final defense for phd

Ph.D. in Operations Research | NC State OR

Ph.D. in Operations Research

Last Updated:  06/21/2024 | All information is accurate and still up-to-date

Outstanding students like you pursue a Ph.D. in Industrial Engineering, ideal for those interested in independent study and research. This program entails advanced coursework and research beyond the master’s degree. Additionally, you must pass a written and oral comprehensive preliminary examination. Moreover, writing a dissertation and successfully defending it in a final oral examination are required. Consequently, the program prepares you comprehensively for advanced research roles. To earn this degree, you must:

• Complete a minimum of 72 credit hours, or 54 credit hours, if you have a master’s degree from another institution.
• Complete your written qualifying exam. An OR faculty committee member, appointed by the OR program director, administers this exam once a year.
• Complete your oral preliminary exam. Your Academic Advisory Committee will give you this exam separately.
• Write and successfully defend your dissertation. Your Academic Advisory Committee conducts this defense for each student separately.

Ph.D. in Operations Research Course Requirements

• You must satisfy the course requirements for the MSOR degree .
• You need a minimum of 72 credit hours to receive a doctoral degree. At least 42 credit hours should be in letter-graded coursework.
• If you received your MS from NC State, you can transfer up to 36 credit hours toward your Ph.D. If you received your MS degree from another university, you may transfer up to 18 credit hours toward your Ph.D.

You are expected to attend the OR 801 Seminar in Operations Research each semester and register for it for two semesters. Your previous registration for OR 601 Seminar in Operations Research as a Master’s student counts as one of the two.

Written Qualifying Examination

The qualifying examination verifies your potential for high-quality, independent research early in your graduate studies.

The OR Ph.D. qualifying exam has two written core exams in Linear Programming and Stochastic Modeling plus one area-specific requirement.

Core Exam I   –  Linear Programming (based on OR 505 course)

Core Exam II  – Applied Stochastic Models in Industrial Engineering (based on OR 760)

Area-Specific Requirement – The student should satisfy one of the area-specific requirements given below

Advanced OR Area

Choose one of the following exams

• Dynamic Programming (based on OR 709 )
• Nonlinear Programming (based on OR 706 ) 
• Network Flows (based on OR 766 )

Mathematics Area

Choose and complete one of these sequences, then take the single exam for that sequence.

• Numerical Analysis ( MA 580  Numerical Analysis I and  MA 780 Numerical Analysis II)
• Applied Matrix Theory ( MA 523  Linear Transformations and Matrix Theory and  MA 723 Theory of Matrices with Applications)
• Analysis ( MA 515  Analysis I and  MA 715 Analysis II)

Industrial and Systems Engineering Area

Choose one of the following ISE SAO/SCL exams:

• Statistical Models for Systems Analytics in Industrial Engineering (based on ISE 537 ) 
• Production Planning, Scheduling and Inventory Control (based on ISE 723 ) 
• Logistics Engineering (based on ISE 754 ) 

Operations and Supply Chain Management Area (Poole College of Management)

Take all BUS 790 doctoral seminar courses offered by operations and supply chain faculty in the academic year before the examination. The exam is a single take-home exam.

Preliminary Examination and Ph.D. Candidacy

After passing the qualifying exam, you will formally organize your Ph.D. Advisory Committee. Then, submit a committee-approved Plan of Graduate Work to the Graduate School. The Advisory Committee will recommend specific courses in your specialization areas and conduct a preliminary oral examination.

You achieve “Ph.D. Candidacy” after passing all recommended courses and the preliminary oral exam. This exam assesses your knowledge of your research subject. Failure to pass may lead to termination from the Ph.D. Program, at the discretion of your Advisory Committee.

Final Oral Defense and Dissertation

Final defense.

You will be awarded the Ph.D. degree when you:

• Pass all required courses for graduation.
• Write a satisfactory Ph.D. dissertation.
• Successfully pass the “Defense” conducted by your Advisory Committee.
• Fulfill all other conditions required by the Graduate School.

To earn your Doctor of Philosophy degree, a final oral examination conducted by your advisory committee is required. You must demonstrate that your work meets the scholarly and originality standards.

Unanimous approval by the advisory committee is required to pass the oral examination. Such approval may be conditioned on satisfactory completion of additional work. Failure of the examination terminates your graduate study unless your advisory committee unanimously recommends re-examination. Only one re-examination is permitted, and at least one semester must elapse before the re-examination is held.

Submission of Dissertation

Upon passing the Ph.D. final oral examination, you must have the dissertation approved by each member of your advisory committee. The dissertation must be submitted to the thesis editor of the Graduate School and must conform to the Graduate School’s Electronic Theses and Dissertation website guidelines.

OR Theses and Dissertations

Request for Ph.D. in Operations Research Diploma

If you expect to complete all degree requirements by the end of the semester or summer session, submit a Request for Diploma. Do this within the first three weeks of classes in the semester or first summer session. You can get the necessary forms from the Graduate School.

Cookie Acknowledgement

This website uses cookies to collect information to improve your browsing experience. Please review our Privacy Statement for more information.

Aerospace Engineering graduate earns multiple top honors, heading back to Auburn for master's degree

Published: Jun 21, 2024 10:00 AM

By Dustin Duncan

In 2020, Emma Signor was making one of the most important decisions of her young life about where to attend college. She knew little about Auburn University besides the men's basketball team's thrilling trip to the Final Four the previous year and its renowned aerospace engineering department, known for its cutting-edge research and distinguished faculty.

All it took was one visit to The Plains, and she was hooked. Fast-forward to 2024, and Signor has cemented herself in the Auburn Family and has some hardware to remind her of her time on campus.

• First place in the Southeastern Regional Student Conference hosted by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) for the Region II undergraduate category.
• The Undergraduate of the Year award from the AIAA Greater Huntsville Section.
• The Mark A. Spencer Creative Mentorship Award from the Samuel Ginn College of Engineering along with her faculty advisor Joe Majdalani , the Hugh and Loeda Francis Chair of Excellence in the Department of Aerospace Engineering at Auburn University.

Signor, who graduated this past spring with a degree in aerospace engineering , earned top honors at the regional student conference for her presentation titled "Analytical and Computational Models of Rijke Tube Pressure Waveforms Using a Sigmoidal Temperature Distribution."

"A Rijke tube is an open-ended tube that produces a loud noise when a flame is placed inside and then removed," Signor said.

 Working in Majdalani's Advanced Propulsion Research Laboratory and building on research conducted by Department of Defense Smart Scholar Cody Shelton , Signor's research focuses on analyzing the Rijke tube computationally and studying how adjustments to the flame's length, temperature gain and position within the tube can impact rocket engine performance.

Signor said she wanted to live in the moment at the student conference, trying to soak in the experience, but upon learning of her top honor, she felt a sense of confirmation of her well-earned academic achievement.  

"It was a surreal experience," Signor said. "I wasn't expecting to win. I was there to share my work and enjoy the moment. It was shocking to hear my name called for the award, but it validated all the hard work and sleepless nights."

AIAA presents the Undergraduate Student of the Year Award to an undergraduate student member in recognition of notable technical accomplishments, active engineering research, outstanding service to the AIAA student section, or active STEM outreach in the local community.

Signor learned of her nomination when she received a call from her advisor informing her that she won and that her nomination came from a faculty member in the aerospace department.

"I remember being in disbelief after receiving that call, but it felt great after all the hard work, all-nighters and juggling extracurriculars," she said. "I'm really thankful to have the aerospace department for their support. The faculty keeps in mind that students work nonstop in classes, extracurriculars and research, and they are very committed to student success and submitting them for these types of awards."

Beyond the honors received by Signor, she has been active in several organizations and leadership positions on and off Auburn's campus. She has served as a member of the payload team for the Auburn University Rocketry Association , a Cupola Engineering ambassador , a Society of Women Engineers member and secretary for the Auburn chapter of the AIAA.

After spending the summer of 2024 interning with Dynetics in Huntsville, Signor plans to return to Auburn in the fall to pursue a master's degree in aerospace engineering.

Emma Signor, an aerospace engineering graduate, holds the Mark Spencer Creative Mentorship Award earned at the Samuel Ginn College of Engineering annual spring awards ceremony in April 2024. Signor plans to return to Auburn in the fall of 2024 to obtain a master's degree in aerospace engineering.

Featured Faculty

Aerospace Engineering

Recent Headlines

3 Keys: Panthers at Oilers, Game 6 of Stanley Cup Final

Florida takes 3rd straight crack at 1st championship; Edmonton 1 win from forcing Game 7

© Dave Sandford/NHLI via Getty Images

• Link copied

(1A) Panthers at (2P) Oilers

Stanley cup final, game 6.

8 p.m. ET; CBC, TVAS, SN, ESPN+, ABC

Florida leads best-of-7 series 3-2

EDMONTON -- The Florida Panthers once again will try to win the first Stanley Cup in their history when they face the Edmonton Oilers in Game 6 of the Stanley Cup Final at Rogers Place on Friday.

Since a 4-3 victory in Game 3 to take a 3-0 series lead, the Panthers lost Games 4 and 5 by a combined score of 13-4, but they have not lost three straight games this postseason. As tight as the series has gotten, Florida players are trying to keep an even keel.

