Within response scholarship, although there is some literature addressing response in the context of thesis projects, the student perspective is notably absent. This article brings the students’ perspectives into focus as it is collaboratively written by three thesis students and their adviser. Three main findings are presented discussing the relationship between the thesis adviser and student and the feedback provided throughout the process. First, context plays a critical role in the manner in which the relationship is viewed by both the thesis adviser and student, with factors such as age, prior coursework and supervision of the student, the thesis adviser’s knowledge of the topic, IRB protocols, etc. playing an important role in how both the student and adviser perceive the relationship. Second, written and verbal feedback each play crucial roles in the feedback process, with their relationship often being reciprocal as the written feedback plays an agenda-setting role for verbal exchanges. And, lastly, students’ emotional responses to their thesis adviser’s written feedback are often directly related to the labor that the feedback will create rather than the tone or focus of the feedback itself.

In spite of a host of scholarship pertaining to response and the contexts that surround our response practices, few have studied how everyday classroom texts may inform students’ interpretations of teachers’ written feedback on their writing. This article examines the results from case studies of six students across two firstyear composition (FYC) classrooms and explores how these students drew upon three types of contextual factors—assignment descriptions/texts, student-teacher conferences, and grading materials—in order to articulate their interpretations of their teachers’ written feedback. This article investigates the roles each of these contextual factors play in students’ interpretations of their teachers’ written commentary. It also discusses how classroom texts work reciprocally with one another and in conjunction with teachers’ overall pedagogical practices. The article further argues for greater attention to these classroom texts in response scholarship and practice, along with recommending an approach to response that views these contextual factors and written feedback in a more pedagogically integrated fashion. The article concludes by advocating for the development of cohesive narratives about writing across the texts teachers create in their classrooms and the written commentary they provide to students.