RESEARCH DEGREE EXAMINING - COMMON PRINCIPLES AND DIVERGENT PRACTICES

Year 2001, , 31 - 44, 13.01.2001

S.d. Powell H. Green C. Mccauley M. Shaw

https://doi.org/10.14783/maruoneri.727402

Abstract

This paper reports on discussions that took place at a specialist seminar on research degree examining organised by the UK Council for Graduate Education in July 2000 and at subsequent dissemination workshops at various venues in the UK. The processes and procedures of research degree examination in the UK are debated in terms of variations in practice that exist along vvitlı principles that signal a comnıon identity. The discussion takes account of the effects of developments in, for example, professional doctorates and the PhD by published vvork and on perceptions of the ‘traditional’ examination. Issues addressed include: the composition of PhD examining panels and the roles of individual examiners within those panels; the training and qualification of examiners; the purpose and nature of the oral examination; the tension betvvecn examination of the process of training and that of the ‘finished product’ (which the thesis may be seen to represent). The paper argues for the need for more transparency about examination processes, for challenge to coramon assumptions and for a refocusing on research degree examination as a process of assessment.

Keywords

RESEARCH, RESEARCH DEGREE, RESEARCH DEGREE EXAMINING

References

• CVCP (1993) Handbook for Extemal Examiners in Higher Education Sheffield: UK Universities Staff Development Unit.
• Hartley, J. and Jory, S. (in press) Lifting the veil on the viva: the experiences of psychology PhD candidates in the UK. Paper submitted for publication (copies ffom the authors - Keele University).
• Hoddell, S. (1999) Professional Doctorates in the UK, unpublished paper (UKCGE)
• Povvell, S.D. (1999) A Svvedish Disputation: Reflections on PhD Examination. UK Council for Graduate Education, Nevvsletter.
• QAA (1999) QAA Code of Practice for the Assurance of Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Education: Postgraduate Research Programmes.
• QAA (2001) The Framevvork for higher education qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland,
• Shaw, M. and Green, H. (1996) Standards in research awards: length, weight or quality? Developing an approach for resolving the dilemma. Innovation & Leaming in Education: The International Journal for the Reflective Practitioner, 2, 3, pp 4-10.
• UCoSDA/BPS (1995) Guidelines for the Assessment of the PhD in Psychology and related Disciplines. Sheffield: Universities’ and Colleges’ Staff Development Agency.