The focus and substance of formative comment provided by PhD examiners
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4098147 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Allyson Holbrook (0000-0002-3371-4187, University of Newcastle Australia, corresponding author), Sid Bourke (University of Newcastle Australia), Hedy Fairbairn (0000-0002-0402-4144, University of Newcastle Australia), Terence Lovat (0000-0001-6994-2168, University of Newcastle Australia) |
| Year | 2014 |
| Volume | 39 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Pages | 983-1000 |
| Publication date | 2014-07-03 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Studies in Higher Education (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0307-5079 • E-ISSN: 1470-174X |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/03075079.2012.750289 |
| OpenAlex | W2077445428 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 13 |
| References cited | 36 |
In practice and process PhD examination is distinctive, reflecting the high expectations of students whose learning has been directed to their becoming researchers. This article builds on previous research on the examination of Australian theses that revealed that examiners in Science (n = 542) and Education (n = 241) provide a substantial proportion of formative comment in their reports, much of which is constructed in a way that anticipates reflective engagement by the student. Detailed examination of the formative text identified nine categories of comment directed at three collective groupings of weaknesses or flaws related to less favourable recommendation. The flaws are related to ‘fundamentals’, ‘project’ and ‘argument’. There were discipline differences, including significantly more comment in Science, indicating that the candidate should attend further to the data and analysis in their project and the fundamentals of presentation. In Education there was more emphasis on improving argument
Formative assessment · Higher education · Mathematics education · Pedagogy · Political science · Strengths and weaknesses · Evaluation of Teaching Practices · Higher Education Practises and Engagement · Medicine · Psychology · Social Psychology · Student Assessment and Feedback
La estructura discursiva de la defensa doctoral en dos corpus orales
“I found it very special and interesting”
Linguistic diversity and doctoral assessment
Supervisor perspectives on the ‘end-stage’ of the doctoral examination process
Assessing and predicting the quality of research master’s theses
Research Ethics in the Assessment of PhD Theses
Understanding doctoral progress assessment in the arts and humanities
Assessment feedback in examiner reports on master’s dissertations in translation studies
“Commenting on your work is a waste of time only!”
The dissertation examination
What examiners do
What do examiners look for in a PhD thesis? Explicit and implicit criteria used by examiners across disciplines
Doctoral defence formats
The Doctoral Experience
A socio‐cultural theorisation of formative assessment
Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems
Feedback
Theorising the academic viva in higher education
Assess as you go
Challenging formative assessment
Beyond feedback
Examining PhD and research masters theses
English as an additional language (EAL) viva voce
Examiner comment on the literature review in Ph.D. theses
The doctoral viva voce as a cultural practice
Assessment Practice in Fine Art Higher Degrees
You don't want a smart Alec
From First to Second Generation Professional Doctorate
The 'Academic' Qualities of Practice
Examining the examiners
Examining the Doctorate
It's a PhD, not a Nobel Prize
Assessing the mock viva
| Unique citing works | 13 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,08 |
| Citation span | 2014 - 2023 (10) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 12 |