#AcWriMo: a supervisor’s perspective on work-in-progress writing

The way PGRs and their supervisors work together varies a lot. It varies by discipline, by the nature of the project, and by the preferred working styles of the individuals involved. Here’s a pattern of work that suits me, the field I work in (philosophy of education), and the majority of my PGRs. About a week before a scheduled supervision, the PGR sends me a piece of work-in-progress writing; I read and prepare feedback on the piece; and at the supervision we work through the piece and my feedback together. Perhaps it’s fair to say that this way of working, or some variation on it, is the norm in the arts, humanities and social sciences. Be that as it may, I spend a fair chunk of my time reading work-in-progess writing by PGRs – and I have some thoughts on the genre.

Let me start by saying that reading and discussing these pieces of writing is one of the most interesting and rewarding parts of my job. It is genuinely exciting to watch a PhD project come together, and to work out how, as a supervisor, I can be useful to PGRs on their intellectual journeys. Many of the lines of inquiry I have pursued in my own academic work have been prompted, expanded or deepened by engagement with the writing of my PhD students.

Still, some of these pieces are better than others. So what makes for good work-in-progress writing? The key is to be clear about its purpose. The point of this kind of writing is to try out ideas, arguments or analyses and see if they stand up to scrutiny. From that purpose, several imperatives follow.

First, be adventurous. The caution and circumspection appropriate to the final formulation of your argument is not needed when you’re figuring out its size and shape. At this stage you’re in the sandbox. Experiment. Push boundaries. Take big swings. Your supervisor will tell you soon enough when it’s time to rein in your thinking.

Second, talk straight. Figure out what you want to say and say it – as simply and directly as possible. Jargon and pomposity are your enemies here. The temptation to bury your ideas in an impenetrable forest of long words, technical terms and ugly neologisms can be strong (and a depressing number of professional scholars succumb to it): try to resist it.

Third, finish thoughts. Work-in-progress writing is at its most frustrating when the ideas presented are promising but only half-formed. It’s not enough to gesture in the direction of an argument: you need to actually make it. Otherwise neither you nor your supervisor will be able to check that it holds up.

Fourth, and finally, don’t polish. I’m hesitant to issue this advice because no supervisor wants to wrestle with stream-of-consciouness paragraphs or ungrammatical sentences. Your writing needs to be readable. But turning draft writing into polished prose is incredibly time-consuming and it’s just not necessary at the work-in-progress stage. There’s a real danger, too, of falling in love with your elegantly turned phrases and then being reluctant to abandon the unhelpful ideas they articulate.

So those are my thoughts. But, unless you happen to be supervised by me, you should definitely check that they align with your own supervisor’s expectations of your work-in-progress writing!