Overview of Phd20sb

Recent Posts

Major corrections as R&R

Update after 6 daunting months I passed and am officially a Doctor!!

Yes my viva and the post viva months were extremely tough , Yes the examiners were biased, Yes my ego was badly hurt during this journey but in the end I passed and this is what matters the most.

Thanks for everyone one who tried to support me in this forum and to those who are struggling, keep fighting and with determination you are going to get there.

Major corrections as R&R

Quote From Em89:
OK, in terms of your literature review, go back through and look at the main studies your highlighted. Create a table of the following: Date conducted, sample used, methodology (study design, recruitment, analysis), limitations identified within journal. Then go through each point and add the strengths and limitations, so for example:
Date: 2010 (limitation, field has moved on a lot since then), sample: Young adults, aged 16-24, 78% female (not representative of males, age should have explored older age groups for more in depth findings), Methodology: cross sectional, purposive sampling, non-parametric mean comparisons (generalizability and reliability issues, risk of type II errors, no a priori power analysis)

then you use this to critically reflect on the study better. Then add your own voice, so 'this study could have been greatly improved by using a more inclusive sample wit equal representation of gender. The methodology makes replication for this study difficult to conduct, however overall this study was the first of it's kind and paved the way for further studies such as XY & Z'

Many literature reviews are very descriptive 'this is what was done and this is what was found and this is what it means' when you a PhD you need to be able to show that you can critically look at research.

In terms of integrating chapters, are they asking you to merge chapters or ensure a greater flow? A thesis should be a like a story (albeit a boring one) with a logical flow. One of the things I struggled with was ensuring that the end of one chapter set the scene for the next chapter, and the start of the next chapter related directly to the ending of the previous chapter. I then triangulated all my research within the concluding chapter and brought it all together. depending on your area of study you can use a theoretical framework to guide this

Thank you Em89 for your time and your reply is soooo helpful. Definitely I will consider all your suggestions

Major corrections as R&R

I mean I am trying to be as practical as possible and I am very flexible and easygoing in general . If I had recieved similar outcomes from fair examiners then I would just do the corrections without even worrying about it.

I am worried from those examiners because I believe that they did not understand or might even have not read my whole thesis. They gave me a hell time during the viva and then send me a video of their discussion ( sterotyping and bias). In the video they said what corrections do we want to give. Instead of whats wrong with the thesis and then decided that I should ( expand the literature and compined the findings with the discussion). When delivering the outcome and the corrections, I expressed that expanding the literature is almost impossible as I had a systematic review and included materials up to 2020. When I recieved the report they changed expand the literature to review it on a more critical voice and then they wrote a long paragraph about how I argued with them at the end of the viva instead of accepting their constructive criticism.
I do not really mind doing all of the corrections but it is very clear they are really biased and unprofessional. In when I consulted the student union which is an independent party in the university they urged me to raise an appeal saying I have a strong case. I am only worried that raising an appeal would create a backlash and I would end up with internal examiner whose similar to this one and I really do not trust anyone in this department

Major corrections as R&R

No they told me congratulations you passed your oral examination with correction up to 12 months and they said that this is a positive thing as it takes the pressure off and that I can easily submit in half of that . But when I read the university regulation it said that they might ask me for a second viva

need to be sorry . On the contrary, I feel it is good to step away from my problem and see how other view it.

I totally do not mind making any corrections that will eventually going to improve my thesis. But from my point of view my literature is critical and hang together and as a non native speaker I am really proud of its level and some of the points they mentioned are already mentioned in the literature but they did not bother to read.

The fact that I have seen the back scenario and how external said of the record this is a “ so what situation “ and was willing to give me minor corrections but then the internal pushed for the r&r.

Also, the fact that their report was brief and they only focused on how inflexible I was made me worry alot that they would be unprofessional and biased in the second submission ( if they are fair then I would be happily doing the corrections and submit but I am 100% sure that they are biased and unfair)

Major corrections as R&R

Thank you Em89
Your reply is so helpful. Unfortunately,
my supervisor has not contacted me since the Viva and I tried to conact her and she never replied but she was never helpful and I have never benefited from her at all as she used to till me that my work is ok without even bothering to read it.
Anyway, thank you for your helpful comments.
I was thinking of appealing and request a new viva and new examiners as I believe I have strong evidence that they were not fair.
Doing the corrections might seem an easier path but I am worried that they will still fail me even if I address their comments and by that time it will be too late to appeal. ( in my uni you have 4 weeks to raise an appeal after the formal descision)

Not really sure what to do but thanks alot for your reply

Major corrections as R&R

Clarification in my university we have minor or Revise and resubmit

Major corrections as R&R

I wrote about my issue several times and it had been three weeks now and I still burst into tears whenever I remember the outcome.

Today I recieved my official report which says ( revise and resubmit)

They told my at the end of the viva that it is major corrections but will be awareded revise and resubmit

In their report they mentioned that I rebutted their constructive feedback while in reality I only responded to their stupid comments and attack. They also mentioned I gave them difficult moments at the end of the examination meeting forgetting to mention that my viva was basically an attack and I am the victim here

Anyway, I am still angry now and I am hoping that I could calm down and don’t do anything reckless ( liking emailing the examiners and telling them that they do not deserve to be in academia)

My question is ( I already emailed thegraduate chair to explore if this nasty internal examiner can be replaced with another examiner)

I still have not mentioned anything about the video that was mistakingly sent to me by the examiners where she laughed loud when I ended the call and I was literally crying.

