Deans' Weblog: Dalhousie Graduate Studies

Defending Your Dissertation

The Faculty of Graduate Studies here at Dalhousie University wants to be helpful to students, faculty and staff.  The resource crunch we are dealing with makes extending our helpfulness much more difficult  and it is likely to get a lot worse before it gets any better.  But there are a couple of ways to add value that aren't very expensive. Offering useful advice is one way. Hence the lecture this week.

As someone who has chaired something in the order of 85 PhD defences over the last five years, I've seen a lot of interesting things. My "expertise" is data modelling in a management setting; this does not prepare me well for understanding a PhD presentation in biochemistry, physics, oceanography, and three dozen other domains. What to do when the scientists are have a profound debate about polyubiquitination? 

I took notes. Notes on how effective the oral presentation was.  When the candidate got into trouble. What kind of questions were a problem. What common thoughts were offered during the in camera session. What external examiners had to say publicly and privately about the performance of our students.

You get a lot of notes in the course of 85 defences, enough to provide content for a presentation on "How to Defend Your Dissertation." And a very popular presentation this turned out to be.  There were 52 people in chairs, another 12 seated on other horizontal surfaces, and a further 12 students standing, including a number in the hall. And it was not because Lady Gaga or equivalent showed up to perform either.

We tried something a little different and video recorded the session. We will post this once we get it chopped into small enough piece to actually load, and I will adjust this blog with the URL of the page to access it. In the meantime, I offer a little preview of the content. Everything has to be considered in the context of the expectations of the discipline, whose norms almost always trump anything said below.

What is a good dissertation defence? There are 3 parts:

    Dissertation elements

• contribution to knowledge;
• research as conducted and its outcome;
• overall document quality.

    Presentation elements

• overall understanding of the subject;
• clear evidence the student did the work;
• ability to communicate the core of the work.

    Candidate elements

• appropriate socialization into the tacit norms of the discipline;
• appropriate balance between confidence and modesty

What the institution / supervisor can do to increase the likelihood of success?

• Ensuring the student is ready, really ready.
• Arranging the most appropriate external examiner.
• Conducting an internal defence, with other graduate students as examiners.
• Giving students as many opportunities as possible to present work, internally and externally.
• Helping students publish early and often.
• Building student presentation skills, using a video presentation and one-on-one critiquing.

Advice for students

• Go to a defense, preferably in a related discipline.
• Backup and version control for both the document and the presentation is vital.
• Make sure you know something about the work of the external examiner.
• Know your “so what”?
• Have absolute command of the vocabulary in your dissertation.
• Have command over your (null) hypotheses. 
• Have command over the literature. That means the most recent literature too, not just the seminal article from 1976.
• Have complete command of the data that you collected. 
• Anticipate and prepare for the obvious questions, (since you did the research, you should know what they are).

• Arrive early to arrange the room. Best practice – see the room a couple of days before.
• Dress for a job interview.
• Do not trust the technology – have a Plan B.
• Get the laptop ahead of time, or use your own.
• Load the presentation the day before and make sure it works.
• Do at least one practice session with laptop & projector.
• Turn off the screen saver. The desktop picture. Turn off Skype.
• Bring water.
• Go to the bathroom.
• Bring your own markers for the white board. 
• Edit your work closely.  What does the phrase "edit your work closely" mean? 
• “As you know, I choose one [bibliography] page at random and check every one. I live in hope of finding one that is perfect.”  One examiners unfulfilled dream.
• People who have already published, especially in good ranking journals, almost always have an easier time of it.
• Be clear with symbols, conventions, figures, tables (i.e., having an appropriate legend).
• A word from the Academic Integrity Officer. If the German Defense Minister can’t get away with it, do you feel lucky?
• If you are an ESL person and your maternal tongue has a speaking rate faster than English, speak more slowly.
• Do NOT read the slides.
• Time management - put your watch on the table.
• Be able to defend every assertion whether you do this by…
• Be prepared to defend your methodology, and your analytical framework by …
• If you have statistical analyses, what do the various parameters and tests actually mean?
• Know what you can say and what you can not say based on the evidence, and the methods used.
• Reference comprehensively including testing precedents.  (i.e., precedents for the testing practices you are using).
  Understand the methods of measurement and the units of measurement you refer to in your dissertation and know exactly what they mean. 
• If there are alternative measures, know what they are and what the choices in using one or the other might be.
• You must understand the specifics of your measurement tools.  If you're working in a lab with specific technology you should have some idea of how it works.
• Do not believe any examiner who claims that one of your chapters is simply over his head.
• Beware of simple questions.
• You are not done after the presentation.
• Think for yourself; there is no point in looking into the faces of the examiners for answers. They may not know the answer to the question they are asking.
• Good phrases to remember:

                                    I don’t know.

