“How to Fail Your Doctorate” and some other strategies for Success in Preparing for Research Thesis Submission 1

Thiru Aravinthan and P. A. Danaher Associate Deans (Research and Research Training) University of Southern Queensland Australia Preparation for research thesis submission workshop, University of Southern Queensland, 23 July

Point of entry 3 There are multiple indicators of and stakeholders in the stories of your successes

A couple of crucial caveats  There are (appropriately) significant disciplinary differences in doctoral study, including in relation to research thesis submissions  Some of the references refer to “PhD” but they are actually referring to “doctorate”  If in doubt, consult your supervisors!  Our goal, as is that of everyone else, is to contribute to supporting your success 4

A timely note of encouragement  centre/sorti/about-us centre/sorti/about-us  E.g., Cantwell, R., Bourke. S., Scevak, J., Holbrook, A., & Budd, J. (2015). Doctoral candidates as learners: A study of individual difference in responses to learning and its management. Studies in Higher Education. published online 01 May 2015 DOI: /  Holbrook, A., Bourke, S., & Fairbairn, H. (2015). Examiner reference to theory in PhD theses. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52(1), DOI: /  Kiley, M. (2015). 'I didn't have a clue what they were talking about': PhD candidates and theory, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52(1), doi: / The Study of Research Training and Impact (SORTI) Centre at the University of Newcastle, Australia

Another timely note of encouragement  Prieto, E., Holbrook, A., & Bourke, S. An analysis of PhD Examiners' Reports in Engineering. European Journal of Engineering Education. doi: /  Holbrook, A., Bourke, S., Fairbairn, H., & Lovat, T. (2014). The focus and substance of formative comment provided by PhD examiners. Studies in Higher Education, 39(6), DOI: /  Holbrook, A., Dally, K., Bourke, S., Fairbairn, H., & Lovat, T. (2014). Reference to "ethics" in PhD examiner reports: Where is it? AARE/NZARE Conference Proceedings, Brisbane, 1-4 December  Bourke, S., & Holbrook A. (2013). Examining PhD and research masters theses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(4), DOI /  Budd, J., Scevak, J. & Cantwell, R. (2010). "I don't want to do a PhD anymore": Speaking the unspeakable in an online discussion forum. Abstract in M. Kiley (Ed.). Quality in Postgraduate Research Conference: Educating Researchers for the 21st Century, Conference Proceedings, April, 2010, Adelaide, SA. p

 “It’s a PhD, not a Nobel Prize: How experienced examiners assess research theses” (Mullins & Kiley, 2002)  data/page/65297/Its_a_PhD_not_a_Nobel_Prize.pdf data/page/65297/Its_a_PhD_not_a_Nobel_Prize.pdf  “For students, the most heartening information is that experienced examiners want them to be awarded the PhD and will go to extraordinary lengths to enable this to happen. The other information is that experienced examiners should be sought for the examination process, not avoided, because of their high degree of tolerance” (p. 384)  “‘A PhD is a stepping stone into a research career. All you need to do is to demonstrate your capacity for independent, critical thinking. That’s all you need to do. A PhD is three years of solid work, not a Nobel Prize’ (Maths-Eng/Female/18)” (p. 386) 7 Another timely note of encouragement

“How not to write a PhD Thesis” (Professor Tara Brabazon, 2010)  Dean of Graduate Research and Professor of Cultural Studies Flinders University Australia  ara.brabazon ara.brabazon  age/category/podcasts age/category/podcasts  Brabazon Brabazon 8

1.Submit an incomplete, poorly formatted bibliography. 2.Use phrases such as “some academics” or “all the literature” without mitigating statements or references. 3.Write an abstract without a sentence starting “my original contribution to knowledge is…” “How not to write a PhD Thesis” (Professor Tara Brabazon, 2010)

4.Fill the bibliography with references to blogs, online journalism and textbooks. 5.Use “discourse”, ideology”, “signifier”, “signified”, “interpellation”, “postmodernism”, “structuralism”, “poststructuralism” or “deconstruction” without reading the complete works of Foucault, Althusser, Saussure, Baudrillard or Derrida. “How not to write a PhD Thesis” (Professor Tara Brabazon, 2010)

6.Assume something you are doing is new because you have not read enough to know that an academic wrote a book on it 20 years ago. 7.Leave spelling mistakes in the script. 8.Make the topic of the thesis too large. 9.Write a short, rushed, basic exegesis. 10.Submit a PhD with a short introduction or conclusion. “How not to write a PhD Thesis” (Professor Tara Brabazon, 2010)

“5 ways to fail your PhD” (Inger Mewburn, 2011) 1.Don’t talk to your supervisor about who you think should examine your thesis. 2.Send your thesis to someone who has never examined a thesis before. 3.Write your introduction first. 4.Write a bad literature review. 5.Don’t let anyone else do your copy editing. 12  “The Thesis Whisperer”  ways-to-fail-your-phd/ ways-to-fail-your-phd/  Director of Research Training,  Australian National University, Australia

Some suggested strategies from Thiru and Patrick  The 3 Cs: clarity, coherence and complexity  Professor Rob Walker’s advice re revisiting the title, the subtitle, the abstract and the keywords  Verb tense: the significance of moving from future to past tense  Be assertively evidence-based about claims about “original and significant contributions to knowledge” vis-à-vis: o theory o methodology o policy o practice o other domains as appropriate 13

 Think about how you are articulating a clear, compelling and credible scholarly voice  Think about what is/is not revealed by the thesis acknowledgments  Use the final thesis chapter as a checklist for what has been achieved and what remains to be done – e.g., for many qualitative theses: o some answers to the research questions o the study’s contributions to [multiple forms of] knowledge o suggestions for further research o the biographically situated researcher o revisited OR a personal note revisited 14 Some suggested strategies from Thiru and Patrick (continued)

 Consider the implications for what and how you write of the varied order in which examiners read theses (e.g., “Most examiners read the abstract, introduction and the conclusion to see what the work is about and then look in the references, so you should write these last – or rather rewrite them at the end. Any questions you raise in the introduction should be answered in the conclusion” (Mewburn, 2011, n.p.)  See the thesis as part of a broader corpus of scholarly work (publications and presentations written during and after graduation)  View the thesis as assembling your ‘best case’ and your ‘strongest evidence’ in support of your clearly articulated and demonstrated argument 15 Some suggested strategies from Thiru and Patrick (continued)

 Include some strategically added references dated 2013, 2014 and 2015  Think about how you will engage with the examiners’ feedback: o appropriately o authentically o sufficiently o wholeheartedly  Look forward to revisiting and reengaging with the thesis at different times and for different purposes in the future  Enjoy the celebrations of your hard work and your well-deserved success 16 Some suggested strategies from Thiru and Patrick (continued)

References  Brabazon, T. (2010, January 28). How not to write a PhD thesis. Times Higher Education. Retrieved from how-not-to-write-a-phd-thesis/ article how-not-to-write-a-phd-thesis/ article  Mewburn, I. (2011, February ways to fail your PhD. Retrieved from ways-to-fail-your-phd/  Mullins, G., & Kiley, M. (2002). “It’s a PhD, not a Nobel Prize”: How experienced examiners assess research theses. Studies in Higher Education, 27(4),

Many thanks for participating!... …and wishing you all multiple successes in your research thesis submissions AND in your post-doctoral careers! 18