PhD woes......just want a rant to fellow academics who might understand

[TearsforBeers]

Not sure what I'm expecting anyone to say but just feel like i need a safe space to rant......apologies, it's long.

I've been an academic for 7 years but worked at my uni for 18. I was headhunted from another department to teach on a specific course. I was immediately put on a part time PhD and the pressure to complete on time has been pretty intense.

In that 7 years I've progressed quite rapidly. I started out as a lecturer but i'm now a director of education in my faculty. I suspect that this has got some old school academic's backs up but it's never really bothered me as I'm good at my job and have track record which supports my progression. I've earned it.

My PhD experience hasn't been very positive. I've had 7 different supervisors and my last two ( who saw me through submission) have been pretty disinterested at times. However, I submitted on time and was pretty happy with what I'd done.
I had to wait 7 months for a viva which is an issue in itself but there wasn't anything I could do.
I had a mock viva two weeks before with my supervisors and it went really well. Both said they were really confident about the outcome and although we identified some weaknesses in the study we discussed strategies to address these in the actual viva.

Viva day arrived - it didn't start well. We had to move rooms 4 times and my supervisor didn't bother to turn up.
However, I thought i performed well. The external examiners were lovely and although they asked challenging questions there wasn't any suggestions that they didn't like what I'd done, how I'd done it or what I'd found.

My internal examiner was someone from my faculty and he was really, really harsh but i felt i handled myself well.

My verbal feedback was a bit of a disaster. They were complimentary and said I'd found something really interesting but that they wanted me to make a few changes - no new content just a bit of restructuring and strengthening. Nothing that would take too long. However, I didn't realise until I left that they hadn't formally informed me of my outcome ( minor or major amends) but i thought I'd see what my report said as it didn't seem too bad. I was pretty pleased with myself if I'm honest.

Later that day my internal examiner visited my office and proceeded to give me loads of additional feedback on my thesis - basically he didn't like it. Not one of the points he raised were discussed in the actually viva itself. I asked him what my outcome was and he said a full re-write!!!
I've not received my official report yet but I'm absolutely devastated. I genuinely feel blindsided as that outcome does not tally with my experience. However, as my supervisor didn't bother to turn up i have nobody to tell me whether i completely misjudged the situation. I think i've probably got grounds for complaint but it would mean complain abut my own department at at time when there is a lot of shit going on with redundancies. .

Not sure if its relevant but my internal examiner has been an academic for 20 years but this was his first time examining a PhD and he's only doing it because he wants to get promoted to professor and you need yo have a certain number of examinations competed to be able to do that. I'm more senior than him but 20 years younger. It makes for an odd dynamic.

Well done if you got to the end!

Sounds like a total clusterfuck, through no fault of yours, OP. I agree, chase the report, documenting its inexcusable lateness, and take it from there.

The irony is, I actually really enjoyed the viva itself. My two externals were lovely and although it was challenging it was really nice to talk about what I'd found with two people who had heavily influenced what i'd chosen to research.
One of the externals even said that people will be citing my work for years to come and you'll become famous (in academic terms obviously!😂😂)

Not sure how that translates as a re-write!! Unless I completely misjudged the situation.

I'm going to be pragmatic though and remember the goal is the doctorate and this is merely a hiccup

I don’t think the can give you more criticism after the meeting. Only what is said in the viva counts. I once had someone try to add a load of comments to a validation report (I was chair) and I refused them. Definitely appeal.

have you been given a pre-viva report too? In my university, each examiner has to write an independent pre-viva report on the quality of the thesis and it often has an outline of the questions that will be considered in the viva. then afterwards the examiners have to agree a post-viva report and also a list of corrections. The list should only include things that were discussed in the viva.

the internal examiner for this sounds like he doesn't know the rules and is behaving very inappropriately. the independent chair should be able to reign him in.

No pre viva report.
I've received my report which clearly states they are asking for a re-write.

I feel the report does include things that were not discussed as part of the viva. I just need to decide what to do and what (if any) benefits there would be to appealing the outcome.

