How much contextual background does a PhD thesis need?

I have a full draft completed, currently standing at 89,000~ words :$. I provide the context and history of the policy I am critiquing in my introduction, together with the specific aspects of the policy my research focuses on. I state my positionality and then off I go in the rest of the thesis with my critique! My supv liked my introduction [amazingly] but wants me to add an a further contextual chapter. He says I pretty much go straight to the consumption of the policy rather than provide a full outline of how it came into being. However, I think that I do do this in my introduction - which he liked. Given that my thesis is already pretty long, I don't think this further context info will make or break my thesis, and really will just make it longer. I think there is more than enough for a reader - not familiar with my region - to be able to grasp what it is that I am critiquing.

What does anybody think?

Its quite hard to say, not knowing a lot about the content. If your sups anything like mine, I'd just send through the intro again, saying you've done it and here it is (even if they've supposedly read it before) - mine wouldn't notice and would stop me having to do loads of unnecessary work :p

I'm literally writing my intro now and finding that it feels like I'm repeating a lot of stuff (although v briefly) and worrying that I'm overdoing it with the 'these are the gaps in the research' stuff, but then that's what I thought about another chapter which my sup thought was excellent, so really not sure.

Maybe give it to someone completely different to read and they can say whether they understood it or felt more info was needed.

======= Date Modified 12 Jun 2011 00:31:03 =======
I'd be tempted to do the same as Sneaks as my supervisor doesn't remember what he reads either when he actually reads stuff so you'll probably get a different answer the next time you give it to give assuming he rereads it!

I think they are just absent minded so as he liked your intro his mind is just working overtime as you stimulated his mind into thinking of loads of other stuff that it relates too. My supervisor decided that my intro was too general and not detailed enough despite the fact it was a chapter itself and quite detailed setting my ideas into context. It essentially reviewed the current literature that related to one part of my research and showed where my ideas came from. I decided not to do anything as I was happy with it and he didn't even tell me this personally as my second supervisor told me!!!! I think you reach a point when you know whether what your supervisor thinks makes sense and you need to go with your gut instincts. If you think it's ok just go with it but you could give it to your second supervisor or somebody else to look to be on the safe side. It's always good to get a second opinion!

If you don't think it wouldn't add anything I wouldn't bother doing it! You don't need this extra work at this point!

Good luck (up)

I think you're going over wordage, and need to find where you can edit, usefully.

Thanks guys, I'm going to add a bit to my intro but not another chapter and yes, I'll just see if he notices!

Agree also re: wordage but we have that conversation and he doesn't see a problem once I keep it under 100,000 :-( -in my uni the limit is 80-100 and he likes em long!

at least if its long there's less doubt about whether it is the amount of work required for a PhD. I've known 3 people pass with no amendments recently and reading their theses (which have lots of mistakes and quite big problems in my opinion) I think this was purely down to the sheer amount of work they did!