Preparing for and Handling the Viva Authoring a PhD and Developing as a Researcher: the Endgame Dr. Sarabajaya Kumar

Today’s Workshop Aims … To give you an overview of the viva process To give you the opportunity and space to think through the process Overall … To de-mystify what may seem like a mysterious process

Agenda 14.30Coffee 14.35Exercise 14.45Preparing for the viva: purpose, process Examiners’ and Examinees’ Panel - Q & A 16.15Summary and reflections

Fears and Needs: Brainstorming Working in your table groups, take 5 minutes to: brainstorm your fears about the viva process and what you would like to get out of this workshop. Write down the group’s ideas on the flipchart.

The PhD Viva: Purpose(s) Checking it’s all your own work Check you fully understand the work and its implications Independent professional examination/voice Examiners use viva to clarify points of uncertainty Candidates can use the viva to seek advice on progressing the research further Rite of passage - acceptance into the ‘Academy’

The PhD Viva: Process Selecting your examiners When? Minimum 6-8 weeks before submission You will be contacted about setting a time, date and place by your supervisor

The PhD Viva: Process (contd.) Examiners each prepare a preliminary report before the viva In the room: 2 examiners, you, possibly your lead supervisor (unless you decide otherwise) Take with you: a copy of your thesis, any preparation notes, something to take notes with

The PhD Viva: Process (contd.) Outcomes –Pass with no corrections/amendments (considered unusual) –Pass with minor corrections/amendments (most common) –Referral (18 months to do major corrections/amendments) –Offered award of MPhil –Fail Examiners will prepare a joint report, which you will see

Recent PhD Exam Outcomes According to Research Degrees Unit, 227 PhDs awarded between 2013 to 2014: –96 PhDs awarded with no amendments –102 PhDs awarded with minor amendments –29 PhDs awarded after major revisions –3 MPhils awarded –0 Fails

The PhD Viva: Preparation Before you submit: examiner selection, produce a good ‘industrial standard’ thesis, ‘rolling synopsis’ After you submit: –Re-read and SUMMARISE (chapters and thesis as a whole) –Mark-up thesis highlights –Make a list of typos/errors – there will be some! –Revise – some of the key works/ideas you made use of –Practice – anticipate likely questions and practice answering them

What will I be asked? Not the Spanish Inquisition!

Common Viva Questions Originality What are the most original parts of the thesis? Which propositions would you say are distinctively your own? How do you think your work takes forward or develops the literature in this field? What are the ‘bottom line’ conclusions of your research? How innovative or distinctive are they?

Common Viva Questions Origins/Topics Can you tell us how you came to choose this topic for your doctorate? Why have you defined the topic in the way you did? What were some of the difficulties you encountered and did they influence how the topic was framed?

Common Viva Questions Methods What are the core methods used in this thesis? Why did you choose this approach? In an ideal world, are there different techniques you’d have liked to use? Data What are the main sources or kinds of evidence? Are they strong enough to sustain the conclusions you draw? How do your findings fit with or contradict the rest of the literature in this field?

Common Viva Questions What next? What are the main implications of your research for the rest of the field?

The Panel The Examiner/Supervisor/Dean’s Perspective Dr. Sunil Kumar – Dean of Graduate Studies and Department for Social Policy The PhD Graduates’ Perspective Dr. Ana Gutierrez-Garza (Anthropology), Dr. Jonathan Roberts (Department of Social Policy) and Dr. Tim Laing (Department of Geography and Environment)

Dealing with Questions Listen … to the question Pause - take your time Talk precisely and move from the general to the specific Use appropriate rhetorical strategies: –First person and the active voice –Speaking in the past tense

Dealing with Criticisms Define-defend (Murray) Viva – Debate/Assume Disagreement and Conflict Defend but not Defensive Define - say what you did … then Defend – say why you did it … Shifts tone and creates space to demonstrate knowledge and process. Examiner: “Why did you not do a more detailed analysis of … ?” Defensive Stance: “I did not do that because …” Define/Defend: “What I did was … my reasons for doing this were … I could have done a more detailed analysis of … by … but I decided not to because …”

Dealing with Criticisms Defence in depth (Dunleavy) –Keep the faith, but respect and accommodate examiners’ criticisms/suggestions –Keep in mind the (limited) scope of a PhD thesis –Talk about making amendments in the context of publication

What Next …? Further reading P. Dunleavy, Authoring a PhD (Basingstoke, 2003) – Chapter 8 R. Murray, How to survive your Viva (Maidenhead, 2003)