Beyond red ink: how better feedback can transform doctoral supervision

Supervisors can protect rigour and student well-being by turning feedback from a list of corrections into a structured conversation about progress and judgement. In this article, I draw on my experience as a doctoral supervisor, feedback from my PhD students and insights from pedagogical research.            

Many of us academics were trained through red ink: dense comments, tracked changes and marginal notes focused on what was wrong. In doctoral supervision, rigorous critique remains essential but feedback that primarily identifies weaknesses can leave students anxious, uncertain and overly dependent on their supervisors. This is an issue because doctoral education is not simply about producing a good thesis; it is about developing confident, independent researchers. To do this, we must shift from feedback as correction to feedback as development. Drawing on my supervisory experience, feedback from my PhD students and pedagogical research, here are seven ways supervisors can make feedback more constructive, interactive, inclusive and future-facing.

1. Ask students what feedback they need

Encourage students to accompany drafts with a brief note outlining what they need from you, identifying key areas for feedback and where your guidance would be most helpful. Knowing these will help students become active participants in feedback and take greater responsibility for using it. This simple step can prevent a common mismatch. A supervisor might provide detailed editing when the student actually needs help with the argument or structure. By asking first, we also encourage students to assess their own work, an important skill for the viva and beyond.

2. Prioritise what matters most

Not every comment deserves equal attention. Yet a missing comma and a major problem with an argument can appear side by side in the margin, leaving students unsure about where to start. Help them distinguish between:

• argument and contribution: is the central idea clear, coherent and original?
• structure and evidence: does the structure support the argument, and is the evidence sufficient?
• style and presentation: are the writing, referencing and formatting clear and consistent?

Show students what matters most for the next draft. For example, by telling them to prioritise structure before sentence-level editing, they can avoid hours of polishing material that may later be removed.

3. Balance critique with recognition

Good feedback should identify weaknesses but it should also show students what is working. Instead of the vague comment, “This needs more analysis”, be specific: “Your themes are clearly presented; now deepen the interpretation by exploring their relationships and implications.” Also, acknowledge progress: “This section is much stronger than the previous version”. This highlights the difference that revision makes.

• Spotlight guide: Research supervision that supports and inspires
• ‘I’ve been a research supervisor for 35 years and I’m still learning’
• Recognise the human side of doctoral study

4. Make major comments actionable

Comments such as “clarify”, “expand” or “be more critical” may seem obvious to experienced academics but can leave students wondering what to do next. For substantial issues, identify the problem, explain why it matters and indicate a possible route forward. For example: “This paragraph lists three studies but does not show how they relate to your research question. Try synthesising them and make a clear link to your work.” The standard stays high but the student has a clear route forward. This is actionable feedback. 

5. Remember the person behind the thesis

Feedback lands on a person, not just a document. A student might be dealing with uncertainty, isolation, financial pressures, family responsibilities, additional learning needs or they may be writing in an additional language. Others might be experienced professionals returning to academic study after a long absence. Supervisors should consider the student’s perspective. A supervisor-supervisee relationship built on empathy and trust creates space for honest dialogue about difficult feedback and expectations. 

This does not mean lowering standards. Ask, “What has been most difficult about this chapter?” and break down complex tasks into manageable steps. Consider how and where you deliver feedback: sometimes a relaxed conversation over coffee can create a more open and constructive space for discussion, where appropriate. Clear, supportive guidance can help students engage with challenging feedback while maintaining high academic expectations.

6. Turn feedback into a conversation 

Feedback does not have to end with a marked-up document. Discuss the comments, invite questions and ask students how they plan to respond. This helps them become responsive to, rather than passive recipients of, feedback. 

7. End with an action plan

After a substantial feedback discussion, agree on three things:

• What will the student do next?
• What can wait?
• When will you review progress?

Ask the student to write the plan as part of the minutes of the supervision. This turns feedback from a document full of corrections into next steps. The goal is not to facilitate a perfect thesis through increasingly detailed comments. It is to make the supervisor progressively less necessary. Good doctoral feedback should help students judge their own work, respond to criticism and decide what to do next.

Good feedback should prioritise what matters, recognise progress, explain what needs to change and give students a clear route forward. It should be inclusive, attentive to the person behind the thesis and foster dialogue. 

Most importantly, it should help students understand what to do next. The aim is not to produce a perfect thesis through increasingly detailed comments but to develop researchers who can question advice, respond thoughtfully to criticism and make informed decisions about their work. The real measure of good supervision is therefore not how much we write on a student’s thesis but how much independent thinking our feedback helps create.

Yakubu Salifu is a lecturer in palliative care at Lancaster University.

If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter.