Whoops! Sorry that was my misunderstanding. I did, but more as a way to explain existing concepts a lot of research has identified. I suppose my work offers the means to identify the processes that result in those concept’s production.

Does that help? I tried to be as painstakingly clear as possible.

So how I phrased it was something like “future research could focus on [x]”. I explain what I do in my work and what concept or idea still has work to be done. Then I go “for example such an analysis could ask [question]” or “analysis could ask [x]”. Doing so would contribute in these ways.

I actually did that with my future work section. I tried to provide potential questions and topics for future analyses to take from my work.

Yeah I guess the exhausted part of my brain is wondering why I have to repeat the justifications for contributions over and over 😂😅

To be honest I’m exhausted and time is a factor (I have to submit next week), so I’m trying to figure out if I have to actually provide justifications for these contributions (and future work). I think mine is organized different to yours: recap of findings, novel contributions, limits, future work

Media studies!

They’ve said “more development” is needed. But when I ask for feedback or a time to chat about this they tell me it would be better for me as a scholar to try to figure this out on my own. So I’m not sure if it’s the ideas themselves, or explaining them better than needs the revising.

And they tell me it would be good for me as a scholar to wrestle these ideas out on my own and figure it out. This is frustrating for me because I can’t diagnose specific issues that need fixing and end up “rewriting the entire chapter”. I hope I’m making sense!

The issue is that the fixes I have been given indicate a higher level problem that the solutions I’ve been given don’t work. I’ve asked my supervisor to sit down with me and talk out the chapter to discover what specifically needs concept development, paragraph editing, (etc) (2/3)

Hi, thanks for your response. The issue is that my supervisor would like to see more development in my chapters. They have told me this means explaining the processes that are going on in more depth to which I have. In addition, they also asked that I edited by paragraph. 1/2

Has this happened to you before, and how do I move past this efficiently? I’m so scared I’ll either be stuck doing this PhD for another 6 years or my drafts will be sent back because they’re “wrong” and not developed enough! Please send advice, I’m so stuck!

#AcademicSky

Thanks Branka!