My questions is : I just want this degree and I really trying to avoid any sort of troubles but after reading their report. I feel literally a victim and I don’t really trust anyway at this department?

Shall I appeal based on the video that I have or shall I do the corrections and see how it goes.

One of the corrections is not really doable as it says” review more critically the literature review” ok I can try and rewrite it again but if he does not want to accept he would still say “ I can not find your voice in the literature “

Please advice what should I do and this thing had significantly affected my mental health and my wellbeing,
Phd is not only tough but also humiliating as you have to endure the attitude of these academics pass

Examiners report

Quote From rewt:
This is off topic but I submitted a journal paper were my supervisor kept suggesting we do some extra analysis before submission. I was adamant not to do it because the method was extremely time consuming and the method itself was dodgy. However one of the reviewers said that it was very important and so I had to do method in order to publish. I still don't think it was relevant but the paper got published and it was worth it in the end. Also, your supervisor and examiner can agree on the same topic without talking with each other.

Thank you so much for your reply and it is extremely helpful
I was avoiding any meeting with the head of phd program because I became really paranoid from her over caring.

I will meet here this week and hopefully they will change some of the stupid corrections

A lawyer with experience in university policy

What I am really worried about is that even after I do the corrections they will still fail me as the internal had some issues with me and the video she was discussing me not my viva or thesis.
One of the comments that she added later suggests that I rewrite the literature review because it is not really clear!! I am convinced that no matter how hard I try she will still simply same not clear,
I am really shocked by this system and how unfair it is

A lawyer with experience in university policy

At first I thought that you are the internal examiner 🤔
I am extremely upset because they were not professional and I cant reveal what did they say,
I said it is undoable because it does not make sense and it is purely subjective so I can rewrite the chapter 100 times and they will still feel that it is not clear enough because they simply do not want me to pass!!

Examiners report

I have written about my issue and my viva before,
In my university usually the examiners would write the viva report and then will send it to the examination unit and then the unit will send the report to the student.
After my viva I contacted the head of phd program in the department.
I literally complained about everything supervisor, examiners and my list of major corrections ,, right now I think it was immature as my supervisor is extremely angry with me and haven’t contacted me since the viva. ( I don’t really care about him as he is the one who chose the internal and refused to change him saying that I am worrying about nothing)
Anyway, the head of the phd program said that they will send me the report before sending it to the research unit as this is faster.
I don’t really know what is the point of this?? Why they want me to see the report first 😏
Also, the report included corrections that were not discussed in the viva.

My question is why are they doing this ? Why are they caring about my opinion of the report? I am just worried that if I said something about the report the examiners will add more corrections ( I feel that they are trying to say be silent or will give you more corrections). Also, I hope that I am not paranoid but I am pretty sure that one of the corrections in the report was passed to the examiner by my supervisor as this point has not been discussed in the viva and is not relevant to my work and it is related to my supervisor work.
The head of the program emailed me several times to discuss the report and claim to check on me.
I have not responded yet because I want the official report before I talk. Also it has been two weeks after the viva and my anger has not dropped at all.

Any insight on what should I do as I literally can not trust anyone in this department,

A lawyer with experience in university policy

I mentioned that the video of my viva outcome was sent mistakenly to me by the internal.

I received my report for major corrections today and the report has an issues that are completely unachievable.
For example they want me to integrate the 3 chapters ( qual, quan and discussion)
They added points that were never discussed in the viva nor when they were delivering the outcome.
Last week, I spoke to the head of the department and she said that they will send me the report before they sent it to the research unit ( things are not official yet).
The internal was the issue here and she is the one who suggested this list. In the video the external said that he has done the work and it is not fair to give me complete rewrite. However, the report suggests a complete rewrite.

Does anyone know a lawyer who can work on my case?
What should I do to gain my rights as this is totally unfair.

Recording of online viva- academic scandal

Please, I need advice from someone with legal background toward academic misconduct.
I had my online viva last week with major unnecessary corrections.

Apperantly, my internal examiner is not tec savy so he mistakenly shared the vidoe where he and the external examiner were discussing my viva outcome.

The video was a scandal and I felt shocked after seeing it . They were mocking me and laughing and then said some mean comments about my country ( could be considered kind of racism)

The external was ok with minor revisions and she suggested that rewriting is not fair to me. However, the internal tried to push the external for major revision.

“Then they started negotiating some comments: let her rewrite the literature, and let her merge her findings of the data and then maybe rewrite the conclusion”

I was enraged by how unprofessional and unfair they were. I spent 3 years of agony and hardwork and then to see them suggesting some comments just to let me get major corrections were extremely unfair.

Then the external alerted the internal that their meeting was recorded and that they said some stuff that should not be recorded then the internal stated do not worry “ I will cut these parts”
My question is :
This video was sent to me by the internal can I use it to raise academic misconduct and refute their corrections.

They suggested a number of amendments and I only agreed with two of them.
Can I use this video against them or shall I just remain passive Do the corrections and move with my life ( however, one of the corrections is not doable)

Please , help