1. Merrilyn Goos University of Limerick, Ireland
Thesis examination: Similarities to, and differences from, journal article and conference paper reviewing
Merrilyn Goos
University of Limerick, Ireland

2. Your questions Who has … examined a PhD thesis? (T)
reviewed a journal article? (J)
reviewed a conference paper? (C)
done none of these?
Pair up with “someone like you” and ask each other a question.
Pair up with “someone not like you” and ask each other a question.
Write at least ONE QUESTION and put it in the question box.

3. Some (superficial) comparisons
Dimension
PhD thesis
Conference paper
Journal article
Author’s research experience
Novice
Varies
Manuscript scope
Report of a substantial research project
Up to 300 pages
Small slice of research
8-10 pages
Complemented by oral presentation
Slice of research
20-30 pages
Opportunity for revision?
Yes No
Time needed to complete review/report
3-4 days
1 hour
3-4 hours
Length of report
4-6 pages plus list of corrections
Half page (structured by review criteria)
1-2 pages

4. Some (more interesting) comparisons
Dimension
PhD thesis
Conference paper
Journal article
Decision options
No changes
Minor corrections
Revisions
Revise and resubmit
Do not award degree
Accept or reject
Accept as short communication
Accept
Minor revisions
Major revisions
Reject
Decision purpose & consequences
Award degree and title
Entrée to academia
Attendance and presentation at conference
Contribute to research literature
Tenure and promotion
Author/reviewer relationship
Single blind or non-blinded
Report can be used to decide awards or prizes, or in job applications
Examiners can become job referees and collaborators
Double blind
Double blind or single blind

5. Review criteria for a (MERGA) conference paper
Review criteria are related to the quality of:
Statement of the problem/issue and discussion of its significance
Literature review and theoretical framework
Methodology and data analysis (where appropriate)
Results and discussion
Conclusions and implications

6. Review criteria for a journal article (ESM)
Reviewers are asked to assess the extent to which the study:
makes an original contribution to knowledge in mathematics education;
has clearly stated aims;
offers a critical review of relevant research literature that provides the theoretical basis for the study;
if an empirical study, has a clearly described and well justified design and methodology;
presents a well-founded and cogently argued analysis, with conclusions that follow from the data, literature, and/or argument;
is interesting and accessible to an international audience.

7. Examination criteria for a PhD thesis
Makes an original and significant contribution to knowledge
Demonstrates capacity to undertake independent research
Demonstrates competence in surveying literature
Methodology is appropriate and applied effectively
Satisfactory standard of literary presentation
Potential for publication

8. What do I look for? Coherence: Confidence: Critique:
Does the literature review inform the conceptual and analytical framework? Does the candidate come back to it in the Conclusion to identify the contribution to knowledge?
Are the research questions expressed consistently throughout the thesis?
Does the research design provide evidence to address the research questions?
Are the research questions answered?
Confidence:
Does the candidate demonstrate mastery of the literature and the methodology? Using an authoritative tone but with appropriate restraint in making claims?
Critique:
Is the candidate aware of limitations of the study and what cannot be claimed?

9. Some nuts and bolts
I expect the thesis to pass. And I accept that it was not written just for me.
I commit to my own serious intellectual engagement with the thesis.
I set aside a block of time, preferably 3-4 consecutive days.
Presentation matters!

10. Writing the report
Begin with a summary of the thesis and overall appraisal of its quality, contribution to knowledge etc.
Then present an analysis and critique of each chapter, offering suggestions for publishing from the thesis and identifying passages that must be revised.
Summarise required revisions. List typographical corrections.

11. Your questions