Our orders are delivered strictly on time without delay 
Please revise the work as we agreed before. all feedback is in task with feedback… file. I attached the main work done and your response made early this year. Please highlight the revision you will make in different color.
Please revise the annual report as we agreed earlier this year. I attached the feedback, your suggested revision plan and the original work.
Please highlight the revision in different colour and if you need longer timer I am happy to extend till the end of this month.
The feedback:
The feedback is as follows. It is due by June, but my supervisor would like to see regular updates.
What was also mentioned is that in the thesis, we have names of interviewees that we didn’t end up seeing, so we need to remove those. The writer should have the names of everyone I’ve interviewed in previous notes.
Comments from the VIVA:
Please comment on the candidate’s performance at the Upgrade Viva.
Khaled was well prepared for the viva and approached each question with the outmost attention, indicating appreciation for the critical comments made during the meeting. It is also important to highlight that Khaled has submitted for this critical appraisal a ground somewhat wider than a normal APR2 submission, having submitted an important part of the thesis (approximately ¾ of the thesis?).
Please provide any recommendations for the candidate.
NB: in recommending the length of the remediation time, it has been taken into consideration the quantity of the material that needs to be re-worked as well as the possibility that, reflecting on the comments, Khaled may decide to re-think the overall research design in a more substantive way. Equally, it has been taken into account the difficult personal/family circumstances in which Khaled finds himself currently, circumstances which may influence both emotionally as well as practically/logistically the progress with the thesis.
While numerous elements were clarified during the viva, key elements remain still to acquire depth.
To sum-up, ultimately an exceptionally interesting and complex topic, it can stay at the heart of an exceptionally good thesis by addressing four key dimensions:
– Depth of analysis
– Solidity and clarity of methodology
– Solidity and clarity of theoretical framework
– A more textured and nuanced approach to the intersection of law & social change
In the next section, some of the most important aspects are addressed in more detail. Together, they make a rather complex package that will require sustained reflection. I am, however confident that Khaled can do this, accompanied by his supervisory team. Should he feel the need to, Khaled should also feel free to contact me for further discussion.
Where you are recommending remediation, please provide guidance to the candidate on what needs to be addressed during their period of remediation.
NB: in recommending the length of the remediation time, it has been taken into consideration the quantity of the material that needs to be re-worked as well as the possibility that, reflecting on the comments, Khaled may decide to re-think the overall research design in a more substantive way. Equally, it has been taken into account the difficult personal/family circumstances in which Khaled finds himself currently, circumstances which may influence both emotionally as well as practically/logistically the progress with the thesis.
While numerous elements were clarified during the viva, key elements remain still to acquire depth. Below, some of the most important aspects are addressed. Together, they make a rather complex package that will require sustained reflection. I am, however confident that Khaled can do this, accompanied by his supervisory team. Khaled should also feel free to contact me for further discussion of the feedback, should he need it.
Methodology: The methodology has been developed substantially since APR1. It remains, however, in need of clarity as well as of a more solid foundation. The thesis needs to spell out systematically what methods; for what data; for answering what research questions or addressing what hypothesis; how the collected data would contribute to answering those questions; the whole, articulated on what theoretical framework. The viva revealed still important gaps in this respect.
The text needs to acquire clarity with respect to key methodological parameters: Clarifying and justifying the choice of interviewees/focus group participants/methods of selection; What focus groups? How many FGs?… etc. All these elements should be clear for the reader. In relation to these elements, during the viva several sources of misunderstanding were highlighted. Equally, a fundamental issue was raised: is the qualitative data gathered so far sufficient for such a complex scope as the one addressed in this thesis? And, ultimately, is the methodology – as it stands now – sufficiently developed? (Or, one could equally way, is the research question too wide for such a rather narrow methodology?)
A number of related issues were raised during the viva that should be kept as points of necessary reflection. Why use exclusively qualitative methods of inquiry? Why not consider quantitative data? Also, for a thesis that aims to address a complex issue in need of reform, there is very little mentioning of any comparative element throughout the thesis, or of any drawing on other fields of ‘law and social transformation’. (While an issue of a higher importance in SA rather than other neighbouring countries, the nationalisation of the labour market, is not a phenomena specific only to SA). This, as well as other methodological choices, should be thoroughly justified when outlining and explaining the research design.
In addition, as it stands, the methodology contains a lot of textbook-like material and during the viva this impression was not necessarily addressed. While pertinent, the explanations about the role of various methods should be integrated in a more organic way into the analysis.
Theoretical framework: in need of being developed, with depth and clarity. The viva discussion revealed this as a rather weak point that needs to be addressed. (In the submitted chapters, this part appeared also amalgamated with the methodology. While related, as key elements of the research design, the two are distinctive issues and should be addressed as such for clarity)
Literature Review: The Lit Rev – and overall the provided material – does not seem to necessarily cover systematically the ground. Important sources of scholarly analysis are missing: a 2015 GLMM Report; some relevant documents stemming from the G20, to mention just a few.
Very importantly, a ‘G20 Employment Plan SA’, seems to address similar issues as the ones highlighted by the tentative conclusions of the submitted material, which brings dangerously into question the contribution to the field of the proposed thesis.
On the other hand, there are important parts of the Lit Rev (as well as the rest of the submission) where the candidate draws upon a very limited number of authors, sometimes only one, for pages. This does not quite fit with the standards of critical engagement and analysis that are expected from a PhD thesis and therefore needs to be addressed. (Overall, the entire manuscript [chapters 1-3 & 5-6] is based on just about 70-80 sources, which can be seen as very limited).
The Literature Review chapter is made of very disparate issues; possibly linkable, but not linked. It is not clear why they would appear in the same chapter.
Timetable to submission: as already highlighted in the preliminary report, this needs to be re-submitted in a more appropriate format and with more clarity and detail.
Abstract: it is recommended that the re-submission should also be accompanied by a well-developed outline/abstract of the thesis that should give a developed gist of the thesis as it is seen at that moment in time. As submitted initially, the abstract was far too short and without sufficient ‘attention grabbing’ power and detail.
To sum-up, ultimately an exceptionally interesting and complex topic, it can stay at the heart of an exceptionally good thesis by addressing four key dimensions:
– Depth of analysis
– Solidity and clarity of methodology
– Solidity and clarity of theoretical framework
– A more textured and nuanced approach to the intersection of law & social change
Any other comments following Upgrade Viva
