Module 4, Session 2: Research Committee Membership and Examination

[Lilian Omondi]

#3204

This presentation spoke to me at a very personal level. The experiences I went through (both good and bad) as a postgraduate student and what I see students go through now.

One’s role in a research and examination committee should not be taken lightly as it has the power to make or break a young researcher’s spirit. Therefore, in executing our mandate in these committees, it is crucial that we refer to an earlier module of this course that talks about humanising pedagogy. Sometimes what happens is that some academics may feel like the ‘postgraduate club’ should be designate for a chosen few and tend to bring unnecessary power struggles to the examination process.
However, as supervisors it is important to perform ‘due diligence’ like the powerpoint presentation clearly put it so that we don’t end up sending questionable works for examination.

[Theodora]

#3208

These are true. And I Like the objectivity bit. I know sometimes people carry their personal issues with others unto panels and that can impact the kind of feedback they give. It is important to be open-minded and disregard any differences we have with other colleagues and give an objective feedback. Personal issues can be dealt with on a personal level.

[Paul]

#3212

The examination process and the role of the higher degree committees are universal or not unique in our different institutions. The PPT resonates well with the practices in ‘my’ institution.

My observation as a committee member and an examiner, is that, some novices or fresh PhDs are very thorough and often objective on matters examination as much as they can be hard. They are marked early and never get to examine future theses should they ‘fail’ a candidate/thesis. To play safe, clique of the so called ‘senior’ supervisors form cahoots of examiners who will always give favourable feedback/verdict. This compromises the whole process of examination and is an insult to the p/g committee.

[Thando]

#3226

I am part of the postgrad committee in my department which evaluates new applications for MA and PhD, an this role, together with my own university experience has taught me a lot about the level of discourse expected of postgraduates at both levels…it will certainly feed into my supervision.

Examination in my field is by invitation, and I have examined some MAs, not PhDs yet, and this also gives one a good view of the quality of research being conducted at other universities. Examining also forces one to find vocabulary for literacies that one might take for granted in one’s own context.

[Joseph]

#3229

-supervisors are members of examination boards and play crucial roles in supervisory and examination processes
– a member of staff maybe a supervisor for one student but also an examiner for another student.
– The rules and regulations in our university require three examiners to examine any one thesis. At least one comes from the offering department, one from another department but related field while the other is from another university.
– there are procedures for the appointment of examiners
– during oral examination of the candidate, the supervisor is silent. However, he/she can be allowed to talk to clarify issues, but not in the hearing of the candidate.
– the supervisor will only sign the final copy of the thesis after confirming that the candidate has done all suggested corrections
– during graduation a PhD candidate is escorted by the supervisor(s).

[Vera]

#3272

One area that supervisors need to pay keen attention on when preparing their students for the Viva is how to make good & precise power point presentations. I have seen PPT presentations which have been lifted directly from the word documents (thesis) making the presentations too long and monotonous.Candidates often run out of time and then they start panicking probably because they have not presented the most important slides.

Where possible, candidates should do a mock viva presentation before the real viva as this will give them a picture of what to expect.

• This reply was modified 4 years, 4 months ago by Vera.

[Joyce]

#3275

The indicates just about what happens in my institution. As supervisors, we have multiple roles which include examining students’ thesis. However, there is no wait for experience like Chrissie narrates before examining a thesis. Having a PhD means you immediately are supposed to be able to examine.
The problems in Higher Degree Committees quite surprisingly are not unique; choosing an examiner for your student’s thesis is quite new and may be construed as ensuring your student’s thesis is favored – by you picking on someone you probably can manipulate. On the flip side it seems a good idea because we have had cases where a student has had to review a thesis because the examiner did not understand his viewpoint.

[Irene]

#3305

The presentation gave me some insights on how to handle the examination of thesis and the oral defence(viva) thereafter. I have been both a supervisor and examiner of thesis. My experience has been that my work as an examiner has helped me supervise my students better since it has enabled me to know which areas an examiner will look at more critically. So when supervising, I try to think like an examiner as well so that when my student is being examined I won’t have any rude shocks. Of course when my student is being examined I realize that my work as the supervisor is also under scrutiny and I try to do my best in this. I sometimes see students presenting poor quality work which can be attributed to poor supervision and I try always not to disadvantage my students by giving my best in supervision.