Ask for a meeting with the chair and discuss the report say you feel items were not raised in the viva. Make sure you have a list of things you feel were not in the viva. If the chair won't deal with it then ask for the next level to be involved.

And by viva I mean the part where they asked questions and you were able to answer. That doesn't include the bit where they call you back in and tell you their thoughts - they can't raise anything at that bit that you didn't have the opportunity to defend in your viva.

I know this seems hard but that's because you are taking it all on you. Your chair and supervision team should deal with knocking back unreasonable demands from the examiners.

I'm so sorry OP, the Independent Chair should have documented the 4 moves of room for starters as highly disruptive.

The Internal should not be driving the viva outcome with two externals and should definitely not be giving you further unsolicited feedback or pushing to include anything not included in the viva.

I think these should be recorded these days, and the Independent Chair should not have signed this off, the internal is very unprofessional.

I am not sure what a complaint will achieve, you have grounds for one, for sure though, I would ask for an immediate review of the PhD process from the higher up who deals with research postgrads.

with two externals and a convenor, i really do not understand what your internal examiner is trying to achieve here... solid ground for complaint, i m very sorry you experienced this.

I went through a traumatic viva experience in 2022 and was came out with revise and resubmit. I put in a subject access request for the transcript of the viva any for the pre-examiners’ reports that were prepared ahead of the exam. I also put in a FOI ask for PhD viva success rates in the department.

Happy to connect privately via message regarding the complaints route.

this whole department sounds a bit chaotic. How can someone be an academic for 20 years and not have done a viva? How does the chair not know what to do? Has there not been any training or instruction in the role of an internal?

I am surprised the poster above could get a transcript as I wouldn’t have thought most vivas are recorded. But you could certainly ask for the pre viva report

i am also surprised in both cases about the internals having these outsize roles. Their role imo is not to drag the viva down if the externals like it. Especially if there are two externals.

My viva was recorded. Not sure why or whether this is commonplace. Similar to the poster, one of my examiners, the original external who was asked, has never examined a PhD. They’re a professor in an overseas university. I only found out the day I submitted my thesis and was asked to propose names for a third external, we couldn’t uninvite the originate one asked. The whole thing was a shambles.

similar to OP my chair was not great. There were lots of power dynamics in the room. The internal seemed to run the thing.

Thank you everyone for your support.
There is no recording or transcript and as my supervisor didn't bother turning up it feels like it's my word against theirs. I'm still very undecided about what to do next and can't speak to the Director of Graduate Education until next week.

On reflection my main worries/issues are:

• There are two quite major things they are asking me to do which were not addressed in my viva. The first is they are asking for new research questions. I'm pretty sure I would have remembered if they had raised any significant issues with them as part of the discussion. The second thing they are asking me to do is simply incorrect - hard to describe without outing myself (my subject is very niche!) but they are asking me to categorise a particular aspect of my study as something else entirely. I don't agree with what I am being asked to do and I have asked people who work in the sector I am researching and they are incredulous that it has been suggested. If this had been raised as part of the viva I would have been able to explain why I had categorised it in particular way - however, to anyone who know what they are talking about it shouldn't need explaining. Which is my next issue.....
• My examiners were not experts in my subject. This was particularly clear from the questions I was being asked by my internal. I felt like he just didn't get it.
• My university rejected more suitable examiners on ridiculous grounds which meant I was left with one person who vaguely knows the subject and two people who have absolutely no clue.
• While I know I have grounds for appeal I'm not sure it's worth it. I need confirmation but I'm pretty sure that would mean another viva and given the lack of appropriate examiners I can't be sure I'd get a different outcome.

I might just have to suck it up and get it re-written ........

You don't need to go all the way to appeal say to the chair and your supervisor that you don't think these areas were covered in the viva. This meant you had no opportunity to address them and they are therefore ineligible for changes.

I have no background in research or academia but have been following your thread. From my ignorant stand-point, I hope you find a way to push back.

It just sounds worse and worse.

