1. The Thesis: What do PhD examiners look for?
Ivan Gee

2. For PhD students But also for examiners PhD Examination
This is a scary beast
For PhD students
But also for examiners
So what does an examiner look for in a thesis?
1 examination as a student – went OK
3 examinations as an external examiner
0 as an internal – in at the deep end, not recommened

3. So what do you think examiners look for?

4. The Thesis
Size is a factor
Not too big
Not too small
Just right

5. Examining’s a big commitment
Studies asked examiners how long they spend on the thesis. How long do you think it takes?

6. Examining’s a big commitment
In spite of heavy workloads, most indicated that they spent the equivalent of three or four days fulltime examining a thesis, often over a period of two to three weeks. (Mullins, 2002)

7. How do examiners approach it?
It’s a lot of time
It’s not financially rewarded
It is respected and expected of academics
But mainly they are interested!
So examiners expect to be interested in the study and stimulated by the thesis
They start the examination process with some enthusiasm
So how do you maintain that?

8. What do they want to see?
Examiners expect to see a thesis where sections are clearly aligned
Aim and objectives
These are explored using appropriate methods
Objectives supported with a critical literature review
Results deliver objectives
Discussion brings your findings and literature together
Conclusions based on your findings

9. Studies on Examiners
Surprising amount of studies have been conducted on what examiners want and what they do e.g:
“Trials of being a PhD examiner” Grabbe
“The concept of originality in the PhD” Clarke
“Examining Examiners” Johnston
“It’s a PhD not a Nobel Prize” Mullins

10. 12 Indicators Study of 353 PhD examiners (Bourke, 2011)
Found 12 common indicators of quality:
Indicators in Order of Importance
1. Analysis/Findings: effective interpretation
2. Approach/methodology: appropriate
3. Analysis/Findings: appropriateness
4. Literature review: accuracy
5. Approach/Methodology: effective application
6. Contribution: originality
7. Presentation: communicative competence
8. Contribution: substantive
9. Contribution: advance knowledge
10. Literature review: use/application
11. Literature review: coverage
12. Presentation: correct expression

12. Contribution to Knowledge
Important but, perhaps surprisingly, not the most important to examiners
But, generally viewed as: “a requirement to pass”
Originality is linked to publishability (Clarke, 2013)
‘should be capable of generating and critically evaluating new knowledge’ (Walker, 2008)
‘Originality is a red herring. The key is publishable’

13. Presentation Clarity These are easy wins:
Not the most important BUT
Examiners need to be able to understand the evidence/concepts easily
By another pubication was this most frequnt irritation to examinners so:
1. get the grammar right
1. get rid of speelling, referencing and numbering errors.
3. Make sure the thesis is logically organised
These are easy wins:
get the examiner on your side

14. Presentation of Thesis
(Johnstone, 1997)
(Johnstone, 1997)
Poor presentation distracts and dampens enthusiasm for the work

15. Characteristics of a poor thesis
lack of coherence;
lack of understanding of the theory;
mixed or confused theoretical and methodological perspectives;
lack of confidence;
researching the wrong problem;
work that is not original;
not being able to explain at the end of the thesis what had actually been argued in the thesis.
How Experienced Examiners Assess Research Theses (Mullins, 2002)

16. A bit more study! It is worth reading about this
As a PhD candidate OR
As a potential examiner
I have a small collection of papers on this that I am happy to share online: here