“If you were to tell anyone we’d be up 3-2 in the Stanley Cup Final you’d be pretty ecstatic about it," Panthers forward Evan Rodrigues said. "I also think If you asked any player in any series if they’d want to sweep their way to a Stanley Cup, then they’d all say yeah, too.

“We have an opportunity to go into a hostile environment in Edmonton and win a hockey game. It’s a simple mindset. We’re going out as a group, we’re going to stick together, we’re going to do it for the guy next to us, go out there and win a game.”

The Oilers wanted to “drag [the Panthers] back to Alberta,” as forward Connor Brown said prior to Game 5, and if Edmonton is able to come back from a 3-0 deficit and win the Cup in seven games, they would be the first team to do so since the Toronto Maple Leafs in 1942. But they’re not getting ahead of themselves.

“I think we’re all human and of course you think about it," Oilers center Leon Draisaitl said. "But we’re still in no position to make that a priority, right? We’re one game at a time, so we have to win a game at home tonight and get this thing back to Florida and then it’s a one-game series.

“So of course you think about it but ... your focus is on this one game tonight and not what’s going to happen four or five days from now.”

Myers, Van Diest, Zeisberger preview Gm6 of the SCF

Here are 3 keys for Game 6:

1. Settling in on defense

Asked where the Oilers have improved the most during the Final, defenseman Mattias Ekholm said it’s how they have played in their own zone. When Florida has pushed, Edmonton has stood its ground; the Oilers have allowed eight goals in the past four games and goalie Stuart Skinner has been there to stop some of the most dangerous scoring opportunities.

So if Edmonton gets caught playing a little more defense than it would like, that won't be an issue.

“We're more OK with having to play in our 'D' zone and spending time there," Ekholm said, "and not getting frustrated or getting out of the place just because we're there for 30 or 40 seconds.

“I think we can understand now that against these top teams you're going to play some defense. There are going to be chunks in games where you just have to play and not cheat the game and not trying to create something that's not there, because that's when they sting you.”

2. Build off starts

The Panthers liked the way they opened Game 5, with good scoring opportunities on Skinner in the opening minutes. But once the Oilers went up 1-0 on Brown’s short-handed goal, they couldn’t regain their momentum.

They need results to accompany their start in Game 6.

“We basically have to play together, trust we’re going to get the chances and get the goals from just playing together and playing our own game,” center Anton Lundell said.

“You always want to get the first goal but sometimes you don’t get it. We’ve been in that situation many times and we know how to come back from there, but you don’t want to get too much. It’s hard if it’s two or three goals [against]. So obviously we want to keep it tight and get the first goal if you can.”

3. Special teams battle

Whoever wins it in Game 6 will probably be in driver’s seat, right?

Edmonton has been outstanding on the penalty kill throughout the series and its power play has come alive again. The Oilers are 15-for-16 with two short-handed goals on the kill during the Final and have scored three power-play goals in the past two games. So don’t expect Edmonton to change anything.

As for the Panthers, they’ll put defenseman Oliver Ekman-Larsson on the point during the power play, swapping him for defenseman Brandon Montour .

“It might provide a different look, maybe a spark we’ve been needing,” forward Sam Reinhart said. “Certainly a very successful kill in the postseason for them. I think we’re trying to find a little more pace, a little more simplicity out there (on the power play). [Game 6 is] a great opportunity to turn it around.”

Panthers projected lineup

Evan Rodrigues -- Aleksander Barkov -- Sam Reinhart

Carter Verhaeghe -- Sam Bennett -- Matthew Tkachuk

Eetu Luostarinen -- Anton Lundell -- Vladimir Tarasenko

Ryan Lomberg -- Kevin Stenlund -- Nick Cousins

Gustav Forsling -- Aaron Ekblad

Niko Mikkola -- Brandon Montour

Oliver Ekman-Larsson -- Dmitry Kulikov

Sergei Bobrovsky

Anthony Stolarz

Scratched: Kyle Okposo, Steven Lorentz, Tobias Bjornfot, Uvis Balinskis, Josh Mahura, Jonah Gadjovich

Injured: None

Oilers projected lineup

Warren Foegele -- Connor McDavid -- Zach Hyman

Ryan Nugent-Hopkins -- Leon Draisaitl -- Dylan Holloway

Mattias Janmark -- Adam Henrique -- Connor Brown

Ryan McLeod -- Derek Ryan -- Corey Perry

Mattias Ekholm -- Evan Bouchard

Darnell Nurse -- Philip Broberg

Brett Kulak -- Cody Ceci

Stuart Skinner

Calvin Pickard

Scratched: Vincent Desharnais, Sam Gagner, Sam Carrick

Injured: Evander Kane (sports hernia), Troy Stecher (ankle)

Status report

Cousins enters the lineup for the first time since Game 3 of the Eastern Conference Final against the New York Rangers; Okposo, a forward, comes out. ... Verhaeghe and Bennett did not did not take part in the Panthers morning skate Friday but each is expected to play. ... Kane did not participate in the Oilers morning skate Friday and the forward is expected to miss his fourth consecutive game.

Latest News

Ekman-Larsson ready to make impact for Panthers in Game 6 of Cup Final 

Draisaitl 'not at the standard I hold myself to' for Oilers in Cup Final

Projected lineups, starting goalies for today

2023-24 NHL Trade Tracker

Cogliano retires after 17 NHL seasons, to join Avalanche front office

NHL Morning Skate for June 21

State Your Case: Kucherov, MacKinnon or McDavid for Hart Trophy

Jiricek's road to 2024 NHL Draft bred from 'intense' competition with older brother 

Letourneau making sizable impression heading into 2024 NHL Draft

Lindstrom drawing comparisons to Lindros ahead of 2024 NHL Draft

Panthers maintain perspective with chance to win Stanley Cup in Game 6 of Final

Tkachuk looking like 'a force' again for Panthers in Stanley Cup Final

NHL Foundation receives $75,000 donation toward girls hockey

Oilers push toward Game 6 of Cup Final discussed on ‘NHL @TheRink’ podcast

Oilers, fans pumped for Game 6 of Cup Final, unlikely comeback bid

McDavid climbing toward Gretzky's territory, record in Stanley Cup Final

Skinner savoring Stanley Cup Final run with hometown Oilers

Nedeljkovic signs 2-year, $5 million contract to stay with Penguins

Sign in to add this item to your wishlist, follow it, or mark it as ignored

Planned Release Date: 2025

About this game, project extreme x despair is here from the creators of the danganronpa and zero escape series comes a brand-new adventure game, 100 extreme despair-filled endings, defensive battles, free time & exploration, system requirements.

• OS *: Windows 7 64-bit
• Processor: Intel Core i3 4170
• Memory: 4 GB RAM
• Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX460
• DirectX: Version 11
• Storage: 26 GB available space
• Sound Card: DirectX compatible soundcard or onboard chipset
• Processor: Intel Core i5 4690K
• Memory: 8 GB RAM
• Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX960

© Aniplex, TooKyo Games

More like this

What curators say.

You can write your own review for this product to share your experience with the community. Use the area above the purchase buttons on this page to write your review.

You can use this widget-maker to generate a bit of HTML that can be embedded in your website to easily allow customers to purchase this game on Steam.

Enter up to 375 characters to add a description to your widget:

Copy and paste the HTML below into your website to make the above widget appear

Popular user-defined tags for this product: (?)

Sign in to add your own tags to this product.

• Local Sports
• Sports Columnists
• SportsbookWire

Tennessee baseball beats FSU behind Zander Sechrist, advances to College World Series final

OMAHA, Neb. − Zander Sechrist didn't pitch in the College World Series in 2021. He didn't throw in 2023 either.

The Tennessee baseball pitcher finally got his chance on Wednesday and he dazzled to bring the Vols to the doorstep of the finest moment in program history.

Tennessee will play for a national championship in the seventh season under coach Tony Vitello after dispatching Florida State 7-2 and advancing to the CWS final at Charles Schwab Field.

Tennessee (58-12) opens the best-of-three final series against either Texas A&M or Florida on Saturday (7:30 p.m. ET, ESPN). It is UT's first CWS finals appearance since 1951 and is the first finals appearance for a No. 1 national seed since 2009.

UT's 58 wins are a program record, passing the 2022 Vols who won 57.

Zander Sechrist gave Tennessee baseball another quality start

Sechrist delivered a quality start for the fourth time in his past five outings. It might have been his best one yet.

The senior held FSU (49-17) scoreless for 6⅓ innings before back-to-back home runs ended his start. The homers were the first earned runs Sechrist allowed in the postseason. He covered 17⅓ innings in three starts without allowing an earned run. He has allowed three earned runs in his past 29⅓ innings in four starts.

KIRBY: Kirby Connell is a most deserving Tennessee baseball fan favorite in College World Series

Sechrist got big-time defense in the outfield early as Kavares Tears crunched into the right-center wall for the final out of the first inning. Dylan Dreiling made a strong catch colliding with the wall in the fourth.

Tennessee's infield defense was key in third inning

Tennessee's infield defense was shaky in the first two innings. It was savvy in the third.

Sechrist gave up back-to-back hits to open the third before shortstop Dean Curley cut down Jaxson West on a chopper over the mound from FSU star Cam Smith. Blake Burke stepped on first and fired to Curley for an inning-ending 3-6 double play to get Sechrist out of the inning without allowing a run.