[Rendani Mercy Makhwathana]

#3324

With regard to examination at postgraduate level and proposal reviews, there are two committees that assure quality of proposals, namely: School Higher Degrees Committee and the University Higher Degrees Committee. I have never served in any of them. However, I learnt that being a member of such committees requires one to provide support to both the supervisor and students to make sure that the research is fit for its purpose.
In terms of examination, if appointed external examiner, I should check if the thesis falls within my specialisation and also consider time frame.

[Joseph]

#3342

The supervisor is part of the department graduate board that vets the student’s proposal and prepares the examination board that will look at the final thesis. The supervisor is part of board which appoints examiners. in my institution there are three examiners composed of two examiners at least one from the department. The external examiner must have been appointed by the department and approved by senate. The supervisor is important in ensuring a qualified examiner. The preparation of the student for examination is part of the supervisor’s roles. He/she helps the student decipher/clarify examiners’ reports and comments made during oral examination. If need be the supervisor makes clear the student’s work during oral examination where examiners misunderstood the work

[Jane]

#3367

In my experience postgraduate supervision starts from the department where the supervisor is allocated a student depending on the area of expertise. The supervisor guides the student through the proposal writing which is presented and defended at the departmental post graduate committee. The next level is the school post graduate committee which guides the student after assessing the work presented. The supervisor(s) takes the student through thesis writing to completion but cannot examine the thesis as internal examiner. The external examiner is appointed after going through the departmental and school board committees.
The supervisor can belong to other academic committees including normal teaching which can increase the workload of the supervisor. There is however a policy guideline as to the number of students one can supervise at one given time.

[Pauline]

#3391

I have found this section very useful especially in how presents a structure for the role of the supervisor in the examination process. I have found several lessons that enrich the process of this role of a supervisor – especially that of getting the student involved in meeting the requirements of examination.

I am very reluctant to sign a thesis that I feel is not ready. In our context it is considered that once you sign it you are in agreement with the content. Some colleagues have reluctantly signed a thesis for submission because of insistence on the part of the student and other colleagues. Depending on the composition of the board of examiners, this may be addressed, in getting the student to appreciate addressing issues that the supervisor was not able to get him/her to address.

[Alando]

#3444

Experiences on being an examiner of theses, in writing and orally in a viva.

I have found it an interesting responsibility to be an examiner of theses. Doing this often provides me a chance to lean from the students and also to make a contribution to their work. As an examiner, I have had a chance to interact with researches from various topics that have enabled me to expand my understand of the diversity of my discipline. At the same time, this responsibility has also enabled me to contribute to shaping the work of students by pointing out areas that I have always thought need clarification or even improvements.

In spite of the above, I still find it rather disheartening that the oral examination processes are almost viewed by students as a ‘crucifixion’ time – a time when all the work they have done is to be trashed. I find this perception rather unfortunate as it denies the students the chance to just freely discuss their work, confidently share what they have done, and learn from the process.

[Scholastica]

#3459

Yes, Currently I am member of Board of Postgraduate Studies, at the School of Graduate Studies in Maseno University. I am also the Chairman, School of Business and Economics Postgraduate Committee where I chair the School Board issue of postgraduate examination. I have been in several board of examination.

[Tom]

#3509

The procedures described in the Power Point presentation are, in their general outlines, similar to what we have in my university. The differences come in the details. For example, the process that leads to the approval of a proposal has two steps in my university. The candidate first presents the proposal in a departmental seminar that is open to the public. The examination panel is entirely made up of faculty from the department. Once s/he passes this, she presents the now improved proposal in a school seminar that is also open to the public. the examination panel here has members drawn from other disciplines. The principle is the same, really: to improve the student’s work. The supervisor in my university normally does not play a part in the nomination of the examiners. The Head of Department in consultation with the departmental graduate faculty committee (the supervisor, a member of this committee, is excused) together come up with the nominations which form a part of the Board of Examiners for that particular thesis. The proposed board is forwarded to the Dean of School for transmission to the Dean of Graduate Studies – ultimately to the University Senate, which has the authority to approve.

[Author]

Posts