Preparing for the Viva Voce Examination at UCC (or elsewhere) College of Business and Law Friday 25 th of March 2011

Viva Voce - What is it? The oral examination part of the award of a Doctoral degree “ A doctoral degree is awarded to suitably qualified candidates who prepare, present and defend in examination a thesis describing original research which is their own work” Commonly used in graduate education for higher level degrees In UCC a presentation to an Exam Board before the final version is submitted Viva voce leads to (1) a decision and (2) recommendations for changes (optional but frequent)

Purposes of the Viva A doctoral degree is awarded to suitably qualified candidates who prepare, present and defend in examination a thesis describing original research which is their own work. Such work will include discovery of new facts or new interpretations of existing knowledge, and thus represent a real advance in the field of study. The thesis should be of publishable standard in the disciplinary literature, in whole or in part. To establish that the research is of doctoral standard, the candidate is examined on their thesis formally in an oral examination (viva voce). [emphasis added]

Alternatives Many European countries have vivas but differ because they rely on: – Adversarial systems (eg: Sweden) – Public examination (eg: Sweden, France) – Thesis is never modified (eg: France) Other systems – – Viva-less system – examiners submit a report which goes to a “local” committee (eg Australia)

“Old rules” – “New rules” UCC has changed its rules fundamentally in October 2008 – Registered before Oct => choice – After Oct => new rules Key differences – role of the supervisor – Old rule: supervisor is one of the examiner = is present, asks questions and signs the report – New rule: no role for supervisor – can be allowed to stay in the room if no objections but no part in decision / may be “invited” to make a statement

Examination Board Examiners have relevant expert competence Internal examiner – typically member of department. Will act as Chair and will conduct process (under new rules) External examiner (two for a UCC staff member) – non NUI Under old rules – supervisor acts as a second internal examiners All are supposed to write reports before the viva voce – these are synthesised in to The Report

Outline of the Process You submit draft soft bound copies They are sent to the examiners They write reports You perform miracles in the viva You get out of the room so they can talk behind your back You are brought back in for feed back The internal examiner gives you a detailed list of changes When they have been checked you submit the final thesis

Decision (don’t panic yet) (1) Award, no corrections needed (the degree is awarded without any changes to the thesis) (2) Award, on condition minor corrections are carried out (3) Award, on condition major corrections are carried out (4) Reject, but permit the submission of a revised thesis, (5) Reject, but allow the award of a lower degree (6) Reject.

Most likely scenario – Award with changes [because your supervisor has done their homework] Changes are a good thing – – Fresh insights in the work – Enhance publishability – Deliver a really nice document that you are happy to show around in future – Showcase of your ability – Happy times

The Viva Itself Little nerves are OK – as long as they don’t affect your performance too much Come prepared – no excuse for not having answer to certain questions – see FAQs Bring pen and paper – take notes on long questions 3 key pieces of advice: LISTEN LISTEN AND LISTEN Take your time to think and answer Never try to pull a fast one – If you don’t know always say it – it is much quicker Don’t get defensive – Evaluate the objections Out of scope / different approach Genuine problem => don’t panic – reflect on it Ask for a break if you feel unwell

But remember the number one thing – The Viva should absolutely be an enjoyable experience – rich and enriching – a true dialogue, a nice challenge

Frequently asked questions MUST HAVE ANSWERS! – Present your work in 3 / 5 minutes (but concentrate on the conclusions) – Explain the topic of the thesis – State the research objective – Outline the linkages between existing literature – research gap and your research questions – Outline the theoretical basis and how it served the thesis – Describe the research protocol in detail – What is the contribution of the work? – What are the key authors underpinning your work? – What alternative theoretical framework / research protocol could have been used? – What are the implications of your work (1) for theory (2) for practice?

FAQs (2) LIKELY: – Explain the sampling strategy – What is your publication plan for this work? – Explain how you did XYZ – What is the proportion of literature extracted elements and emergent elements in your model / framework? – Explain in detail the data analysis methods you used [link data-finding-conclusion] – Explain to what extent your work supports or contradicts existing literature on XYZ – If final chapter not developed enough: where does all this go…

FAQs (3) CAN ALSO HAPPEN: – What your 5 favourite authors in XXX (area of research)? – Summarise your work in layman’s terms – How do you think your work could apply to YYY (a different object of study) – What obstacles did you encounter? – What would you do differently?

Critical elements of performance Clarity of expression Ability to go in and out of the detail of the data – familiarity with date Ability to explain underlying references / theories / methodologies

Links! Where can I find the University Regulations in relation to PhDs? University regulations can be found in the University Calendar on the following weblink x.html. x.html The following is also a link to Guidelines-for-AC-final.pdf Guidelines-for-AC-final.pdf A quick guide to PhD submission for students PhD_Thesis/