The Vols delivered the first punch and it held

The first five batters of the game reached base for Tennessee, which was enough for Tennessee to take a 3-0 lead that was enough to win Wednesday.

Christian Moore walked before Burke singled down the right-field line. Billy Amick had a run-scoring fielder's choice before a Dreiling walk and Hunter Ensley RBI single. The Vols scored another on an errant pickoff throw to take the 3-0 lead.

Mike Wilson  covers University of Tennessee athletics. Email him at [email protected] and follow him on Twitter @ ByMikeWilson . If you enjoy Mike’s coverage,  consider a digital subscription  that will allow you access to all of it.

• SI SWIMSUIT
• SI SPORTSBOOK
• Buckeyes In the NFL

Meechie Johnson Jr. ‘Grown Up’ in Two-Year Hiatus from Ohio State Buckeyes

Gaurav law | 22 hours ago.

• Ohio State Buckeyes

The Buckeyes welcomed their former player with open arms.

Meechie Johnson Jr. spent two years in Columbus before transferring to South Carolina for another two years. After a slow first three years in Columbus and Columbia, Johnson realized Ohio State was where he wanted to be.

“It’s been a blessing to come back,” Johnson said at media availability Thursday.

The redshirt senior said one of the main reasons he decided to come back was because of the “energy” exerted from Buckeye nation, as well as the opportunity to play with Bruce Thornton.

“Me and Bruce, I feel, we will be one of the best backcourts in the country,” Johnson said.

Johnson is most certainly coming off his best year of college ball — leading the Gamecocks with 14.1 points and offering solid playmaking, off-ball abilities and defense, Johnson found himself on the all-Southeastern Conference Second Team.

Johnson has gotten better in every aspect of his overall game each year. The Cleveland native said he wanted to return home for a last shot to win.

“We’ve put together a good roster for us to go far.… That was then, this is now. I’m just excited for what’s ahead,” Johnson said.

Thornton, who will be entering his third year with the Buckeyes, was the surefire leader for the team this past season as the head facilitator and scorer. However, head coach Jake Diebler didn’t manage to retain any of his fellow juniors — most notably Roddy Gayle Jr. — so Thornton has a new backcourt partner in Johnson for the upcoming season.

“I’m very excited to play with him, go through the season and win big-time games,” Thornton said.

Unlike Thornton who hasn’t experienced the feeling of being in the NCAA Tournament, Johnson is yet to miss it. The renewed Buckeye made it twice under former head coach Chris Holtmann — losing to Oral Roberts in the first round in 2021 and Villanova in the second round the following year.

But now the shifty backcourt has their eyes set on a fairly new goal: making it out of the second round and contending for a national title.

Johnson’s last game as a Gamecock was a first-round loss to Oregon, a team who will be joining the Big Ten next season. While the Buckeyes-Ducks football game has surely caught the public’s attention, he and Ryan Day may have something in common:

“That’s revenge for everybody,” Johnson said.

Thornton and Diebler, despite being “impressed with his consistency” on the court, noticed Johnson’s leadership to a further degree.

“His growth as a man, as a leader, his maturity is different,” Diebler said. “He’s still the same fun, loving, hard-working… young man.”

Diebler concluded with his excitement for the backcourt and Johnson’s general return.

“He’s grown up,” Diebler said.

While the Ohio State community awaits the upcoming season’s schedule release, Buckeye fans can be sure of one thing: This backcourt is going to be a problem for defenses everywhere.

Gators reflect on topsy-turvy season that ends…

Share this:.

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on X (Opens in new window)

Daily e-Edition

Evening e-Edition

• Entertainment
• Restaurants, Food & Drink

Sports College Sports

Gators reflect on topsy-turvy season that ends one round short of cws final.

Coach Kevin O’Sullivan said earlier in the week in Omaha that his team started playing elimination games when they needed to win the last two at Georgia in the final regular-season series.

UF slugger Jac Caglianone breaks Gators’ home run record

Then Florida caught fire and advanced to Omaha. All that surging momentum came to an abrupt halt on Wednesday night. Hours after scoring 15 runs against Kentucky, the Gators’ offense managed just four hits and left eight runners on base in a 6-0 loss to Texas A&M at Charles Schwab Field.

“It’s really hard to put into words,” O’Sullivan said. “It’s like you’re going full speed in a sprint and all of a sudden it just comes to an end just like that.”

Two-way All-American Jac Caglianone was the only Gator with multiple hits against the Aggies in the Gators’ worst offensive game of the season. They stranded a runner on third three times to get shut out for the only time this season.

UF record-setter Jac Caglianone’s success with Gators has been a family affair

Caglianone finishes the season as the program’s all-time home runs leader (75) and single-season home runs leader (35), passing Matt LaPorta, who cheered the Gators in Omaha.

“All these guys who have worn it before us, all we try to do is just make them proud, and we really appreciate what Florida is about,” Caglianone said. “Just everything that Florida is, Gator Nation and all the support that they have shown us throughout this postseason has been remarkable.”

O’Sullivan pulled starter Liam Peterson after recording one strikeout and four walks to open the game. Fisher Jameson scattered a run in 4.2 innings of relief. Reliable reliever Brandon Neely gave up two earned runs while striking out six in three innings. Jake Clemente and Luke McNeillie also pitched less than an inning.

With the loss, Florida fell a round shy of making the championship series for the second year in a row. Members of the team took solace in the run it took to get there.

“This whole year was pretty hard on all of us,” senior Tyler Shelnut said afterwards. “So being here was a huge accomplishment.”

More in Sports

Why Calijah Kancey thinks Bucs defense will wreak more havoc in 2024

Pride ready to embark on another winning streak

Former Magic guard J.J. Redick next up to coach Lakers

SUBSCRIBER ONLY

Florida panthers | dave hyde: panthers, looking for ultimate success, rely on many whose careers have seen rough patches.

Stanley Cup Final: McDavid, Oilers' defense hold off Panthers, force Game 6

June 18 (UPI) -- Edmonton Oilers players poked, dove and scrambled in a hectic final minute, preventing a Florida Panthers comeback Tuesday to win Game 5 of the Stanley Cup Final and extending the best-of-seven-game series.

Connor McDavid powered the offense, registering two goals and two assists in the 5-3 triumph at Amerant Bank Arena in Sunrise, Fla. The Oilers held a 4-1 lead late in the second period before allowing the Panthers to claw back into contention. Advertisement

"I love playing in the playoffs," McDavid told reporters. "I love playing with this group. It's not possible without everybody. It's been a fun ride and we're glad it's going to go one more day.

• Stanley Cup Final: McDavid, Skinner help Oilers crush Panthers 8-1 in Game 4
• Stanley Cup Final: Panthers edge Oilers, move within one win of first title
• Stanley Cup Final: Evan Rodrigues leads Panthers past Oilers in Game 2

Defenseman Evan Bouchard logged three assists for the Oilers. Forwards Zach Hyman, Connor Brown and Corey Perry also scored. Forwards Matthew Tkachuk and Evan Rodrigues each recorded a goal and assist for the Panthers. Advertisement

The Panthers lead the Oilers 3-2 in the series. Game 6 will be Friday in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

The Oilers, who staved off elimination for the second-consecutive game, are attempting to become just the second team in NHL history to overcome a 3-0 deficit to win a Stanley Cup Final -- joining the 1942 Toronto Maple Leafs.

Brown drew first blood with a backhand shot 5:30 into Game 5. That unassisted, shorthanded score was triggered when the Oilers forward intercepted a pass during a Panthers power play.

He threw his stick in front of the feed from defenseman Brandon Montour, poking the pass toward the Panthers net. He then darted forward, gained control of the puck and flipped in a shot past goal tender Sergei Bobrovsky's stick side and into the net.

The Oilers' defense smothered the Panthers, not allowing a shot for the final 14 minutes of the first period. Hyman then doubled the lead with a power-play score 1:58 into the second period. Advertisement

McDavid skated above the left circle and sent a pass to Bouchard on his right to start that sequence. Bouchard then unleashed a shot toward the net. The shot hit Hyman in the leg and deflected into the net for a 2-0 lead.

Tkachuk scored the first goal of the rally, beating net minder Stuart Skinner with a snap shot 6:53 into the second period. McDavid and Bouchard assisted Perry on a power-play score about 5 minutes later, but the Panthers closed the gap with another second-period goal from Rodrigues.

Defenseman Oliver Ekman-Larsson cut the deficit to one with another Panthers score 4:04 into the third period, but Florida -- which held a 26-14 edge in shots on goal over the final 40 minutes -- didn't score again.

Skinner denied a barrage of shots down the stretch, when the Panthers pulled Bobrovsky in favor of bringing another attacker onto the ice.

The Oilers (2-3) will host the Panthers (3-2) in Game 6 will be at 8 p.m. EDT Friday in Edmonton. Game 7, if necessary, will be Monday in Sunrise.

• Connor McDavid
• Corey Perry

Latest Headlines

Trending Stories

How the Oilers dragged the Stanley Cup Final back to Alberta with a Game 5 win: 5 takeaways

SUNRISE, Fla. — Since avoiding a sweep with a beatdown of the Florida Panthers on Saturday night, the Edmonton Oilers’ mantra has been “to drag them back to Alberta.”

Well, they’re now doing the same thing to the Stanley Cup. Too bad hockey’s most cherished trophy can’t get Aeroplan miles.

