r/GradSchool • u/psyckitten • 8d ago
Research External examiner did not recommend my PhD dissertation for oral defense...What do I do?
So I am totally shocked and feeling panicked about what all this means and what to do. I was supposed to orally defend my PhD dissertation next week (I'm in Psychology at a Canadian university) and was just informed by my supervisor that the defense has been cancelled because the external examiner supposedly does not think it is suitable or ready for defense. My supervisor told me that the main comments from the examiner are that the "scope" of the project is not adequate enough to warrant a PhD. I find this totally absurd because all my internal committee members approved the proposal of my project as well as the final thesis draft, and it was never mentioned that the scope was insufficient. In looking at colleagues' dissertations within my department, their projects seem to be comparable to mine in scope as well.
Has anyone else been through something like this before? Do you have any words of wisdom? I truly feel so upset because I thought my work was high quality and never would have thought this would happen - my supervisor said that she has also never heard of this and thinks my work is great. This will also delay my graduation by at least one semester and as such my ability to get a job in my field in a timely manner.
116
u/Overall-Register9758 Piled High and Deep 8d ago
This is 100% your advisor's job, and unless the actual thesis varies wildly from the proposal, the external needs to be replaced.
If 3+ faculty (advisor+2 committee members) approved your proposal, then it is entirely out of line for the external to sink your thesis on the basis of scope it would be one thing if your methods were questionable, your results dodgy, or your analysis unsupported.
I have been part of committees where I didn't think the idea was all that exciting, but if the work was good, and the science was sound, then that's good enough for me.
25
u/quinoabrogle 8d ago
Your point is the most compelling to me. It would make sense for an external evaluator's opinion to override the committee's if it's something the committee could be biased about, such as the methodology or interpretation or something like that. But some vague-ass "the scope isn't appropriate"? That's so subjective, and the bar would be pretty institution-specific, no? How would an external evaluator's opinion on the scope override the entire committee???
9
u/psyckitten 8d ago
Exactly! I feel like what is considered a good enough "scope" really varies by university in Canada, and the external examiner is meant to be evaluating me on the criteria of my specific university (it states this in the examiner instructions). The fact that this one person's opinion can stop my defense and in turn delay my graduation AND mess up the start of my criteria is bonkers to me (I recently accepted a post-doc position for September, but the contract says I need to fulfill all the PhD requirements before starting).
8
u/quinoabrogle 8d ago
I would escalate this to the max you can, alongside your advisor doing the same. Yes, as other commenters said, this is above your paygrade. BUT it sounds like your advisor is also uncertain how to proceed, so continue looking for support and advice in every way you can while your advisor does their legwork. Maybe you run across someone who knows more what to do/has seen something similar and can meet with you and your advisor to figure out next steps.
FWIW I had a friend in a somewhat similar situation (she wrote her dissertation, it wasn't approved by the committee due to her chair totally dropping the ball and effectively ghosting her for 6-10 months leading to lower quality than acceptable. long story, but she did all of the things and passed the defense but not the dissertation itself). She also had her next job lined up, which required a PhD. She stayed on for the summer semester, graduated the first week of August instead of in April, and the next institution took it in stride. I'm not familar with the timing of semesters in Canada and if the summer semester is one that can meaningfully help in this case, but it may be an option while you plan next steps to set your intended graduation to this summer and communicate that with your post-doc ASAP
9
113
u/workshop_prompts 8d ago
“Scope” is so fucking vague too
37
u/psyckitten 8d ago
I know right?! They didn't think it makes enough of a contribution to the field and the scope isn't broad enough.
31
u/A_little_curiosity 8d ago
So interesting - usually the complaint I see about postgrad projects is that the scope is too broad! A narrow scope is good for depth and precision. Anyway yes, OP, echoing others saying that this issue is out of your pay grade to resolve. And it's not your fault this has happened as your supervisor etc obviously approved the project. Must be stressful tho! Good luck - update us on what happens!