Hopefully the meeting with the DGE will be productive 🤞🏼

Sending

Sorry you have had such a hard time. You've mentioned in your poster several allies in your department and people who are on your side. This is the point to set up meetings with them and explain the situation and ask for advice. They will know the local politics and local rules much better than us.

But from what you've said here, this should not be a major rewrite. And things not mentioned in the viva should be in the corrections. So if you can fight to get those removed, it would be worth it.

I just thought I'd check in on this thread again as I'm in a slightly better frame of mind and ready to start tackling my amendments.
Thank you all again for your words of support.

I'm still waiting for some clarification on my report as they are asking me to do things that weren't discussed in the viva. I've been advised to only make the amendments I'm happy with at this stage.

My newest bug bear is that my external examiner has been in place throughout the whole PhD and I dug out his report from 2021 where he had seen my research questions and methodology chapter. His feedback was overwhelmingly positive and the questions and chosen topic/focus was listed as a strength...yet now I'm being told i need new RQ and need to change the focus!!

None of it makes sense

I’m glad to hear you’re feeling a bit better. I had a viva a couple of years ago that was awful and I ended up with R&R to the shock (seemingly) of everyone. I was devastated and I cannot emphasise how much it affected me.

I started to work with a new supervisor on my corrections, taking a full year. I submitted again and was a mess ahead of my viva. It was tough - harder than my supervisors or I expected actually. But I passed with minors.

You will get through this period, I promise.

Thank you very much.
I'm surprised at how upset I am about it all - I'm usually very resilient.

Well done for getting though it!

I've been told very clearly that the panel do not want a second viva. In one respect that is good but I'm a a bit worried that i won't have the opportunity to defend my revisions if the whole panel don't like what I've done!

So your external examiner did your transfer viva in 2021 and approved your research questions then. And you have this in writing.

And your feedback, in writing, asks you to do something that demonstrates the examiners didn't have the skills to examine your thesis

I would appeal.

(Well probably I would get cross, burst into tears, be told to calm down, and fail to get enough grants in to renew my funding - because academia is like that, and this is why I still don't have a senior position)

But I think you have two very clear points on which to appeal and you should put them in writing.

Although politically I couldn't tell you what the best approach is as I am crap at that stuff

But reading what you write it is clear that the error is on their side not yours and you have objective evidence to uphold this

Also, if there is no second viva this is major corrections rather than fail and re-examine.

This sounds like dreadful practice and like your internal examiner is behind the issue. Inexperienced examiners are sometimes overly harsh and some people use the viva as an ego trip and I wonder if all that has been amplified by the fact you’re colleagues and he’s been an academic for so long without doing a viva. Something to prove.

I would query the amendments which were not raised in the viva and log the fact the internal came to speak to you privately- that is almost certainly against your regulations.

Really sorry this has happened after what’s clearly been a tough PhD experience.

Respectfully disagree with some of these earlier comments based on my experience.

You can have revise and resubmit with or without a second viva at my institution. Pass with major corrections is a step up from this. I would check the university regulations here.

in the report following my exam there were some areas mentioned not highlighted during the viva. The main areas were mentioned in the viva, though.

As others have said, I would consider appealing and/or making a complaint. There is an academic appeals barrister - trades under Academic Appeals - who specialises in cases like these. I didn’t use him him or indeed make a complaint as I was so emotionally exhausted and focusing my energy on my corrections.

Is there an independent person in your department and beyond your supervisors you could speak with? I did this and they were so helpful.

I thought I'd pop back to the thread to give an update ...

I found out yesterday that I've been awarded my PhD! The relief is immense.

I did the full re-write but pushed back on some of the points they'd made. For extra support I roped in the most senior professor in my department to supervise me through the re-write knowing that my internal would be unlikely to be an arse with him. A bit political of me but needs must! I'm still convinced it was major amends not a rewrite but no point dwelling on that!

Interestingly, as I've worked at the university a very long time in lots of different departments I know most of the staff. The manager of the team who supports PGR students told me that my experience has been one of the worst she's seen in all the time she's done the job. So at least I wasn't imagining it.