For the second consecutive game, the Stanley Cup didn’t get into public view Tuesday. It will instead be in the belly of the NHL ’s Air Canada charter Wednesday for another 2,550-mile flight to Edmonton after the Oilers officially shifted the momentum of this best-of-seven Stanley Cup Final with a 5-3 Game 5 victory at Amerant Bank Arena.

Advertisement

With two more off days before Game 6 on Friday night, the outside noise will be ear-splitting as the pressure ratchets up for the Panthers.

Connor Brown , who went the first 55 games this season without a goal and fresh off setting up Mattias Janmark ’s game-opening short-handed goal in Game 4, halted the Panthers’ early pressure Tuesday night by scoring a short-handed goal himself just 5½ minutes in.

Then Connor McDavid went to work, posting another four-point game with two goals and two assists to build 3-0 and 4-1 leads.

At one point, the Oilers scored nine consecutive goals in the series (something the 1980s Oilers never accomplished), and they had a 13-1 scoring run before Matthew Tkachuk scored for Florida in the second period.

Evan Rodrigues scored his fourth goal of the series for Florida, and Oliver Ekman-Larsson pulled the Panthers within one early in the third period for a frantic finish. But Stuart Skinner held the fort as Edmonton took the series back to Alberta’s capital.

“I know a lot of guys counted us out,” Oilers coach Kris Knoblauch said. “We’ve been counted out a lot through the playoffs, regular season, whatever. But it doesn’t faze the group in there. They’ve got a lot of belief — a lot of belief and just enjoying every extra day, because we were counted out a long time ago and we’re still here playing hockey in June and have the opportunity where we are going back to Edmonton for Game 6. There’s a lot to smile about.”

Said Rodrigues on the other side: “We’ve got to win one game. Simple as that. Go out there. Got to win one game. That’s our mindset, and that’s what we’re going to go do.”

Here are five takeaways.

Oh captain, my captain

McDavid led the way in Game 4, recording a goal and three assists in a massive 8-1 win for the Oilers. He was even better in Game 5, flying all over the ice. It seemed like the Panthers were in danger every time he had the puck on his stick.

After a secondary assist on Zach Hyman ’s power-play goal in the second period, McDavid simply took over.

First, he found the smallest of openings short side on Sergei Bobrovsky for his seventh goal of the playoffs, a cheeky attempt he isn’t afraid to try. Then, at the end of an Oilers man advantage, he walked through the Panthers defense and ultimately around Niko Mikkola to set up Corey Perry for a chip-in. He added an empty-netter.

McDavid is now up to 42 points in the postseason, fourth-most of all time.

Oh, and he’s come through when it’s mattered most. With eight points in the past two games, McDavid has established a Stanley Cup Final record for production when facing elimination.

“Connor doing Connor things,” Hyman said. “That’s what makes him special. He’s able to elevate his game at the most important time — the biggest reason why we’ve come so far. We’re not here without him. He continues to drive the bus.”

“That’s just the type of player he is,” Perry said. “He puts this team on his back. When we’re against the wall, he puts us on his back and he plays. You see why he is the best player.”

Just gonna let this video speak for itself… 🤩 #StanleyCup https://t.co/0WMOslGWqO pic.twitter.com/lEyuB7i7kB — NHL (@NHL) June 19, 2024

Bobrovsky looks human

After allowing one goal in his first two games of the series, Bobrovsky has allowed 12 in his past three games, which included an early exit in Game 3 after giving up five goals on 16 shots.

Before these past two games, there was debate over whether Bobrovsky had overtaken Aleksander Barkov in the Conn Smythe race. Frankly, we’re getting to the point where we start to ask if McDavid’s overtaken them both even if Florida goes on to win the Stanley Cup.

Either way, Bobrovsky is starting to show signs of cracking as the Oilers come at him in waves. The most glaring softie he allowed Tuesday was McDavid’s bankshot through him from an odd angle for Edmonton’s third goal.

CONNOR MCDAVID PUTS THE OILERS UP 3-0 🤯 pic.twitter.com/XDk389015X — B/R Open Ice (@BR_OpenIce) June 19, 2024

More short-handed Oilers offense

Another game, another offensive contribution from Brown on the penalty kill.

Brown found PK partner Janmark in the crease for an easy goal to open the scoring in Game 2. He broke the ice Tuesday, as well, with an even more impressive effort.

Brandon Montour tried to connect with Barkov along the blue line, but Brown anticipated the play and got his stick on the puck to deflect it to the neutral zone. From there, Brown beat Barkov to the loose puck and went in on a breakaway. He made no mistake, deking to his backhand and beating Bobrovsky 5:30 into the game.

With the goal, Brown became the third player in NHL history to record a short-handed point in consecutive Cup Final games. The others are Hockey Hall of Famers Serge Savard (1968) and Bobby Orr (1970). Nice company.

“He’s been unbelievable, even more so in this Cup Final,” Hyman said of Brown, who had only 12 points in the regular season. “I think a lot of people lost faith in him, but he’s an unbelievable player. I played with him for a long time, so I knew how good he can be. He’s showing it every night at the highest stage. He’s one of best players. Credit to him.”

The Oilers became the first team in NHL history to open the scoring with a short-handed goal in consecutive Final games. It marked the sixth instance in league history where a team had a short-handed goal in two straight Final contests.

Tkachuk finally shows sign of life

It has been a quiet postseason for Tkachuk, but after more and more questions the past few days about what’s going on with him following his monstrous postseason last year, he scored his first goal since May 22 and second in the past 16 games in the second period.

Tkachuk also played his most physical game of the series and did a solid job penetrating the middle and getting to the goalmouth in the final two periods. In the third period, his strong play behind the net set up Ekman-Larsson’s goal to cut the deficit to 4-3.

Tkachuk may not be healthy right now. He has taken a lot of the off-day practices off since the second round against Boston .

Earlier Tuesday, Tkachuk was asked about his game and said, “I’m looking forward to hopefully my best game of the series tonight. I thought last game was nowhere near good enough and I’m way better than that. Maybe the last four periods going back to the third period of Game 3 could be a lot better. So, I don’t know. Good part about us is it’s not about one guy. It’s not about individuals here. We have a chance to capture the biggest goal of our lives tonight, so we’re going to go do that.”

MATTHEW TKACHUK SAID HOLD THE PHONE 🍿 BACK TO A TWO GOAL GAME pic.twitter.com/U9kNaaT1F0 — B/R Open Ice (@BR_OpenIce) June 19, 2024

Oilers power play crushes Panthers

The two power-play goals the Oilers netted — their first two five-on-four tallies of the series — sure were timely.

Hyman’s goal came 1:58 into the middle period, with two seconds remaining in the Oilers’ second power play courtesy of a Mikkola interference call on Warren Foegele at the end of the first. Perry then gave the Oilers a three-goal lead by finishing off McDavid’s pass with eight ticks left on Kyle Okposo ’s hooking infraction on Mattias Ekholm .

The Panthers almost got out of their penalty issues unscathed. Instead, the Oilers’ ability to make them pay late in those man advantages helped turn the tide.

ZACH HYMAN WITH THE RE-DIRECT THE OILERS DOUBLE THEIR LEAD 🚨🚨 pic.twitter.com/9u0wjlEkeA — Gino Hard (@GinoHard_) June 19, 2024

(Top photo of Sergei Bobrovsky after an Oilers goal: Bruce Bennett / Getty Images)

Get all-access to exclusive stories.

Subscribe to The Athletic for in-depth coverage of your favorite players, teams, leagues and clubs. Try a week on us.

13 Tips to Prepare for Your PhD Dissertation Defense

How well do you know your project? Years of experiments, analysis of results, and tons of literature study, leads you to how well you know your research study. And, PhD dissertation defense is a finale to your PhD years. Often, researchers question how to excel at their thesis defense and spend countless hours on it. Days, weeks, months, and probably years of practice to complete your doctorate, needs to surpass the dissertation defense hurdle.

In this article, we will discuss details of how to excel at PhD dissertation defense and list down some interesting tips to prepare for your thesis defense.

Table of Contents

What Is Dissertation Defense?

Dissertation defense or Thesis defense is an opportunity to defend your research study amidst the academic professionals who will evaluate of your academic work. While a thesis defense can sometimes be like a cross-examination session, but in reality you need not fear the thesis defense process and be well prepared.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/c/JamesHaytonPhDacademy

What are the expectations of committee members.

Choosing the dissertation committee is one of the most important decision for a research student. However, putting your dissertation committee becomes easier once you understand the expectations of committee members.

The basic function of your dissertation committee is to guide you through the process of proposing, writing, and revising your dissertation. Moreover, the committee members serve as mentors, giving constructive feedback on your writing and research, also guiding your revision efforts.

The dissertation committee is usually formed once the academic coursework is completed. Furthermore, by the time you begin your dissertation research, you get acquainted to the faculty members who will serve on your dissertation committee. Ultimately, who serves on your dissertation committee depends upon you.

Some universities allow an outside expert (a former professor or academic mentor) to serve on your committee. It is advisable to choose a faculty member who knows you and your research work.

How to Choose a Dissertation Committee Member?

• Avoid popular and eminent faculty member
• Choose the one you know very well and can approach whenever you need them
• A faculty member whom you can learn from is apt.
• Members of the committee can be your future mentors, co-authors, and research collaborators. Choose them keeping your future in mind.

