External Examiners for PhD upgrades?!

[TheGodOfSmallThings]

(Namechanged for this, in case it's outing).

Is this a new thing? I've just been asked to act in this capacity for a first-year PhD upgrade at a university at the other end of the country from me. I'm horrified that this is yet another thing for us to add to our already brutal workloads, and think that the institution must have taken leave of its senses. As usual, the pay, in no way reflects the time it will take to read the thing, plus the significant travel time (11 hours on a train). I really want to say no, as I think we need to resist the constant impositions on our good will and work-life balance. But, in reality, the person who has asked me (the supervisor) is someone who I admire, have worked with, and hope to continue to work with (and who is also senior to me). Has anyone heard of this, or got any thoughts about what I should say? I feel that even if I end up accepting for the sake of my relationship with the supervisor, I should signal that I think this is an unacceptable and unsustainable imposition on busy academics. And that the institution should have faith in its own academics to judge whether a student is capable of proceeding to PhD level.

On a related subject, my own department has now asked nine people if they would act as external examiner for our BA programme and has yet to receive an affirmative response. I wonder if good will is starting to be retracted by a lot of academics?

[Enb76]

We use internal assessors for FYR's unless there is a specific reason for using external assessors. In "problem cases" it might be beneficial to both the student and the university to go outside.

I cannot comment on undergraduate degrees.

[TheGodOfSmallThings]

Thanks for that, Enb. Your post did make me wonder if this might be a problem case, but I went back and re-read the email and it seems that this is just a routine procedure at this university. I've been an academic for 15 years and have never come across this before.

[Phphion]

We only use internal examiners for upgrades. They do a mock with two staff and then the real thing with two different staff (plus their supervisors, DGS, etc.). I don't think we have ever used external examiners, but, as Enb76 says, we might consider it if we anticipate problems.

I do think people are being much more careful about what they commit to. Everyone has so much to do.

[Springisallaround]

Never heard of this, also I would not personally want to upgrade a student after just 12 months (or less if they have to send the work in advance) because it's really not enough time to see if there is a problem with the actual writing. It's become the norm to upgrade now in our institution at this stage, but it's really hard to assess a student's originality and writing, you end up assessing lit reviews which are rather pedestrian and plans which sound plausible but you can't see if they really can complete at that stage. I know they are trying to force everyone through by 3 years now, but in some disciplines, such as philosophy, certain social sciences, you need longer to really start creating your original thinking in a field and also to start to turn that into publishable quality writing. Just my opinion, no-one is listening to me anyway!

[TheGodOfSmallThings]

It wouldn’t even be 12 months, it would be less than nine. Which I agree is far too early. I’ve been feeling really cross about this all day. It feels like such an imposition. The external examiner system functions because it’s a sector-wide thing and people have (until now, anyway) felt a sense of citizenship, and known that their own department is reliant on other people doing the same. But this university is asking very busy people to undertake something that is simply not deemed necessary in the rest of the sector. And, then, just offering a token payment that, as usual, amounts to less than minimum wage. Grrrr!

[impostersyndrome]

Nope, never experienced it and we don’t ask it either. I was though asked to provide a written report on a PhD upgrade submission as an external to Cambridge a few years ago. Not sure if that’s still the case. Wasn’t too onerous (though I cannot recall if I got paid. It’s back when I had more goodwill towards being a good citizen).

[MeltingWax]

I had 2 externals on my PhD upgrade in 2006. It was (and still is, as far as I know) standard practice in that department.

[kalidasa]

I would just say no politely because you are overcommitted at the relevant time, and suggest a couple of alternatives. If you have a good relationship with the supervisor already I'd be surprised if turning down one thing like this makes any difference.

[impostersyndrome]

Yes, as kalidasa said. Turning it down shouldn’t be a problem unless they’re completely unreasonable. You could always indicate your availability for the final viva if you feel comfortable in doing so.

[bingoitsadingo]

This was usual practice when I did my PhD (within the last 5 years). I thought it was a waste of time then and still do now.
But there were several universities with closely related research areas in close physical proximity, so it was a 10 minute walk up the road and definitely not a long train journey