Abstract
Despite some standard thesis examination guidelines having been established by institutions, examination of theses by individual examiners was known in the 1990s and early 2000s to be an irregular and idiosyncratic process that could delay completion of candidature. This chapter reviews research that established this disappointing position about issues in the examination process and what happened a decade after this initial situation. It then proposes some standard procedures to make sound thesis examination procedures for institutions and examiners. These procedures cover many issues that affect the thesis examination process like the definition of a degree, selection of examiners, criteria to evaluate the contribution of the research, and proposals for future policies and practices.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Albertyn, R.M., C.A. Kapp, and B.L. Frick. 2007. Taking the sting out of evaluation: Rating scales for thesis examinations. South African Journal of Higher Education 21 (8): 1207–1221.
American Psychological Association. 2015. Publication manual of the American psychological association. 6th ed. http://www.apastyle.org/manual/index.aspx. Accessed 7 Apr 2015.
Australian Qualifications Framework. 2013. Australian qualifications framework.. http://www.aqf.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/AQF-2nd-Edition-January-2013.pdf. Accessed 18 Apr 2016.
Blass, E., S. Bertone, J. Luca, C. Standing, R. Adams, H. Borland, R. Erwee, A. Jasman, K. Tickle, and Q. Han. 2013. Developing a toolkit and framework to support new postgraduate research supervisors in emerging areas. Sydney: Report to the Office of Teaching and Learning, Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education.
Department of Finance and Administration. 2002. Style manual for authors, editors and printers. 6th ed. Brisbane: Wiley.
Edith Cowan University. 2016. Research assessments – guidelines for examination of PhD theses. https://intranet.ecu.edu.au/data/assets/pdf_file/0010/418726/PhD_exam_guidelines.pdf; http://intranet.ecu.edu.au/research/for-research-students/research-journey/thesis-examination/information-for-examiners and http://intranet.ecu.edu.au/research/for-research-students/research-journey/thesis-examination/appeals. Accessed 9 May 2016.
Holbrook, A., and S. Bourke. 2008. Consistency and inconsistency in PhD thesis examination. Australian Journal of Education 52 (1): 36–48.
Holbrook, A., S. Bourke, H. Fairbairn, and T. Lovat. 2014. The focus and substance of formative comment provided by PhD examiners. Studies in Higher Education 39 (6): 983–1000.
Johnston, S. 1997. Examining the examiners: An analysis of examiners’ reports on doctoral theses. Studies in Higher Education 22 (3): 333–347.
Kiley, M. 2009a. Rethinking the Australian doctoral examination process. Australian Universities Review 51 (2): 32–41.
Kiley, M. 2009b. ‘You don’t want a smart Alec’: Selecting examiners to assess doctoral dissertations. Studies in Higher Education 34 (8): 889–903.
Lawson, A., H. Marsh, and T. Tansley. 2003. Examining the examiners. Australian Universities Review 46 (1): 32–36.
Luca, J., and T. Wolski. 2013. Higher degree research training excellence: A good practice framework. Presentation of Final Report to Council of Deans and Directors of Graduate Students for Office for Learning and Teaching. www.ddogs.edu.au or www.learningandteaching@deewr.gov.au.
Mullins, G., and M. Kiley. 2002. “It’s a PhD, not a Nobel Prize”: How experienced examiners assess research theses. Studies in Higher Education 27 (4): 369–386.
Nelson, H. 1991. The gatekeepers: Examining the examiners. Australian Historical Association Bulletin 68: 12–27.
Nightingale, P. 1992. Initiation into research through writing. In Starting research – Supervision and training, ed. O. Zuber-Skerritt. Brisbane: Tertiary Education Institute, University of Queensland.
Office of Teaching and Learning. 2013. Supervision of higher degree by research students: Supervisor resource book. Canberra: Department of Education. http://researchsupervisiontoolkit.com/page/rst-ebook. Accessed 3 Apr 2016.
Perry, C. 1998. A structured approach for presenting theses. Australasian Marketing Journal 6 (1): 63–85.
Perry, C. 2013. Efficient and effective research. Adelaide: ABE Publications.
Perry, C., and A. Cavaye. 2004. Australian universities’ examination criteria for DBA dissertations. International Journal of Organisational Behaviour 7 (5): 411–421. http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/10282/20040713-0000/www.usq.edu.au/resources/perrycavaye.pdf. Accessed 28 Apr 2016.
Perry, C., J.L. McPhail, and L. Brown. 1998. How are marketing theses examined? Proceedings, Australia and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference (ANZMAC98), University of Otago, Dunedin, Dec 1998.
Phillips, E. 1992. The PhD: Assessing quality at different stages of its development. In Starting research – Supervision and training, 119–136. Brisbane: Tertiary Education Institute, University of Queensland.
Pitkethly, A., and M. Prosser. 1995. Examiner’s comments on the international context of PhD theses. In Research into higher education: Dilemmas, direction and diversions, ed. C. McNaught and K. Beatte, 129–136. Melbourne: Higher Education and Research and Development Society Australasia Victoria.
Starfield, S., B. Paltridge, R. McMurtrie, A. Holbrook, S. Bourke, H. Fairbairn, M. Kiley, and T. Lovat. 2015. Understanding the language of evaluation in examiners’ reports on doctoral theses. Linguistics and Education 31: 130–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2015.06.004.
Tewari, D.D. 2012. Examination of doctoral theses/dissertations: Models practices, and guidelines. African Journal of Business Management 6 (9): 3438–3448. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJBM11.652. http://www.academicjournals.org/AJBM. Accessed 24 Apr 2016.
University of Newcastle. 2016a. Research into the PhD examination. Study of Research training and Impact (SORTI) https://www.newcastle.edu.au/research-and-innovation/centre/sorti/publications/research-into-phd-examination. Accessed 9 May 2016.
University of Newcastle. 2016b. Thesis examination guidelines. http://www.newcastle.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/72470/Thesis-Examination-Guidelines-Nov-2015.pdf. Accessed 11 May 2016.
University of Southern Queensland. 2016. Examination process. http://www.usq.edu.au/research/research-students/current-research-students/examination. And ‘PhD by publication procedure’ http://policy.usq.edu.au/documents/13383PL. Accessed 20 May 2016.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this entry
Cite this entry
Erwee, R., Perry, C. (2018). Examination of Doctoral Theses: Research About the Process and Proposed Procedures. In: Erwee, R., Harmes, M., Harmes, M., Danaher, P. (eds) Postgraduate Education in Higher Education. University Development and Administration. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0468-1_4-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0468-1_4-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-0468-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-0468-1
eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education