How to Prepare for Dissertation Defense?

1. Start Your Preparations Early

Thesis defense is not a 3 or 6 months’ exercise. Don’t wait until you have completed all your research objectives. Start your preparation well in advance, and make sure you know all the intricacies of your thesis and reasons to all the research experiments you conducted.

2. Attend Presentations by Other Candidates

Look out for open dissertation presentations at your university. In fact, you can attend open dissertation presentations at other universities too. Firstly, this will help you realize how thesis defense is not a scary process. Secondly, you will get the tricks and hacks on how other researchers are defending their thesis. Finally, you will understand why dissertation defense is necessary for the university, as well as the scientific community.

3. Take Enough Time to Prepare the Slides

Dissertation defense process harder than submitting your thesis well before the deadline. Ideally, you could start preparing the slides after finalizing your thesis. Spend more time in preparing the slides. Make sure you got the right data on the slides and rephrase your inferences, to create a logical flow to your presentation.

4. Structure the Presentation

Do not be haphazard in designing your presentation. Take time to create a good structured presentation. Furthermore, create high-quality slides which impresses the committee members. Make slides that hold your audience’s attention. Keep the presentation thorough and accurate, and use smart art to create better slides.

5. Practice Breathing Techniques

Watch a few TED talk videos and you will notice that speakers and orators are very fluent at their speech. In fact, you will not notice them taking a breath or falling short of breath. The only reason behind such effortless oratory skill is practice — practice in breathing technique.

Moreover, every speaker knows how to control their breath. Long and steady breaths are crucial. Pay attention to your breathing and slow it down. All you need I some practice prior to this moment.

6. Create an Impactful Introduction

The audience expects a lot from you. So your opening statement should enthrall the audience. Furthermore, your thesis should create an impact on the members; they should be thrilled by your thesis and the way you expose it.

The introduction answers most important questions, and most important of all “Is this presentation worth the time?” Therefore, it is important to make a good first impression , because the first few minutes sets the tone for your entire presentation.

7. Maintain Your Own List of Questions

While preparing for the presentation, make a note of all the questions that you ask yourself. Try to approach all the questions from a reader’s point of view. You could pretend like you do not know the topic and think of questions that could help you know the topic much better.

The list of questions will prepare you for the questions the members may pose while trying to understand your research. Attending other candidates’ open discussion will also help you assume the dissertation defense questions.

8. Practice Speech and Body Language

After successfully preparing your slides and practicing, you could start focusing on how you look while presenting your thesis. This exercise is not for your appearance but to know your body language and relax if need be.

Pay attention to your body language. Stand with your back straight, but relax your shoulders. The correct posture will give you the feel of self-confidence. So, observe yourself in the mirror and pay attention to movements you make.

9. Give Mock Presentation

Giving a trial defense in advance is a good practice. The most important factor for the mock defense is its similarity to your real defense, so that you get the experience that prepares for the actual defense.

10. Learn How to Handle Mistakes

Everyone makes mistakes. However, it is important to carry on. Do not let the mistakes affect your thesis defense. Take a deep breath and move on to the next point.

11. Do Not Run Through the Presentation

If you are nervous, you would want to end the presentation as soon as possible. However, this situation will give rise to anxiety and you will speak too fast, skipping the essential details. Eventually, creating a fiasco of your dissertation defense .

12. Get Plenty of Rest

Out of the dissertation defense preparation points, this one is extremely important. Obviously, sleeping a day before your big event is hard, but you have to focus and go to bed early, with the clear intentions of getting the rest you deserve.

13. Visualize Yourself Defending Your Thesis

This simple exercise creates an immense impact on your self-confidence. All you have to do is visualize yourself giving a successful presentation each evening before going to sleep. Everyday till the day of your thesis defense, see yourself standing in front of the audience and going from one point to another.

This exercise takes a lot of commitment and persistence, but the results in the end are worth it. Visualization makes you see yourself doing the scary thing of defending your thesis.

If you have taken all these points into consideration, you are ready for your big day. You have worked relentlessly for your PhD degree , and you will definitely give your best in this final step.

Have you completed your thesis defense? How did you prepare for it and how was your experience throughout your dissertation defense ? Do write to us or comment below.

The tips are very useful.I will recomend it to our students.

Excellent. As a therapist trying to help a parent of a candidate, I am very impressed and thankful your concise, clear, action-oriented article. Thank you.

Thanks for your sharing. It is so good. I can learn a lot from your ideas. Hope that in my dissertation defense next time I can pass

The tips are effective. Will definitely apply them in my dissertation.

My dissertation defense is coming up in less than two weeks from now, I find this tips quite instructive, I’ll definitely apply them. Thank you so much.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for data interpretation

In research, choosing the right approach to understand data is crucial for deriving meaningful insights.…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right approach

The process of choosing the right research design can put ourselves at the crossroads of…

• Career Corner

Unlocking the Power of Networking in Academic Conferences

Embarking on your first academic conference experience? Fear not, we got you covered! Academic conferences…

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Research recommendations play a crucial role in guiding scholars and researchers toward fruitful avenues of…

• AI in Academia

Disclosing the Use of Generative AI: Best practices for authors in manuscript preparation

The rapid proliferation of generative and other AI-based tools in research writing has ignited an…

Setting Rationale in Research: Cracking the code for excelling at research

Mitigating Survivorship Bias in Scholarly Research: 10 tips to enhance data integrity

The Power of Proofreading: Taking your academic work to the next level

Facing Difficulty Writing an Academic Essay? — Here is your one-stop solution!

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

• Final Defense

The final defense is an oral examination open to the public, during which the author of a thesis or dissertation demonstrates to their committee satisfactory command of all aspects of the work presented and other related subjects, if applicable. The final defense is required for the dissertation and Master’s plan A students.

Scheduling & Announcement

Dissertation – Final defense announcement in the University Events Calendar is required for the dissertation. The defense must be one hour or more in length. It may be scheduled between 8:00 am to 4:30 pm on any work day, during both instructional and non-instructional periods. Submit the announcement to the Graduate Division Student Services no later than two weeks prior to defense. Announcement must specify title, date, time and place of the defense. It must be signed by the committee chair .

Master’s plan A – Final defense announcement is not required to be posted and open to the public. Please check with your respective graduate program for further guidance.

Pre-Defense Manuscript Distribution

The student must submit the completed manuscript to the committee by the deadline set by his or her graduate program, or no later than two weeks prior to the scheduled defense (four weeks is highly recommended in the case of the dissertation). In addition, the student needs to distribute a copy of the abstract to the faculty of his or her graduate program. The abstract may be distributed via email or other electronic means as appropriate.

Committee Participation

Effective 2022, graduate programs have more flexibility with regard to remote participation by the doctoral candidate and committee members for a doctoral defense. With this change, it is possible for the entire committee to attend a doctoral defense online with no members physically present on campus at UHM. However, since such defenses will continue to remain a public presentation, appropriate and secure access to allow for the public to attend will be required. If a physical location on the UHM campus with accessibility for viewers to an online defense will be used, this information will also be required on the Dissertation Announcement that is submitted at least two weeks prior to a defense and when posted to the Academic Calendar.

In the event that a committee member is unable to participate physically or virtually in the final defense, the alternatives are, in order of preference:

1. Postpone the defense.

2. Submit a form to revise the committee (submit the appropriate form pertinent to the degree sought) .

3. Use proxy member(s) — As a general rule, the Graduate Division discourages the use of proxy committee members for the final defense. However, the use of a proxy member may occasionally be the only feasible solution that does not unduly penalize the student. Only regular graduate faculty may serve as proxies. A proxy cannot be used for the committee chair or the university representative. To use a proxy member, submit a written request to the Office of Graduate Student Services prior to the day of the final defense. The request must indicate the reason for the proxy, and include the approval signature of the student’s graduate chair.

Upon request approval by the Graduate Division, the proxy is expected to act in full capacity of the replaced committee member. The proxy may ask any questions deemed appropriate. The proxy may require the student to revise, add or delete portions of the manuscript. Finally, the proxy must indicate approval or disapproval of the defense by signing Form III.

Committee Approval

A majority of the committee, including the chair and university representative, must approve of the defense in order for the student to pass. A student failing the final defense for the first time may repeat it only with approval from both the graduate program and the Graduate Division. A student failing for the second time is dismissed from both the graduate program and the Graduate Division. Committee members are required to indicate their approval of the manuscript and the defense using the forms listed below:

Committee Decision Review

Should a member of the committee voting in the minority wish to have the majority decision reviewed, he or she may do so by submitting a written request to the Graduate Division. The request must state specific reasons. Upon approval of the request, the review will be undertaken by the Graduate Council.

