My work comes back with comments, and more usually with changes to the writing style, most of which are very good. Sup has made it clear that I decide whether or not to accept the changes. But it feels weird to go through and click accept changes to the document. Is this a particularly hands on approach or do other supervisors spend this much time editing your work?
I get lots and lots of comments (some illegible) scribbled in pencil editing little written errors (although not really stylistic ones) but primarily putting big queries beside what I've done! Also, ways to expand and directions to consider, and occasionally a tick to mean: hurrah, a paragraph that makes sense! And then I get told the primary areas in which it can be improved, eg. problems with structure, issues with clarity. It's certainly not changes the way you mean them but tends to be very constructive. I've just had a piece of work (admittedly very much a draft) back that was ripped to shreds, but when we went over it I had to agree with most of what had been said, even the really big criticisms. I'm seeing my second supervisor tomorrow though, so expecting to go through the same experience all over again, which is slightly depressing even though I know it will lead me to produce a good piece of writing at the end!
when i got my lit review back from my supervisor it was basically all red as he had rewritten practically all of it. i didn't feel that most of the changes were actually necessary (v minute changes to writing style so it just didn't sound like 'me' anymore), so to be honest i just ignored the vast majority of it! i only accepted changes where i felt it genuinely made the document flow better, or where he had added in words that sounded better etc. at the end of the day, it is YOUR work and not your supervisors, so you should be free to choose which changes to take on board. at first i found it really disheartening to see my work come back covered in red, but now i find it really helpful in analysing my own work and thinking through which sentence structure works best, which parts sound most 'scientific', etc. i also find it helpful to analyse my supervisor's writing, as it is far from perfect at times (in my opinion anyway!) and i can see where he writes badly/well and incorporate the good elements of his style into my work. i spend a long time going through the corrections he has made and making myself really think about why he thinks it needed improving, rather than just clicking 'accept all' and not reading through it!
I have a completely diff style. When I submit something (which is 5 days before every fortnightly supervision) at supervision I get verbal comments. Now that I am submitting drafts, ie. review (13K) or chapter (12k), she sits me down and goes through her scribbles page by page. I never make notes for I cannot listen and write, but the saving grace is that I remember everything.
I come out and make a table cateorising her comments into theory, method and style, so that I dont forget anything and send it to her. She responds and I tackle those and make version X+1 of the doc and then ot gpes back to her or to wherver it is supposed to go to.
I find this a really useful way and nothing else would work for me.
Masters DegreesSearch For Masters Degrees
An active and supportive community.
Support and advice from your peers.
Your postgraduate questions answered.
Use your experience to help others.
Enter your email address below to get started with your forum account
Enter your username below to login to your account
An email has been sent to your email account along with instructions on how to reset your password. If you do not recieve your email, or have any futher problems accessing your account, then please contact our customer support.
or continue as guest