                                    That’s a good question.

                                    You are right.

This is a very quick rundown of the presentation, without the horror stories of course.  Good luck to all the defenders!

 

Sunny

 

 

The PhD Defense

This is PhD defense season, one of three pressure points in the year during which PhD students work feverishly hard to beat administrative deadlines.  In the summer, they are trying to finish before the beginning of the fall semester so they don't have to pay continuing fees. 

It's an exciting time. And it gives incontrovertible evidence supporting the project management maxim - "if it weren't for the last minute, nothing would get done."  So we've seen a lot of defenses this summer.

Here's the process in our part of the world.  When the student thinks s/he is ready for defense, s/he gets the supervisory committee to sign off. Sometimes they do; sometimes they don't. But it is the student's right to go for defense whether anyone thinks they are ready or not.  Then we find a suitable external examiner who is given three weeks to determine if the student should go for defense.  Most of the time they say yes.

Most of the time.

If it goes forward to defense, then the local staff make the necessary arrangements to bring the person in. We get a written report from the external examiner, which is held by FGS and not shared until the in camera discussion among the examiners.

With all of this preliminary work, most people assume that the defense is pretty pro forma, that it is a done deal.  This is not the case.  In the last two months we have had two committees come to the conclusion that the work, its presentation, and/or its defense was not accepted. In each case the candidate has the opportunity to revise, resubmit, and redefend.

There are a number of lessons from these difficult experiences.  First, and most obvious is not to take anything for granted.  Second, if you are a PhD candidate, you want to prepare by attending a defense preferably in your discipline, attend sessions on the topic of how to defend your dissertation (we offer them as part of the personal and professional development series here at Dalhousie), and practice in front fo a live audience. If you this is not available, read my upcoming non-fiction book imaginatively entitled "How to Defend Your PhD" (just as soon as someone pays me to write it!). 

Last but not least, remember that it ain't over until it's over.

Something to think about for the 14 candidates we will see in the next 5 weeks.

Sunny

Institutional Failures

The Dean and two Associate Deans who are your loyal weekly contributors to this blog have been at this post for almost three years - something in the order of 145 posts. At this point, I simply cannot remember what we've written about and what we haven't. So I apologize if I have offered this rant before. It probably doesn't matter since readers aren't likely to remember either.

One of my responsibilities is to manage the pool of PhD Chair volunteers, people willing to act as the independent master of ceremonies at the dissertation defense required of students in the very last stage of their student work. Needless to say, I get to do a fair number of these defenses myself, around 70 or so since coming to Grad Studies.

It is a fascinating perch from which to view the workings of a modern research-intensive university. The variety of work is spectacular - psychology, molecular biology, chemistry, English, French, Interdisciplinary Studies, political science, etc. Sometimes the topics are riveting, even for someone like me - well outside the discipline.  For example, a couple of months ago we heard a candidate discuss his research on the question of "Deterring the Undeterrable: The Theory and Practice of Coercing Terrorists". Yesterday we had a scholar present and defend her work on resisting reconciliation in post-genocidal Rwanda. Serious. Compelling.

All defenses at this university are open to the public, and members of the audience are permitted to ask questions, assuming the questions are related to the research.  Whether they do (sometimes) or whether they don't (most of the time), I ask every candidate questions on your behalf, since you can't be there and since you obviously have a deep interest in development of young scholars. (You are reading this blog, after all!)

And on your behalf, there are three questions for each candidate. Question 1 "As a married man, at the end of the day I like to share my experiences with my wife. Can you give me 3-5 sentences to summarize your work in a way that I can help her understand what has happened here today?" 