Graduate Division 2540 Maile Way Spalding Hall 3rd Floor Honolulu, HI 96822 Tel: (808) 956-8544 Email: [email protected] The University of Hawaiʻi is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Institution Use of this site implies consent with our Usage Policy | © 2020 Graduate Division | All Rights Reserved

• Graduate Programs
• Select a Program
• Admissions Standards
• Standardized Exams
• Documentation Requirements
• Deadlines & Notification
• Submitting Your Application
• Applying for Concurrent Degrees
• Dual Degrees
• Multiple Masters or Doctoral Degrees
• Graduate Certificates
• Master’s to PhD
• Readmission
• Applying as a PBU Student
• Change in Program
• UHM Faculty Admission
• Enrollment Regulations
• Admissions Requirements
• English Proficiency
• English Language Institute (ELI)
• International Student Services
• Overseas Advising & Useful Links
• Admitted Students
• Cost of Attendance
• Selected Campus Resources
• Registration
• Course Loads & Full-Time Definition
• Academic Progress
• Time Allowed for Completion of Degree
• Leave of Absence
• Degree Check
• Commencement
• Course Applicability
• Transfer & PBU Credits
• Credit by Examination
• Undergraduate Excess Credits
• Double-Counting Credits
• Required GDGPA
• Required Grades
• Grading Policies
• Disciplinary Actions
• Conduct Code
• Residency Program Requirement
• Language Requirement
• Exam Policies
• Master’s Plan A
• Master’s Plan B
• Master’s Plan C
• Graduate Certificate
• Change in Degree Requirements
• Requirements for Concurrent or Sequential Degrees
• Committee Composition & Potential Members
• Select Committee Member
• Format, Language & Content
• Authorship & Acknowledgement
• Style Policy
• ProQuest ETD Submission & Publication
• Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED)
• Dissertation Written Under Funded Research
• Manuscript Copyright
• Remote Participation Resources
• Student Research Award
• Compliance & Ethical Standards
• Co-Authorship
• Intellectual Property
• Copyright & Patent
• Academic Advising
• Academic Policies
• Important Information
• Notice to New GAs
• Types & Duties
• Eligibility & Criteria
• Recruitment & Appointment
• Clarification of GA workload & compensation
• Compensation & Tax Withholding
• Sick and Bereavement Leave
• Rules & Regulations
• GA Grievance
• Frances Davis Award for Excellence in Undergraduate Teaching
• Record Keeping & Confidentiality
• Party Responsibilities
• Informal Resolution
• Formal Grievance
• Beyond Grad / Beyond Prof
• Achievement Scholarships
• College of Social Sciences Connector
• East West Center Fellowship and Housing
• Fellowships & Scholarships
• Fulbright Annual Competition Calendar
• Fulbright-Hays Dissertation Research Abroad
• Graduate Division STAR Fellowships & Scholarships
• UH Financial Aid Services
• UH Mānoa International Student Services Scholarships
• WICHE Program

Defending Your Dissertation: A Guide

Written by Luke Wink-Moran | Photo by insta_photos

Dissertation defenses are daunting, and no wonder; it’s not a “dissertation discussion,” or a “dissertation dialogue.” The name alone implies that the dissertation you’ve spent the last x number of years working on is subject to attack. And if you don’t feel trepidation for semantic reasons, you might be nervous because you don’t know what to expect. Our imaginations are great at making The Unknown scarier than reality. The good news is that you’ll find in this newsletter article experts who can shed light on what dissertations defenses are really like, and what you can do to prepare for them.

The first thing you should know is that your defense has already begun. It started the minute you began working on your dissertation— maybe even in some of the classes you took beforehand that helped you formulate your ideas. This, according to Dr. Celeste Atkins, is why it’s so important to identify a good mentor early in graduate school.

“To me,” noted Dr. Atkins, who wrote her dissertation on how sociology faculty from traditionally marginalized backgrounds teach about privilege and inequality, “the most important part of the doctoral journey was finding an advisor who understood and supported what I wanted from my education and who was willing to challenge me and push me, while not delaying me.  I would encourage future PhDs to really take the time to get to know the faculty before choosing an advisor and to make sure that the members of their committee work well together.”

Your advisor will be the one who helps you refine arguments and strengthen your work so that by the time it reaches your dissertation committee, it’s ready. Next comes the writing process, which many students have said was the hardest part of their PhD. I’ve included this section on the writing process because this is where you’ll create all the material you’ll present during your defense, so it’s important to navigate it successfully. The writing process is intellectually grueling, it eats time and energy, and it’s where many students find themselves paddling frantically to avoid languishing in the “All-But-Dissertation” doldrums. The writing process is also likely to encroach on other parts of your life. For instance, Dr. Cynthia Trejo wrote her dissertation on college preparation for Latin American students while caring for a twelve-year-old, two adult children, and her aging parents—in the middle of a pandemic. When I asked Dr. Trejo how she did this, she replied:

“I don’t take the privilege of education for granted. My son knew I got up at 4:00 a.m. every morning, even on weekends, even on holidays; and it’s a blessing that he’s seen that work ethic and that dedication and the end result.”

Importantly, Dr. Trejo also exercised regularly and joined several online writing groups at UArizona. She mobilized her support network— her partner, parents, and even friends from high school to help care for her son.

The challenges you face during the writing process can vary by discipline. Jessika Iwanski is an MD/PhD student who in 2022 defended her dissertation on genetic mutations in sarcomeric proteins that lead to severe, neonatal dilated cardiomyopathy. She described her writing experience as “an intricate process of balancing many things at once with a deadline (defense day) that seems to be creeping up faster and faster— finishing up experiments, drafting the dissertation, preparing your presentation, filling out all the necessary documents for your defense and also, for MD/PhD students, beginning to reintegrate into the clinical world (reviewing your clinical knowledge and skill sets)!”

But no matter what your unique challenges are, writing a dissertation can take a toll on your mental health. Almost every student I spoke with said they saw a therapist and found their sessions enormously helpful. They also looked to the people in their lives for support. Dr. Betsy Labiner, who wrote her dissertation on Interiority, Truth, and Violence in Early Modern Drama, recommended, “Keep your loved ones close! This is so hard – the dissertation lends itself to isolation, especially in the final stages. Plus, a huge number of your family and friends simply won’t understand what you’re going through. But they love you and want to help and are great for getting you out of your head and into a space where you can enjoy life even when you feel like your dissertation is a flaming heap of trash.”

While you might sometimes feel like your dissertation is a flaming heap of trash, remember: a) no it’s not, you brilliant scholar, and b) the best dissertations aren’t necessarily perfect dissertations. According to Dr. Trejo, “The best dissertation is a done dissertation.” So don’t get hung up on perfecting every detail of your work. Think of your dissertation as a long-form assignment that you need to finish in order to move onto the next stage of your career. Many students continue revising after graduation and submit their work for publication or other professional objectives.

When you do finish writing your dissertation, it’s time to schedule your defense and invite friends and family to the part of the exam that’s open to the public. When that moment comes, how do you prepare to present your work and field questions about it?

“I reread my dissertation in full in one sitting,” said Dr. Labiner. “During all my time writing it, I’d never read more than one complete chapter at a time! It was a huge confidence boost to read my work in full and realize that I had produced a compelling, engaging, original argument.”

There are many other ways to prepare: create presentation slides and practice presenting them to friends or alone; think of questions you might be asked and answer them; think about what you want to wear or where you might want to sit (if you’re presenting on Zoom) that might give you a confidence boost. Iwanksi practiced presenting with her mentor and reviewed current papers to anticipate what questions her committee might ask.  If you want to really get in the zone, you can emulate Dr. Labiner and do a full dress rehearsal on Zoom the day before your defense.

But no matter what you do, you’ll still be nervous:

“I had a sense of the logistics, the timing, and so on, but I didn’t really have clear expectations outside of the structure. It was a sort of nebulous three hours in which I expected to be nauseatingly terrified,” recalled Dr. Labiner.

“I expected it to be terrifying, with lots of difficult questions and constructive criticism/comments given,” agreed Iwanski.

“I expected it to be very scary,” said Dr. Trejo.

“I expected it to be like I was on trial, and I’d have to defend myself and prove I deserved a PhD,” said Dr Atkins.

And, eventually, inexorably, it will be time to present.  

“It was actually very enjoyable” said Iwanski. “It was more of a celebration of years of work put into this project—not only by me but by my mentor, colleagues, lab members and collaborators! I felt very supported by all my committee members and, rather than it being a rapid fire of questions, it was more of a scientific discussion amongst colleagues who are passionate about heart disease and muscle biology.”

“I was anxious right when I logged on to the Zoom call for it,” said Dr. Labiner, “but I was blown away by the number of family and friends that showed up to support me. I had invited a lot of people who I didn’t at all think would come, but every single person I invited was there! Having about 40 guests – many of them joining from different states and several from different countries! – made me feel so loved and celebrated that my nerves were steadied very quickly. It also helped me go into ‘teaching mode’ about my work, so it felt like getting to lead a seminar on my most favorite literature.”

“In reality, my dissertation defense was similar to presenting at an academic conference,” said Dr. Atkins. “I went over my research in a practiced and organized way, and I fielded questions from the audience.

“It was a celebration and an important benchmark for me,” said Dr. Trejo. “It was a pretty happy day. Like the punctuation at the end of your sentence: this sentence is done; this journey is done. You can start the next sentence.”

If you want to learn more about dissertations in your own discipline, don’t hesitate to reach out to graduates from your program and ask them about their experiences. If you’d like to avail yourself of some of the resources that helped students in this article while they wrote and defended their dissertations, check out these links:

The Graduate Writing Lab

https://thinktank.arizona.edu/writing-center/graduate-writing-lab

The Writing Skills Improvement Program

https://wsip.arizona.edu

Campus Health Counseling and Psych Services

https://caps.arizona.edu

https://www.scribbr.com/

Electrical and Computer Engineering

Final Defense/Filing a Dissertation

Final examination and filing of the dissertation.

