Hi all. I am posting almost after a year but I thought I should give an update on my situation. I finally graduated in Feb after almost 8 months of making changes to my thesis. I ended up making same changes almost three times which took almost 6 months due to lethargy on my supervisor's part, and extremely difficult nature of the other examiner. These changes would not take any phd student more than 2-3 weeks to make.

In another development, the other examiner revealed that he was not given any instructions at the viva by the independent chair, and as a result he was under the impression that my supervisor would have the final word on the viva result. He even raised this formally at the end of the viva, but by then it was too late. When I read the report by the independent chair, it clearly stated that the rules had not been explained to the examiners "as I never do that".

At the end of this whole process I was left disillusioned and unhappy. It is only now that I can approach the subject without feeling too depressed or angry. This severely affected my family life over the last year.

Sorry for the long post, but I really can't emphasise more to all who are going to appear for their viva, to not take the selection of examiners lightly. Of course you may not have a say in selecting them, but at least you should make sure that your supervisor has done a proper review of the selected examiners and that they are aware of the research methods and are not known as problem characters. Also, make sure that YOU know the rules of viva and the process that should be followed. I am sure that I was a minority case and this is not meant to scare anyone off.

I'm not sure I agree with you here. Perhaps you misunderstood research method with prior research and body of knowledge?

I don't mean prior research, or other work which possibly even use other research methods. I have a chapter that deals with prior literature, prior research and a thorough analysis of the subject area. We are talking about methods such as quantitative, qualitative, action research etc. The one I used is also an "existing" research method. Even if I had mentioned other methods, I would still have used this particular method. I am not contributing to methods, I am contributing to a particular theory and the research field that I work in. By conducting my research say under "action research" or "quantitative" or "qualitative" etc, my research contributions wouldn't have become more or less significant. It is just that a particular method was considered more appropriate. At the end of the day, it is "means to an end", not the end in itself.

In hindsight, I fully agree that I should have mentioned other methods, but just because a particular method is used does not make the research weaker or stronger. The focus should be on substance. In fact, research rigor is one of the important guidelines of the method that I have used.

There are good days and there are bad days when you're in research. But if your heart's not in it then there is probably no point in continuing. You're not doing it for someone else. PhD is one of the most difficult thing to do if you are not interested. Also, it seems that you don't want an academic or research based career, in which case a PhD won't be that useful anyway (don't know your domain area but mostly the case, unless in some specialist fields or if you want to be a consultant).

Better to take a break, clear your head and think about what YOU really want. Then if you still think that this PhD is not for you then better to just let it go.

Just my 2p worth...

Meaninginlife, incognito, you raise good points. I will keep you posted about my progress. Also, just a small clarification. My papers, citation or other publications did not get a mention at the viva at all. Of course, a list of publication has been provided at the beginning of my thesis as a standard practice. Also, a quick google will reveal citations etc, but I did not mention it during the viva at all, neither the funded pilot, subsequent funding or anything like that.

I am (and was) ready to acknowledge other research methods in my thesis. But the whole point of resubmission is a bit of a "disproportionate punishment", just because they have not been mentioned.

Also, I should clarify that these research method is simply applied by me. Myself or my supervisor haven't contributed to it in any way. They have been used in other fields for quite some time now.

Incognito, having an internal making your life difficult is even more surprising and sad. Most probably a case of ego or jealousy like you mention. Could you not overcome by some internal processes or by having a quiet word? Good luck to you and fingers crossed.

Will I be classed as a home/EU or international student for fees purposes?

The universities or colleges to which you are applying will make this decision individually. If your status is very difficult to resolve, help is available from the UKCISA (UK Council for International Student Affairs) website. If you cannot find an answer online, you can telephone +44 (0)207 107 9922, between 13:00 and 16:00, Monday to Friday.

From UCAS website:

Citing own stuff to get more citations and then bragging about it. He or she is desperate as others are not citing their work enough. This happens in normal course too, as you would naturally cite your own research in future work. But that constitutes half of your citation, it is far too high.

Bewildered, You raise valid points. We also have similar rules. The whole thing (in my case) is about what a phd thesis should contain. It fulfills all requirements, but the structure and content correspond to this newish method. It has been followed before. In fact there are examples I now know on this board who graduated last autumn.

I only have pre-oral from the other examiner. He only raised three points, which were relevant and I am happy to incorporate. He even sent a message post viva outlining his changes which were reasonable and fall within minor changes. i havent yet received pre oral report from other examiner (I've asked), which he had to submit in a week. So lets see what that contains. To me this whole episode is due to the "ignorance" of this particular examiner to this new method, and his lack of appetite to learn new things. Even if he disagrees, he could have familiarized himself with this method. Research I thought was about pushing boundaries and learning /exploring new stuff. Anyway lessons learnt, possibly the hard way. But hopefully not the hardest!

No. That shows desperation.

Yes. I should have perhaps convinced my supervisor to mention other methods. But honestly it wouldn't have made a huge difference. This examiner just wanted to find "things" to object. He should have provided grounds for suggesting those changes too. He hasn't pointed to specific errors or shortcomings so that is also part of my argument,

Meaninginlife, the problem was quite opposite. I used a newer method, where the examiner is a believer of traditional methods. I have criticized them, which I guess didn't sit we'll with him. The supervisor is willing to talk to the examiners and explain to them. Things will eventually sort out. Just that the humiliation and embarrassment will remain, for a short while at least.