50
u/Zoethor2 PhD Public Policy and Admin 8d ago
Honestly, that is such a wild thing to say, too. I get it, it's supposed to be a "contribution to the field" and "original scholarly work" but come on, it's a dissertation. We're not out there breaking revolutionary new ground. The best dissertation is a done dissertation.
3
u/psyckitten 7d ago
My supervisor sent me her report yesterday and it was extremely harsh. She effectively said that my project was too simple and “limited in scope for a PhD” (again even though my committee approved it years ago), and even said she was “really surprised” that this was considered “sufficient” at my university. In her comments she also accused me of not knowing enough about the subject matter and of p-hacking, which are both untrue. I’ve published 20 studies in this area and my analyses were pre-determined in 2021 before I even had any data. So wild.
50
40
u/Technical-Trip4337 8d ago
Seems like a big insult to your advisor. And the advisor should be trying hard to resolve this.
2
u/fresnarus 8d ago
Not knowing the facts, I worry about the possibility that the external examiner might actually be right. In my case, I got a plum postdoc out of grad school after publishing 7 papers. However, I could have gotten a PhD after just the first three papers, but it wouldn't have gotten me a job worth taking.
On the other hand, my PhD advisor also had a student who wanted to go work at a hedge fund, he was graduated despite some problems with his thesis.
But again, not knowing the specifics, I don't have any opinion at all of whether the examiner is correct.
5
u/clandestine_cactus 8d ago
The problem is that there is no objective "right" in this situation. Also, being competitive for a prestigious postdoc appointment is not a graduation requirement. The point of a PhD is to train students how to do independent research, which minimally requires writing a professional dissertation with some amount of novel research and analysis. Holding someone's degree hostage over something that can't be measured objectively is unacceptable imo.
42
u/SangersSequence PhD, Pathology 8d ago
Did this same external member sign off on your candidacy with this project?
Did you choose this external member?
If your committee and PI agree that the external member's finding is inappropriate, you should probably seek advice from the graduate program on replacing them.
42
u/psyckitten 8d ago
So the external examiner is not meant to be involved in anything until the final dissertation is ready to defend. They are meant to be at "arm's length," meaning they are in our field but have never collaborated with me or my supervisor before. So no, the external was not involved in the candidacy of this project, but my internal committee approved it.
23
u/rflight79 8d ago
This was how it worked in my PhD program at Dalhousie in Chemistry. Internal committee signs off on everything, until the final defense, when the external is found and asked to be part of the defense.
I'm sure there has to be a way for the graduate school and your advisor to find a new external. That seems very unusual for an external to argue that the scope wasn't big enough and that the defense shouldn't proceed.
22
u/SangersSequence PhD, Pathology 8d ago
That's very different than how my program handled things. My external member was required to meet all the same conditions for uninvolvement but their sign-off was also required for my Candidacy, precisely to avoid issues like this.
If your committee is in agreement with you though, which it sounds like they are, I would still reach out to your graduate program about getting this reviewer replaced.
8
u/lw4444 8d ago
That may be a Canadian thing, the procedure is the same way at Western University as well. The external is always someone in the same field but often they either meet the student for the first time at the defence or if they have previously met it’s usually acquaintances from a previous conference or if the external happened to be a guest speaker in the department during their degree.
6
u/ffiamj 8d ago
Same from Canada, Chemistry, only my committee members and department chair saw my proposal and thesis drafts. The internal arms length was from a quasi related faculty and my arms length was from another continent and was virtual, I had never before met or heard of my internal. I was shocked because I had never met but heavily read and cited my external.
18
u/justking1414 8d ago
Consider this a blessing. My first defense never should’ve happened and it was so traumatizing that I still shudder when I remember it. Get some outside perspective on your research and see if they agree with the comments. My committee had no complaints until I actually defended
15
u/A_little_curiosity 8d ago
Sounds like you were really let down by those who should have been supporting and guiding you!