The rationale for this question is simple. Every scholar is going to have ask someone else for financial support. Getting that support will depend how effectively they can communicate with a semi-informed audience.  My estimate is that fewer than 20% of the candidates can do this well. One candidate in mathematics was struck mute by the question, sat in total silence for well over 20 seconds. Among the 70 candidates heard this question, only one had the insight to ask "what might your wife know about this topic already?" A very excellent response, indeed, especially given the topic was bio-science and my wife has a deep background in the general area.

Question 2 is where I try to pose a question specifically directed at the research.  This is a serious challenge when it comes to molecular biology or biochemistry given the depth of my ignorance.

Question 3 - "My estimate of the direct cost of the dissertation defense this morning is about $1500 so far, given what everyone around the table makes. What did the rest of the research cost?"

Apart from those students who have heard me pose the question before, virtually none of the candidates can provide an answer. Not one of them appears to have ever considered the question.  Not the cost of the lab chemicals. Not the cost of the infrastructure. Not the cost of the technicians. Not the cost of their supervisor's time. Not the opportunity cost of their own time. So it seems we are producing PhD graduates who are generally unable to explain their work to an informed lay audience, and who have a poor understanding of the economics of their work. 

I count this as two significant institutional failures, neither of which I have much capacity to change. Something to think about.

But not on the Victoria Day Weekend - let's all get some rest.   Golf.   Run the Bluenose.   Anticipate summer.

Sunny

Greening the PhD

I have spend a fair amount of this week rethinking our requirement of having external examiners for PhD defences come to the university for the occasion, if at all possible. There are lots of good reasons for this tradition. The student gets to meet and discuss face to face his or her topic with a recognized expert, someone who they may then meet at a conference or in a workshop, someone who may look out for them and help them along the academic path. The other students often get to meet the external at a seminar or talk  given  by the visitor while they are here. In my lab we arrange short show and tell sessions with each student and the visitor and these are generally pretty interesting. The university gets to show off a bit (maybe not so much in March) if this is a first time visit to the university. The faculty members have access to the external and can build on previous relationships or forge new ones over coffee or dinner. The defence itself proceeds better when there is a person to connect with the voice and all of the players are around the table if the discussion gets difficult.

Not surprisingly, there are lots of good reasons to avoid having the external actually arrive in person for each PhD defence and many universities discourage this practice. It is much more difficult to schedule defences in a timely manner when the examiner has to fly in. Students have jobs and postdocs to start, new terms mean more fees, and faculty are busy people. It is obviously easier to find a 3 hour block when everyone is available than to find a 3 hour block inside a 2-3 day block for the external. It is much cheaper; no flights, no hotels, no dinners, and no taxis. And so really, I suppose, to keep to my theme, much greener!

Like so many things, however, we are looking at how we can get some of the benefits of the on sight external while we lower the complication and the cost, a compromise if you like. So first we are in the process of relaxing our requirement that externals come if at all possible. We still want them to come but not will not demand it in that "if at all possible" way. OK that saves jet fuel and taxi gas but what about the quality of the defence experience. Not much we can do about the overall experience of meeting a famous academic but surely we can do better than a voice! Seems simple enough, video conferencing is everywhere. Alas, not simple and not everywhere! So Stephanie (thesis defence guru) and I set out to put together a "defence in a box" with three levels of service. Gold service gets 2 way video and audio connection; Silver service gets audio and one way video (to the external); and Bronze (maybe Pewter) gets good old teleconferencing. We are not anywhere near ready to provide full 2 way video conferencing with a quality high enough for a PhD defence from anywhere to here with an "on" switch. So we will start with a simpler more robust solution (or sub solutions, if you will), an IP camera (connects directly to the Internet) to get video out to the external, who just goes to a web address to access it, Skype or MSN with web cam if we want to see the external, and teleconference for very reliable high quality voice. Simple, fits in a box, and Stephanie can set it up herself in any room with internet and a phone jack. No fancy software, no remote protocols and it comes with a pretty failsafe Plan B, the telephone!

I'll let you know how it goes as we try it out over the summer.

enjoying the summer, yes even the fog

Carolyn

Defending the Dissertation

One of the best parts of my week is Thursday afternoon when I skip out of the office to attend the Interdisciplinary PhD Seminar series.  It is fabulous to hear about the engaging, creative and interesting research our students are doing.  It is also a chance to have speakers offer different thoughts and ideas about life as an academic in the various cultures that we have on campus.  Occasionally we get to do something practical, and yesterday I gave a presentation on How to  Present and Defend Your Dissertation.