Thanks all for your messages. I have received some good advice here, and perhaps it has helped me calm down too.

Meaninginlife, Yes, all citations are positive. It is that paper which uses the research method. The other paper was more conceptual where we started this whole research topic/area. I can argue all I want, I don't know what will happen.

The viva lasted 3 hours. I have no doubt this guy hadn't bothered to read my thesis. But no way to prove it, and even if I do so what.

Incognito, yes, very similar situation. But only difference is I got a resubmission. It is not minor or major which I wouldn't mind, it is a resubmission, with potentially new viva and fees (to add insult to injury).

This is how I felt. It was a public prosecution. The jury had reached the guilty verdict even before the trial started. And no matter how well I defended.

I answered all his questions to the point, and he could not refute a single one. Except the last where he got me cornered was the research method. I answered why I used this method. But as my supervisor forbid me to even mention another method, I couldn't answer that why I didn't consider others. So they decided that my defense is very strong, but have given me exact same changes, the points which I answered already.

Anyway, I could go on and on. What has happened has happened. I will try to find the fastest and best way out now. If it means making those damn corrections so be it.

Sorry, wasn't suggesting I'm conquering the discipline. Still early stage researcher! Just not as sh&&tty as the viva outcome suggested. Had been feeling worthless ever since. I wanted to resign and quit the whole academic world!

Thanks for your advise. Now it is wait and watch for a while!

Thanks folks for your messages. I don't mind blunt messages, I agree, no need to be sentimental and dwell on things too much. The pragmatist in me also tells me to move on, accept what has happened and get the phd finished.

I have full support of my supervisor. He has been apologising ever since the viva (was close to tears at the end of the day himself). He is willing to do all he can, and we are exploring all the options. I have not only his but also the PG director's support but of course academic judgement can't be challenged. I have almost decided that if a solution can't be reached through an internal process, I will just have to bite the bullet and make the changes. The reason behind this is that if I appeal the examiner is also involved. And he's the final authority. I only get one more chance, if he rejects the resubmission - all finished.

Here is something worth reading - http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/features/are-phd-vivas-still-fit-for-purpose/2003341.article

I can't reiterate enough the importance of carefully choosing examiners. Not because your research is weak, but because it is not worth the gamble.

Even bizarre thing is that my research is recognised internationally. We just won funding worth $2m for a 3 year project in Europe, with 12 industrial partners, and are bidding for more. Two of the three papers I published in peer reviewed journals (1.5 or more impact factor) were both top downloaded in the years they were published, one won an award, and together have given me more than 80 citations in last two years. Have just led development of a national guide on the research topic. Not bragging but just saying it was not just run off the mill research.

Again, thanks for your messages, and sorry for the rant. Also, I can't post any more today as there is a 5 message limit.

Thanks for your reply. My supervisor is a full professor. Actually, he is one of the most cited internationally in our area of work. The examiner was not much from our area so I couldn't cite him, nor could I have challenged/supercede his work. Also, he has really low citations. In fact one of his 15 year old paper (most cited) has about 55 citations. My own 3 year old paper has 45 citations.

In a nutshell, he was absolutely the wrong choice, which my supervisor agrees to now. I was so so so nervous as neither of knew him and told my supervisor several times about my reservation but he thought it wouldn't be a problem. Now, other people (including our director of PG studies) in my Uni has told us that this examiner should not have been selected as he is known for harassing students. Any guidance on this issue?

It is of course possible. I worked in a research centre and myself and many others were RA/RFs also doing their PhDs on same or relevant topics. In fact in many of our cases it was actually a requirement.

Hello,

This is my first message. Unfortunately not a very positive message. I just had my viva last week. One of the examiner's was not known to either me or my supervisor, hence a bit of a wild card. True to Murphy's law, he acted like a complete idiot and was very agrressive from the otuset, so much so that the independent chair had to stop him at one point. Anyway, I answered almost all his questions even quoting pages and references in the thesis, he could not refute any of my answers. The second examiner probably spoke 5 sentences in the whole viva (one was a strong disagreement with the fist).

The whole issue boiled down to this guy's complete ignorance about the research method I had followed. My supervisor had forbidden me to even mention other methods. Now, the whole thesis is structured following a particular method. This meant that he had problems with almost all aspects of design, evaluation and contribution to knowledge. The outcome of the viva was a resubmission.

Neither me or my supervisor agree with this outcome. I have received 12 points from the examiners, out of which I agree with possibly 1.5 - that I could respond to. The changes are completely against my research principles and both myself and my supervisor strongly disagree with them.

What are my options? I have spoken with the director of PG studies. They told us that this examiner was a known problem. But I've been told it is hard to challenge academic judgement. It seems that the academic judgement can not even be challenged in a court! So is my only option to bite the bullet, go against my principles and make (or pretend to make) those changes. This will mean I can't graduate in the summer and attend the ceremony, which I was really looking forward to.

Also, want to strongly send a message to all fellow students who will appearing for viva, that choosing an unknown examiner is a risk not worth taking.

Thanks and regards.