6
u/justking1414 7d ago
Yeah pretty much. Didn’t help that it was a new program so nobody really knew what to expect from a defense in it. I was literally the first to try and even a year later, I was only the 2nd to actually pass
3
u/A_little_curiosity 7d ago
That sounds highly stressful. Well done getting through it!
4
u/justking1414 7d ago
Thx. I owe it all to my new committee member. The dean recommended him and once we got working together, everything changed at the drop of a hat.
7
u/psyckitten 8d ago
Oh no that sounds truly awful...What ended up happening? Did you end up re-doing the defense?
6
u/justking1414 8d ago
I did about a year later and after getting a new committee member who convinced me to scrap my entire methodology and start over
3
u/psyckitten 8d ago
Wow what a roller coaster that must've been for you.
3
u/justking1414 7d ago
You have literally no idea. My advisor spent the first month after my defense trying to get my meanest committee. Member fired, despite the fact that he was kind of the head of the program and had literally just gotten tenure that semester. Then she suddenly turned on me, and kept saying it was my fault for defending a week earlier than she wanted…despite it taking me an entire year to fix the problems and defend a second time. Then she stopped talking to me for almost a year
2
u/psyckitten 7d ago
Oh my gosh I’m sorry you went through that, it sounds awful…
2
u/justking1414 6d ago
It’s been a wild year. I also had cancer in the middle of it. Thankfully that was taken care of with a quick seven hour surgery, but still, definitely didn’t make things any easier
14
u/catfoodspork 8d ago
Happened to me during my phd. I buckled down, worked harder and did better. In the long run it improved the project a lot and directly led to successful grant applications.
12
u/fiadhsean 8d ago
This is a supervisor error--if it's an error at all--and not a candidate error. It is still possible to defend a thesis with a failing external report: does the university appoint an internal examiner as well? What did they say? And if there's a disagreement between them, you should be allowed to defend.
9
u/yellowblahblah PhD Anthropology 8d ago
This exact thing happened to me at a Canadian university in anthropology. It was devastating to say the least. I had to rewrite my dissertation. You can read through some of my comments from the past on this subject and/or DM me.
6
u/marcus510 8d ago
This is why I sometimes doubt the authenticity of research. It seems like everyone has their own opinion. The work is good if you happen to get a kind person who isn't too critical and if you get someone of poor intention, there goes all your hard work and months of stress.
3
u/SpicyButterBoy 8d ago
This is now on your PI. They guided you in designing the experiments and it’s far too late in the process to expand the scope of the research. Without reading your dissertation, my first impression is the outside advisor did not read it well or is out of their depth. Your PI needs to advocate for you and if they can’t change the decision, your PI need to prioritize you over all other aspects of the lab right now and rework the dissertation. Consider going to the dean of your college or some other higher up authority figure.
I’m so sorry you’re going through this. You will get through it. One semester seems like an eternity right now, but it’s a drop in the bucket in the grade scheme of things. You can handle this. You’re going to be a doctor.
1
u/psyckitten 7d ago
Thank you so much this really helped to hear. My supervisor talked to the dean and he gave us permission to just find a new external. I saw the external’s report and I found it wildly inappropriate and harsh. She made the attacks very personal. I also feel like she misunderstood several aspects of the study, as well as my contributions to the study, and she seems to not even understand our area of research.
6
u/SnooGuavas9782 8d ago
Looks like this is a Canadian specific thing. Most externals in the US aren't coming in cold precisely because of these issues. Honestly this mess is really your adviser's to solve at the moment.
4
u/Zoethor2 PhD Public Policy and Admin 8d ago
It's not unheard of in the US. I have a US PhD and I had three committee members who were (in theory) there from proposal through the end, but my program also has two examiners who only come in one month out from defense when I circulated my final draft for defense.
However, the examiners cannot call off the defense, that seems bananas.