It was an overflow crowd. This is not so much commentary on the presenter (who also gave a talk on Effective Meeting Management that was not nearly so well attended), as it is commentary on how salient the topic is to students.  The Defence.  "Defence" is a word we associate with "attack".

It is a nerve-wracking moment for the student, but there are stresses for the supervisor, too.  We had a chance to talk about the complex dynamics of this critical three hour session in the long lifetime that is the fate of the graduate student.

There is so much to talk about. I have chaired perhaps 20 such defences in a wide range of disciplines, including molecular biology and neuroanatomy where my ignorance is unbounded. Whatever the topic, I take notes - what works in the presentation; what doesn't.  What the interesting questions are.  Why you should never believe anyone who says that your work is too complicated in places for them to understand.  The importance of a clean document.  Who in the university has the greatest commitment to precision in language (the prize goes to Chemistry, much to my surprise.)

And it was a pleasure to share those thoughts with the smartest group of people I have spoken to in the last 20 years.  Could this job get any better?

Sunny

The fall rush begins...

September is fast approaching and one of the high priority (and high demand) activities in Grad Studies is thesis format reviews.  For students in thesis-based programs who plan walk across the stage to collect their graduate degree in October, getting the thesis through the whole administrative process is the last thing on their minds, both literally and figuratively.  So we are busy looking at graduate theses.  It reminds me of the old saying: "if it weren't for the last minute, nothing would get done."

And what are we looking for, you might ask?  Good question!  As it turns out, there are a set of standards that the academic community has set out, and turned over to  us to apply.  In part, these requirements are on our website at http://www.dalgrad.dal.ca/forms/tdc/#regs, then look for Thesis Submission and Formatting. Some of the rules seem decidedly arbitrary, and some of them seem outright peculiar.  But occasionally students seemed somehow surprised that we apply them.  They are sometimes surprised how closely we look at things, too.

And sometimes we are surprised that they are surprised.

I’ve learned a number of lessons in this process.  First, we could be more helpful to students if we got to them sooner with a description of the requirements, and not just by the website. Nothing replaces a face-to-face discussion with an opportunity to ask questions. Second, we could add value by sharing what we know about “best practices” in manuscript preparation, beyond the technical niceties of margin width, and the like. We understand that most students genuinely want to produce the best product possible, in terms of both the content and the presentation. Third, an understanding about how to make Microsoft Word really work well is highly variable among students (and probably among faculty too!) I suspect someone would do grad students a good service by providing a couple of tutorials about what part of the software is really useful in an academic setting.

So there is no shortage of opportunities to help grad students be more successful.  Grad Studies is in the process of planning its future, so any thoughts you have on this front – do let us know. Contact me directly or contact the student representative on the Core Planning group – Alain Joseph.

And have a great long weekend.  While I am hiking in Grosse Morne, I will be thinking of the grad students using these waning summer days to get over the last hurdle - the thesis format.

Sunny

Another country heard from…

Dr. Watters has asked me to share this space with her, as one of the Deans in the Faculty of Graduate Studies.  As she indicated in her introduction of me last week as the Acting Associate Dean, I am new to this part of the University. It has been a very busy ride in the first 6 weeks on the job.  It’s a good job there are competent and experienced people in this office working very hard to keep me out of trouble!

August is very busy for the Associate Dean, since one part of the job is to chair the sessions in which PhD candidates defend their research to external examiners.  I have a choice -- either chair the defence myself or turn to a panel of volunteers to find someone who is not on holidays, or soaking up the sunshine (when we get it) on a beach or a golf course.

Chairing the defenses is an education of a different kind, beginning with the language of experts.  In one defence, I heard the words translocation, polyubiquitination, immuno-precipitated used in a completely unconscious and apparently correct way. It is going to be very hard for me to work these words into an average cocktail conversation.

One thing is clear to me from these defences: getting a PhD is not the end of an education.  It might be the end of the beginning.  I knew that on my way to defending my own thesis.  And I get reminded of it every time I sit in on one of these presentations.

Sunny