The final Ph.D. requirements are submission of a dissertation and the dissertation defense. A minimum interval of three quarters of academic residency must elapse between advancement to candidacy and final defense and submission of the dissertation. Therefore, you should plan on taking the Final Examination about one year after passing the qualifying exam. The Final Exam is an oral examination, which shall be public and so announced, in which you present and defend your dissertation to your doctoral committee.

• You must have completed 6 quarters of academic residency, of which 3 quarters must be between advancement and final examination. Residency requirements between advancement to candidacy and completion of the degree may be waived under special circumstances. Please consult an ECE Graduate Student Affairs Advisor on the process involved.
• You must maintain a GPA of 3.0 or above in upper division and graduate course work, have no more than 8 units of "F" or "U", and resolve all outstanding grading problems.
• You must be registered and enrolled or file a general petition to pay the filing fee in lieu of registration.
• You must liaise with the members of your doctoral committee to decide upon a date and time for your examination. Try to set a date and time for your exam six weeks in advance. Faculty members are very busy and are frequently out of town, especially during the summer months. Keep this in mind when planning to schedule your exam.
• You would normally take the final exam during a regular quarter. You may, however, schedule the exam during the summer or between quarters to accommodate the availability of faculty. In this instance, you will be required to file a general petition to waive registration and pay the filing fee.
• For a variety of reasons, your doctoral committee may need to be reconstituted. To request a reconstitution of the membership of your committee, you must consult an ECE Graduate Student Affairs Advisor. The Advisor will then submit a Request for Reconstitution of Committee Membership form to Graduate Division, with the reasons for requesting the change. This form must be submitted to Graduate Division at least two weeks prior to your final defense.
• Date and time of exam
• Title of your dissertation
• Names of your committee members Page 2 of 3 Updated 08/2016
• Room booking
• Preparation of required forms
• Preparation of your file for the exam committee
• An exam confirmation will be sent to you via email once initial arrangements have been made for your exam
• An exam announcement will be sent to you and your exam committee via email two weeks prior to the exam
• An exam reminder will be sent to you and your exam committee via email two days prior to the exam
• Academic Senate policy states that a draft of the doctoral dissertation should be submitted to each member of the doctoral committee at least four weeks before the final examination.
• The final version of your dissertation must conform to procedures outlined in the publication, Preparation and Submission Manual for Doctoral Dissertations and Master’s Theses, which can be found on the Graduate Division’s website.
• You must make an appointment with Graduate Division for a preliminary check of your dissertation. At that appointment the format is checked and instructions on the final preparation and submission of the dissertation are given. You may schedule your dissertation formatting review appointment via Graduate Division’s Online Calendar: https://gradforms.ucsd.edu/calendar/index.php
• For reservations in EBU1, the last 6 digits of your PID will serve as your room code the day of your exam.
• Complete the Program Exit Questionnaire .
• 1. Academic Senate policy states that the committee conducts the examination which is to be public and announced as such.
• All committee members are required to be present at the examination. In the event that a committee member is going to be absent at the time of the examination, this matter should be discussed with an ECE Graduate Student Affairs Advisor and your committee chair. The committee chair and the tenured outside member must always be present at a defense exam. The doctoral committee shall pass on your dissertation and conduct the final oral examination.
• The final examination is about 2 hours in duration. You should be prepared to present and defend your dissertation before your doctoral committee.
• Plan to give a practice talk to your advisor and/or fellow students at least one week before your exam. This allows you plenty of time to make revisions and helps to strengthen your advisor’s confidence in you.
• You will be informed of the outcome following the end of the exam. The Report of the Final Examination and Filing of the Dissertation for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy form is then signed by members of your doctoral committee. The Final Report and the Signature page of your dissertation must have the original signatures of all members of your doctoral committee. Proxy signatures are not acceptable. Page 3 of 3 Updated 08/2016
• Schedule your final appointment with Graduate Division for the submission of your final paperwork and dissertation at least a week after your final defense date to allow sufficient time for finalizing your final paperwork and obtaining relevant signatures.
• The ECE Graduate Student Affairs Advisor will notify you via email when the Report of the Final Examination and Filing of the Dissertation for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy form is ready for collection. You must submit this form during your final submission appointment with Graduate Division and by the filing deadline.
• Concurrently, you must submit the dissertation to Graduate Division and, upon approval by the Dean of Graduate Studies, file the dissertation with the university archivist, who accepts it on behalf of the Graduate Council.
• Acceptance of the dissertation by the archivist, with subsequent second approval by the dean of Graduate Studies, represents the final step in the completion by the candidate of all requirements for the Ph.D. degree.
• You are not "finished" until the dissertation has been filed with the Library and Graduate Division has signed off on all paperwork.
• The Ph.D. degree will be awarded in the same quarter that you file your dissertation (except for exams taken between quarters, for which the degree will be awarded at the end of the following quarter).
• You will receive a letter confirming that you have successfully completed the Ph.D. degree requirements at the end of the same quarter.
• Your diploma will be mailed 3-6 months after the end of the quarter. The diplomas are mailed directly to your permanent mailing address. Therefore, you must check your address for accuracy on TritonLink ( http://tritonlink.ucsd.edu/ ) to avoid delays in delivery.
• Collect all mail from your student mailbox, and notify everyone who sends you mail at ECE of your current mailing address. Your mailbox will be cleared at the end of the quarter of your graduation, and all remaining mail will be returned to the sender.
• UCSD conducts one commencement ceremony each year at the end of Spring quarter. In order to participate in commencement, you must have completed all degree requirements, including the filing of the dissertation by the Spring filing deadline.

Reference management. Clean and simple.

How to prepare an excellent thesis defense

What is a thesis defense?

How long is a thesis defense, what happens at a thesis defense, your presentation, questions from the committee, 6 tips to help you prepare for your thesis defense, 1. anticipate questions and prepare for them, 2. dress for success, 3. ask for help, as needed, 4. have a backup plan, 5. prepare for the possibility that you might not know an answer, 6. de-stress before, during, and after, frequently asked questions about preparing an excellent thesis defense, related articles.

If you're about to complete, or have ever completed a graduate degree, you have most likely come across the term "thesis defense." In many countries, to finish a graduate degree, you have to write a thesis .

A thesis is a large paper, or multi-chapter work, based on a topic relating to your field of study.

Once you hand in your thesis, you will be assigned a date to defend your work. Your thesis defense meeting usually consists of you and a committee of two or more professors working in your program. It may also include other people, like professionals from other colleges or those who are working in your field.

During your thesis defense, you will be asked questions about your work. The main purpose of your thesis defense is for the committee to make sure that you actually understand your field and focus area.

The questions are usually open-ended and require the student to think critically about their work. By the time of your thesis defense, your paper has already been evaluated. The questions asked are not designed so that you actually have to aggressively "defend" your work; often, your thesis defense is more of a formality required so that you can get your degree.

• Check with your department about requirements and timing.
• Re-read your thesis.
• Anticipate questions and prepare for them.
• Create a back-up plan to deal with technology hiccups.
• Plan de-stressing activities both before, and after, your defense.

How long your oral thesis defense is depends largely on the institution and requirements of your degree. It is best to consult your department or institution about this. In general, a thesis defense may take only 20 minutes, but it may also take two hours or more. The length also depends on how much time is allocated to the presentation and questioning part.

Tip: Check with your department or institution as soon as possible to determine the approved length for a thesis defense.

First of all, be aware that a thesis defense varies from country to country. This is just a general overview, but a thesis defense can take many different formats. Some are closed, others are public defenses. Some take place with two committee members, some with more examiners.

The same goes for the length of your thesis defense, as mentioned above. The most important first step for you is to clarify with your department what the structure of your thesis defense will look like. In general, your thesis defense will include:

• your presentation of around 20-30 minutes
• questions from the committee
• questions from the audience (if the defense is public and the department allows it)

You might have to give a presentation, often with Powerpoint, Google slides, or Keynote slides. Make sure to prepare an appropriate amount of slides. A general rule is to use about 10 slides for a 20-minute presentation.

But that also depends on your specific topic and the way you present. The good news is that there will be plenty of time ahead of your thesis defense to prepare your slides and practice your presentation alone and in front of friends or family.

Tip: Practice delivering your thesis presentation in front of family, friends, or colleagues.

You can prepare your slides by using information from your thesis' first chapter (the overview of your thesis) as a framework or outline. Substantive information in your thesis should correspond with your slides.

Make sure your slides are of good quality— both in terms of the integrity of the information and the appearance. If you need more help with how to prepare your presentation slides, both the ASQ Higher Education Brief and James Hayton have good guidelines on the topic.

The committee will ask questions about your work after you finish your presentation. The questions will most likely be about the core content of your thesis, such as what you learned from the study you conducted. They may also ask you to summarize certain findings and to discuss how your work will contribute to the existing body of knowledge.

Tip: Read your entire thesis in preparation of the questions, so you have a refreshed perspective on your work.

While you are preparing, you can create a list of possible questions and try to answer them. You can foresee many of the questions you will get by simply spending some time rereading your thesis.

Here are a few tips on how to prepare for your thesis defense:

You can absolutely prepare for most of the questions you will be asked. Read through your thesis and while you're reading it, create a list of possible questions. In addition, since you will know who will be on the committee, look at the academic expertise of the committee members. In what areas would they most likely be focused?

