A qualitative study of doctoral students’ experiences with written supervisory feedback

Abstract

In doctoral programs, supervisory feedback serves as a central mechanism for academic development, guiding students towards producing a thesis that meets the scholarly standards required for successful examination. However, the process of interpreting and applying this feedback is not straightforward. The language of feedback – tone, clarity, and specificity – plays a significant role in how students engage with supervisors’ comments. For candidates, particularly those navigating complex research projects at the master’s or doctoral level, understanding and responding effectively to feedback are both cognitive and emotional tasks that demand strategic thinking, resilience, and communication skills. This study draws on insights from five doctoral candidates in addressing written supervision feedback during their candidature. Using a qualitative research design, an online questionnaire was administered to evaluate each candidate’s experience. The common themes identified in this study include (1) divergence between feedback expectations and reality, (2) managing anxiety, (3) challenges in addressing feedback, and (4) the structure of written feedback.  Discussions bring to light the common strategies used by the five doctoral candidates in addressing feedback, and factors that motivated them while working on written feedback.