https://youtu.be/S7ihcJk2sKY  Your viva, your day Dr Conan Leavey

What led you to choose your topic?

Over 80% vivas start this way! (Trafford, 2003)

Viva Voce “By live voice” Oral examination Word of mouth Thesis defence

First viva

Viva looks different depending where you are! Did you know, in Finland you are awarded a doctoral hat and sword.

Anatomy of a UK Viva (Carter and Whittaker, 2009) Internal and external examiners appointed Thesis is sent to the examiners/ Viva date confirmed Preliminary reports solicited (or not) A pre-viva meeting – running order for questions Viva occurs behind closed doors Post viva meeting / decision making Feedback to candidate and DoS

Viva! What is it good for? No consensus over the role it plays in the PhD examination process (Jackson & Tinkler, 2001) The university The examiners The candidates

The University

The University Viva is compulsory Viva is an important part of assessment process But guidelines and policies vary between universities

The examiners

The examiners Ensures authenticity (31%) Checks candidate’s ability to produce PhD level research (36%) Clarifies areas of weakness (32%) Tests understanding of the broader context (22%) Checks ability to ‘defend’ work (24%) Decides between borderline cases (11%)

But also… Discuss ideas with an expert Guidance on publication Feedback to make thesis better A celebration! A rite of passage!!

The candidates

Candidates Check authenticity Assess knowledge Test understanding Main difference is examiners attribute formative roles (developing, feedback, broadening), candidates summative (checking, testing, assessing)

“There is no such thing as a typical oral examination “There is no such thing as a typical oral examination.” (Cryer, 2000; p240)

Lines of questioning (Trafford, 2003) Opening Consolidation Closing Broad vistas Why did you choose this topic? What did you do? Conceptual framework Evidence base Professional relevance Content Methodology Contribution Critique Publishing Anything else?

On average, vivas in the natural sciences last longer than in the social sciences and humanities. (Tribe and Tunriu, 2016)

Typically Pass (without amendments) Pass (with minor amendments) Pass (with moderate amendments) Resubmission Resubmit for an MPhil Fail

Should you do a mock viva? Practise with supervisors Practise with other students Transfer viva Training workshop Observe a simulation Observe an actual viva Read a ‘mock’ thesis and role play questions Judged helpful by 90% of students (Hartley and Fox, 2004)

The Anti-climax

Even successful candidates… 10% of successful candidates, on the whole, find the experience negative (Wallace, 2003) Examination being insufficiently searching Negative behaviours of some examiners A huge ‘life event’ now over (Hartley and Fox, 2004)

The Competent Researcher A PhD is less about proving originality and more about demonstrating that the student’s thinking about research has moved from naivety to realism. (Silverman, 2005) “I am able to coherently defend the choices that I have made during my studies and to use constructive and logical arguments to support these.” (Edwards, 2014: 11)

The Apprenticeship Model “Doing a PhD has a lot in common with traditional cabinet making. Back in the Past, an apprentice cabinet maker would finish his apprenticeship… by making a cabinet which demonstrated that he had all the skills needed to be a master cabinet maker.” (Rug and Petre, 2004; 4)

Top Tips! Prepare but don’t over prepare Don’t be put off if your examiner has a copy of your thesis filled with post-it notes Difficult questions are a chance to shine – don’t be defensive! Don’t be frightened to say you don’t know something; but say why you don’t know. Don’t be upset if you have corrections – VERY FEW people pass with no amendments A resubmission is NOT a fail! Plan something nice for after your viva – whatever the outcome you will want company and a break.

Thank you for your time…

References Carter, B. & Whittaker, K. (2009) Examining the British PhD viva: Opening new doors or scarring for life, Contemporary Nurse, 32(1-2), pp. 169-178. Chen, S. (2014) Balancing knowing and not-knowing: an exploration of doctoral candidates’ performance of researcher selves in the dissertation defence, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 364-379. Cryer, P. (2000) The Research Student’s Guide to Success, 2nd Ed., Open University Press, Buckingham. Edwards, M. (2014) What does originality in research mean? A student’s perspective, Nurse Researcher, 21, 6, pp. 8-11. Hartley, J. & Fox, C. (2004) Assessing the mock viva: The experiences of British Doctoral Students, Studies in Higher Education, 29:6, pp. 727-738. Jackson, C. & Tinkler, P. (2001) Back to Basics: A consideration of the purposes of the PhD viva, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26:4, pp. 355-366. Poole, B. (2015) Examining the doctoral viva: Perspectives from a sample of academics, London Review of Education, Vol. 13, No. 3. Rugg, G. & Petre, M. (2004) The Unwritten Rules of PhD Research, Maidenhead, Open University. Share, M. (2016) The PhD Viva: A space for academic development, International Journal of Academic Development, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 178-193. Silverman, D. (2005) Doing Qualitative Research, 2nd Ed., Sage, London. Tinkler, p, & Jackson, C. (2002) In the dark? Preparing for the PhD viva, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 86-97. Trafford, V. (2003) Questions in doctoral vivas: Views from the inside, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 114-122. Tribe, R. & Tunriu, A.D. (2016) Preparing for a Doctoral Viva, The Psychology of Education Review, Vol. 40, No. 2, Autumn 2016. Wallace, S. (2003) Figuratively speaking: Six accounts of the PhD viva, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 100-108.