidate will find their feedback emotionally constructive or destructive.…”

“…At times, a supervisor may not know whether a candidate will find their feedback emotionally constructive or destructive. Stracke and Kumar's (2016) qualitative interview study with doctoral candidates shows that "expressive types of feedback are dense with emotions" (p. 135) and, as such, supervisors need to be more aware about the language they use.…”

“…Previous studies that looked at the link between language and socio-emotional aspects of feedback highlighted the role of expressive types of feedback that often cause intense emotions (Stracke & Kumar, 2016). While candidates need to realize that negative feedback from supervisors, while frustrating, may build their confidence as academic writers, supervisors need to realize that the language they use to criticize or praise will have an impact on their candidates.…”

Understanding Supervisory Practices: Commonalities and Differences in Ways of Working with Doctoral Writers

“…Discussing the practices of successful supervisors could provide much needed insight into ways in which supervisors might deepen their pedagogical treatment of doctoral writing. Given the importance of writing to the overall success of doctoral students, it is crucial to seek out ways to investigate the treatment of writing in supervisory relationships (Pare, 2011;McCulloch, Kumar, van Schalkwyk, & Wisker, 2016;Stracke & Kumar, 2016). In particular, I wish to go beyond the narrative of disappointment that is so often heard in discussions of supervisory relationships and instead consider the practices of supervisors who do a good job supporting writers.…”