Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Feedback processes are crucial in doctoral supervision but require adaptation to meet the changing nature of the doctorate, and increasing impetus to publish during the candidature. This study builds on concepts of authentic feedback and feedback literacy to chart possibilities for the development of feedback socialization in doctoral education. Semi-structured interviews with twenty doctoral supervisors in a faculty of education in Hong Kong aimed to investigate their understandings of feedback, its enactment within the doctoral process, and broader feedback inputs beyond the supervisor. Data were analyzed through reflexive thematic analysis and trustworthiness was enhanced through a member checking focus group with a sub-set of four of the interviewees. The analysis is informed by sociocultural theory with emphasis on co-construction of insights between supervisors and doctoral students. The findings highlight supervisors’ understandings of feedback as comments, interaction and follow-up; and authentic feedback generated from presenting at conferences or submitting to journals. A contribution of the paper lies in bringing to bear conceptual insights from feedback research in undergraduate education to inform feedback in doctoral supervision. We deploy the concept of authentic feedback, practices that resemble those of the relevant workplace, to demonstrate how journal peer review facilitates the socialization of doctoral students into academic publishing norms. Key supervisor roles lie in guiding the enactment of responses to peer review, and supporting the development of resilience. Proposed features of supervisors’ feedback literacy include sociocultural-based dialogue and co-construction, emphasis on the enactment of feedback and working with authentic feedback of different forms.
Carless et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: