When This Service May Be Helpful

A Committee or Supervisor Feedback Consultation may be appropriate if:

• Your proposal, dissertation, or thesis has been returned with extensive comments

• You are receiving repeated feedback about the same issue

• Different committee members appear to emphasize different concerns

• You are unsure which revisions should take priority

• Comments about alignment, methodology, literature, analysis, or scholarly argument are unclear

• You have already revised your work but continue to receive similar feedback

• The amount of feedback feels difficult to organize into a practical revision plan

This service is especially useful when the challenge is not simply making corrections, but understanding the scholarly or methodological concerns underlying the feedback.

How the Consultation Works

Committee or supervisor comments are considered alongside the relevant sections of your proposal, dissertation, or thesis. The review looks for patterns that may not be apparent when comments are considered individually.

These may include:

• Recurring concerns

• Areas of agreement among reviewers

• Apparently conflicting comments

• Research-alignment problems

• Methodological concerns

• Weaknesses in scholarly reasoning or organization

• Issues requiring substantial revision rather than minor correction

Identifying Priority Issues

Not every comment requires the same level of attention. Feedback can often be organized into broader categories such as:

• Conceptual or theoretical concerns

• Research design and methodology

• Problem, purpose, and research-question alignment

• Literature and scholarly support

• Data collection or analysis

• Organization and presentation

• Clarification of terminology

• Minor editorial revisions

Identifying these broader issues can make it easier to determine which revisions should be addressed first.

Developing a Revision Strategy

Rather than approaching a long list of comments one at a time, related feedback can be organized into a logical sequence of revisions.

Your revision strategy may identify:

• The issues requiring immediate attention

• Comments that should be addressed together

• Dissertation sections that may need coordinated revision

• Questions that warrant clarification from your chair or supervisor

• A practical sequence for completing the work

• Clear next steps before resubmission

The result is a more manageable approach to revision and a clearer understanding of what requires attention.

Examples of Feedback We Can Discuss

Consultation may address comments concerning:

• Research problem and significance

• Purpose statement

• Research questions

• Literature review and research gap

• Theoretical or conceptual framework

• Research alignment

• Qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods design

• Sampling and participants

• Data collection procedures

• Data analysis

• Findings or results

• Discussion and interpretation

• Limitations

• Scholarly writing and organization

• Preparation for resubmission

The specific focus depends on the feedback you have received and the stage of your doctoral research.

What You Provide

To support an effective review, you may be asked to provide:

• Written comments from your chair, supervisor, committee, or examiners

• The relevant dissertation, thesis, or proposal sections

• Your research questions

• A brief methodology summary, when relevant

• University guidelines when they are important to understanding the feedback

• Previous revisions when they help clarify recurring concerns

Only materials necessary for the agreed consultation should be submitted. Please do not provide personally identifiable research-participant information or confidential data unless sharing that information is permitted under your university and research-ethics requirements.

What You Receive

The standard consultation includes:

• Independent review of the agreed materials

• Identification of major concerns and recurring themes

• Prioritized recommendations

• A structured revision plan

• A 60-minute individual consultation

• Suggested questions to raise with your chair or supervisor when clarification may be necessary

You should leave the consultation with a clearer understanding of the feedback, the issues requiring the greatest attention, and a practical plan for moving forward.

An Independent Perspective

Not a Replacement for Your Committee

Your university, dissertation chair, supervisor, and committee remain the final authorities on the requirements and expectations for your doctoral work. This consultation provides an additional scholarly perspective to help you interpret, organize, and respond to their feedback. When comments are ambiguous or appear contradictory, you may be encouraged to seek clarification directly from your chair or supervisor before making substantial changes.

Understand → Prioritize → Plan → Revise

Advising, Not Ghostwriting

EDRC provides scholarly consultation, feedback interpretation, and revision planning. You remain the researcher and author of all submitted work. EDRC does not write dissertation or thesis content for submission, complete assessed academic work, fabricate citations or data, or guarantee that revisions will be accepted. Doctoral procedures and terminology vary among universities in the United States and internationally. Consultation is therefore guided by the requirements and expectations of your own doctoral program.

Need Help Making Sense of Your Feedback?

If you have received extensive or confusing feedback and are uncertain about what to address first, a complimentary 30-minute consultation can help determine whether this service is appropriate for your situation.