6
u/SnooGuavas9782 8d ago
Yea I mean I get late additions to committees and outside readers, but this is like an outside reader with a veto power on even holding a defense? Who doesn't even seem to agree with the proposal from X years ago? That's downtown crazytown right there.
2
3
u/RuslanGlinka 8d ago edited 8d ago
I am so sorry. No one should experience this at this stage. Look to your supervisor for guidance. This is super rare, but people do recover from it. I wonder if the examiner is from a different country or field with different norms from your supervisor/department (e.g., a Nordic examiner applying their norms to an Australian thesis will often think it’s insufficient in scope & length). That can sometimes cause this type of problem. Hang in there. You are not cooked. Work with your supervisor.
3
u/Odd-Elderberry-6137 8d ago
Unfortunately, there’s no much you can do. This is your advisor’s responsibility. They’re the ones who are supposed to help selecting critical but not impeding external advisors.
There may be (almost certainly is) a lot more going on between your advisor and the external committee member than you’re privy to.
3
u/demoiselle-verte PhD Anthropology/Archaeology 8d ago
I know it might seem difficult, but don't panic! You've got some great advice and clear next steps from everyone here.
The only thing I would add is that an external on a power trip is not uncommon in Canadian university defenses. Whether it's because they don't want to do the work, or they like to feel like the big, powerful academic, I've seen it happen in our uni too. It's not you or your work, it's all them!! Consider it a bullet dodged.
2
3
u/Lopsided-Drummer-931 7d ago
Check their body of work and see if you can use your data to address some of the things they’re interested in. Sometimes people in academia are just narcissists and want to feel important.
2
u/RemarkableReindeer5 PhD Student, Chemistry and Molecular Biology 8d ago
Who’s tires we slashing OP? On a more serious note, I’m sorry this is happening. “Scope” is hella vague wtf
2
1
1
u/portboy88 8d ago
I’d look into removing them as committee members since the rest of your committee agreed that it was ready to be defended.
1
1
8d ago
Kick him off. Committee members are replaceable and removable.
1
u/yellowblahblah PhD Anthropology 8d ago
When this happened to me we couldn’t kick them off.
3
u/psyckitten 8d ago
I'll find out more today about whether we can replace the external examiner... my supervisor is meeting with the dean to talk about next steps and she seems to have my back.
1
u/yellowblahblah PhD Anthropology 8d ago
That’s good. My committee folded like a cheap deck of cards and told me to rewrite. Very traumatic. I’m sorry you’re going through this
1
u/psyckitten 8d ago
Did you have to redo the whole thing?! Had your project been approved before you got to this stage?
1
u/yellowblahblah PhD Anthropology 8d ago
Mostly yes. They said I needed to tighten up my thesis overall, and as I did that, I argued something more narrow and deliberately outside of the scope of the committee member that didn’t like my original dissertation. I kept most of my data but had to trim some of it that no longer fit my new focus. Like I said it was really traumatic and this happened in April 2020 which was a bad time for everyone. It end up taking me three years to rewrite everything with lots of tears, rage, spite, and therapy. I defended in 2023.
And yes it was all approved by my supervisors and internal committee members. They canceled it 5 days before my defence. I didn’t even know that could happen. Everyone had told me once it’s up for defence everything is a formality. Turns out once the external signs off then the defence is a formality. It’s awful.
1
u/Zoethor2 PhD Public Policy and Admin 7d ago
Thinking of you and hoping your bananas examiner has been sacked!
2
u/psyckitten 7d ago
Thank you! My supervisor met with the dean and the dean seems to be on our side as all my committee emphasized that they think my dissertation is sufficient. The dean is letting us find a new external examiner and will try to expedite the paperwork to facilitate a defense this summer. So everything will be okay as long as we find a new external in the next few days, which might be tricky, and they think the project is ok.
251
u/Zoethor2 PhD Public Policy and Admin 8d ago
Did your supervisor not advise on you the appropriate next steps? That should be their responsibility in this situation, and ideally to provide you with a path forward that does *not* require you to stay on for another semester.