Article published In: Postgraduate Writing in a Globalised World
Edited by Emmaline Lear and Elke Stracke
[Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 39:2] 2016
► pp. 105–121
The content feedback practices of Applied Linguistics doctoral supervisors in New Zealand and Australian universities
Published online: 7 February 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.39.2.01bit
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.39.2.01bit
The focus of this article is on the written feedback that supervisors say they often give their second language (L2) doctoral students. Little is known about the focus of this feedback and about what supervisors consider as priorities in the early draft writing of dissertation chapters. Given the potentially different priorities and foci of supervisors in different disciplines and different contexts (Bitchener, Basturkmen, & East, 2010), this article reports the findings of an investigation into the content focus of the written feedback that 30 Applied Linguistics supervisors in New Zealand and Australian universities said they provide on early drafts of dissertation chapters. All supervisors completed a questionnaire and 26 were interviewed. Two broad areas of concern are identified: subject knowledge, coverage and argument; and aspects of the writing that need to be edited in some way. The article closes with recommendations for further research and suggestions for pedagogical application.
References (27)
Allison, D., Cooley, L., Lewkowicz, J., & Nunan, D. (1998). Dissertation writing in action: The development of a dissertation writing support program for ESL graduate research students. English for Specific Purposes, 171, 199–217.
Basturkmen, H., Bitchener, J., & East, M. (2012). Supervisors’ on-script feedback comments on drafts of dissertations: Socialising students into the Academic Discourse Community. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(4), 432–445.
Benesch, S. (2000). Critical English for academic purposes: Theory, politics and practice. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bitchener, J. (2010). Writing an Applied Linguistics thesis or dissertation: A guide to presenting empirical research. Houndsmill, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
. (in press). Creating an effective argument in different academic genres. In J. Bitchener, N. Storch, & R. Wette (Eds.), Teaching writing for academic purposes to multilingual students: Instructional approaches. New York, USA: Routledge.
Bitchener, J., & Basturkmen, H. (2006). Perceptions of the difficulties of postgraduate L2 thesis students writing the discussion section. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 51, 4–18.
Bitchener, J., Basturkmen, H., & East, M. (2010). The focus of supervisor feedback to thesis/dissertation students. International Journal of English Studies, 111, 79–97.
Bitchener, J., Basturkmen, H., East, M., & Meyer, H. (2011). Best practice in supervisor feedback to thesis students. (Research Report). Retrieved from [URL].
Cadman, K. (1997). Thesis writing for international students: A question of identity. English for Specific Purposes, 161, 3–14.
Casanave, C., & Hubbard, P. (1992). The writing assignments and writing problems of doctoral students: Faculty perceptions, pedagogical issues, and needed research. English for Specific Purposes, 111, 33–49.
Casanave, C., & Li, X. (Eds.). (2008). Learning the literacy practices of graduate school: Insiders’ reflections on academic enculturation. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
Cooley, L., & Lewkowicz, J. (1995). The writing needs of graduate students at the University of Hong Kong: A project report. Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching, 181, 121–123.
. (1997). Developing awareness of the rhetorical and linguistic conventions of writing a thesis in English: Addressing the needs of ESL/EFL postgraduate students. In A. Duszak (Ed.), Culture and styles of academic discourse (pp. 113–140). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Cresswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. London: Sage.
Dong, Y. (1998). Non-native graduate students’ thesis/dissertation writing in science: Self reports by students and their advisors from two US institutions. English for Specific Purposes, 171, 369–390.
East, M., Bitchener, J., & Basturkmen, H. (2012). What constitutes effective feedback on postgraduate students’ writing? The students’ perspective. Journal of University Teaching and learning Practice, 9(2), 1–16.
Greene, J. (2001). Mixing social inquiry methodologies. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 91–110). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 251, 156–177.
Kumar, V., & Stracke, E. (2007). An analysis of written feedback on a Ph D thesis. Teaching in Higher Education, 121, 461–470.
O’Connell, F., & Jin, L. (2001). A structural model of literature review: An analysis of Chinese postgraduate students’ writing. Paper presented at
BALEAP conference
, Sheffield Hallum University, Sheffield, UK.
Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (2007). Thesis and dissertation writing in a second language: A handbook for supervisors. New York: Routledge.
Pecorari, D., & Petric, B. (2014). Plagiarism in second language writing. Language Teaching, 471, 269–302.
Polio, C., & Shi, L. (2012). Perceptions and beliefs about textual appropriation and source use in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 211, 95–101.
Cited by (5)
Cited by five other publications
Phyo, Wai Mar, Marianne Nikolov, Ágnes Hódi & Awatif Abid Al-Judaibi,
Afifi, Nur
2023. Identifying a pedagogical genre of literature review. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 46:3 ► pp. 339 ff.
Arias Velásquez, Ricardo Manuel
Mao, Zhicheng & Longxing Li
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.