If possible, sit at other thesis defenses with these committee members to get a feel for how they ask and what they ask. As a graduate student, you should generally be adept at anticipating test questions, so use this advantage to gather as much information as possible before your thesis defense meeting.

Your thesis defense is a formal event, often the entire department or university is invited to participate. It signals a critical rite of passage for graduate students and faculty who have supported them throughout a long and challenging process.

While most universities don't have specific rules on how to dress for that event, do regard it with dignity and respect. This one might be a no-brainer, but know that you should dress as if you were on a job interview or delivering a paper at a conference.

It might help you deal with your stress before your thesis defense to entrust someone with the smaller but important responsibilities of your defense well ahead of schedule. This trusted person could be responsible for:

• preparing the room of the day of defense
• setting up equipment for the presentation
• preparing and distributing handouts

Technology is unpredictable. Life is too. There are no guarantees that your Powerpoint presentation will work at all or look the way it is supposed to on the big screen. We've all been there. Make sure to have a plan B for these situations. Handouts can help when technology fails, and an additional clean shirt can save the day if you have a spill.

One of the scariest aspects of the defense is the possibility of being asked a question you can't answer. While you can prepare for some questions, you can never know exactly what the committee will ask.

There will always be gaps in your knowledge. But your thesis defense is not about being perfect and knowing everything, it's about how you deal with challenging situations. You are not expected to know everything.

James Hayton writes on his blog that examiners will sometimes even ask questions they don't know the answer to, out of curiosity, or because they want to see how you think. While it is ok sometimes to just say "I don't know", he advises to try something like "I don't know, but I would think [...] because of x and y, but you would need to do [...] in order to find out.” This shows that you have the ability to think as an academic.

You will be nervous. But your examiners will expect you to be nervous. Being well prepared can help minimize your stress, but do know that your examiners have seen this many times before and are willing to help, by repeating questions, for example. Dora Farkas at finishyourthesis.com notes that it’s a myth that thesis committees are out to get you.

Two common symptoms of being nervous are talking really fast and nervous laughs. Try to slow yourself down and take a deep breath. Remember what feels like hours to you are just a few seconds in real life.

• Try meditational breathing right before your defense.
• Get plenty of exercise and sleep in the weeks prior to your defense.
• Have your clothes or other items you need ready to go the night before.
• During your defense, allow yourself to process each question before answering.
• Go to dinner with friends and family, or to a fun activity like mini-golf, after your defense.

Allow yourself to process each question, respond to it, and stop talking once you have responded. While a smile can often help dissolve a difficult situation, remember that nervous laughs can be irritating for your audience.

We all make mistakes and your thesis defense will not be perfect. However, careful preparation, mindfulness, and confidence can help you feel less stressful both before, and during, your defense.

Finally, consider planning something fun that you can look forward to after your defense.

It is completely normal to be nervous. Being well prepared can help minimize your stress, but do know that your examiners have seen this many times before and are willing to help, by repeating questions for example if needed. Slow yourself down, and take a deep breath.

Your thesis defense is not about being perfect and knowing everything, it's about how you deal with challenging situations. James Hayton writes on his blog that it is ok sometimes to just say "I don't know", but he advises to try something like "I don't know, but I would think [...] because of x and y, you would need to do [...] in order to find out".

Your Powerpoint presentation can get stuck or not look the way it is supposed to do on the big screen. It can happen and your supervisors know it. In general, handouts can always save the day when technology fails.

• Dress for success.
• Ask for help setting up.
• Have a backup plan (in case technology fails you).
• Deal with your nerves.

College of Liberal Arts & Sciences

Department of History

• Why Study History
• Student Financial Aid
• Visit Illinois
• Graduate Admissions
• Graduate Studies and Admissions
• Undergraduate Studies
• Convocation
• Proficiency Exams
• Course Listings
• Fields of Study
• Undergraduate Research
• Faculty Publications
• Women and Gender History Symposium
• Administration & Staff
• Affiliated Faculty
• Graduate Students
• Faculty Resources
• Student Resources
• Public Resources
• News Stories
• Newsletters
• Career Paths in History
• Alumni Spotlights
• Give to History
• Stay Connected

PhD Pre-Defense and Final Defense

Pre-Defense

The pre-defense is an occasion for the dissertator and their committee to come together over a draft of the dissertation to discuss the main arguments, evidence, structure, and organization. This is a good juncture at which each of the committee members can advise the student about major revisions and additions to the tasks of research and thinking that need to be accomplished before the final defense.

The pre-defense generally takes place three to six months before the final defense.

The student is responsible for setting up the meeting: arranging the time and place as well as distributing the draft of the dissertation in time for all the readers to engage with it in a substantive way. The department should also be notified about the event with an e-mail message to the Graduate Secretary.

The pre-defense usually lasts two hours. During the pre-defense each of the committee members has a chance to ask the student questions and usually an organic conversation emerges. If one of the committee members is off campus, they should be asked to participate by sharing comments in advance with the committee chair and the student or might participate via internet. It is not imperative that the entire committee be assembled for the pre-defense.

There is no formal or Graduate College paperwork involved. When the conversation is complete and the student has the instructions from the committee, the advisor should notify the DGS with a short e-mail summary of the pre-defense (about one paragraph). This will be placed in the student's file. A notation will also be added to the Graduate Secretary's records that the pre-defense has taken place.

Final Defense

Instructions for Preparations of Thesis, and a history department thesis checklist, are distributed to each student who becomes ABD. Questions should be directed the Thesis office of the Graduate College and/or the Graduate Secretary. For Graduate College policies about doctoral committees and the final defense, see pages 36-45 in the Graduate College Handbook .

All members of the Doctoral Examination Committee should receive a copy of the dissertation well in advance of the final defense, and in any case not less than one month prior. Some faculty are willing to read electronic copies, but this should not be assumed--please ask your committee members. The Chair of the Committee is responsible for the scheduling, but may delegate the task to the student.

During the final defense, the student is normally asked to leave the room at the beginning of the meeting so committee members can confer about the dissertation and decide on the order in which they will question the student and willingness to have others chime in during their “time” with related questions. The student is then usually invited to return and initiates discussion by briefly describing the dissertation, its main arguments, significance, their own assessments of its strengths and weaknesses, and questions they may have for the committee. Committee members ask questions in sequence, usually ending with the advisor/chair of the dissertation committee. At the end of the two hours the student is asked to leave the room again so the committee members can confer on the result.  The result is conveyed orally to the student immediately, and in writing on the forms provided by the graduate secretary.

Time Limitations

Graduate College rules:

• A student who enters the graduate program with a BA must complete the PhD within seven years after first registration in the Graduate College.
• A student who has received an MA elsewhere must complete the PhD within six years after first registering in the Graduate College.
• A student who has an MA from Illinois, then terminates his/her enrollment only to return to the PhD program a year or more later, must complete the PhD no more than six years after the date of return.

Graduate students who have reached these official Graduate College time limits--which differ slightly from norms in history-- must petition for approval from the Graduate College to continue. To receive this approval, the student will present evidence of substantial progress toward the degree (supported by the thesis advisor) and set a date for completion. A petition must be submitted to the Graduate Secretary, who will obtain the necessary signatures and forward to the Graduate College.

Students who have completed 96 hours and all other requirements, save the dissertation, may cease to enroll at the University while they continue to work on the thesis. Students should remember that unless registered they will not have access to services for which they do not pay fees. Upon completion or near completion, a PhD student may re-apply to register for the semester during which the final defense will be taken. Procedures for this vary according to how long the student has been unregistered; and students are advised to contact the Graduate Secretary several months in advance of when they intend to register.

If more than five years elapse between advancement to candidacy (ABD) and the final defense, students are required to demonstrate the currency of their knowledge by retaking the prelim exam, usually in the form of an oral exam with the dissertation committee prior to defense of the thesis--this could be additional time allotted at the start of the final defense. Evidence such as scholarly publications and college-level teaching may be taken as partial evidence of currency, but a prelim exam committee must be appointed, the exam given, and the results reported to the Graduate College.

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

What are the common mistakes PhD candidates make in their final defense session?

For a PhD candidate that has done a fine job in their PhD, what are the common mistakes to avoid in a defense session?

• thesis-committee

• 39 Being too worried about it. I was pretty nervous, but in the end it was more of a stimulating discussion than anything else. –  Steven Gubkin Commented Sep 4, 2015 at 21:33
• 1 As @StevenGubkin says, the point of the defense is for the committee to understand what you did. You're just giving a talk to a willing audience! –  DanielSank Commented Sep 5, 2015 at 18:36
• 2 @Steven Not being nervous enough could also backfire. I've seen it happen. –  Martin - マーチン Commented Sep 8, 2015 at 13:13

7 Answers 7

How the dissertation defense works varies enormously between fields, countries, universities, and departments. Any guidance has to take into account what the expectations are.

For example, in the defenses I'm familiar with, there are no common mistakes at all. In fact, I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone do anything worth calling a mistake. Here, the defense is basically a formality: you don't reach that point unless your advisor and readers are happy with your dissertation and confident you will easily pass, and in practice nobody fails unless something goes dreadfully wrong. That can happen (I know of one case in which a serious mistake was uncovered at the last minute, which was certainly embarrassing to both the candidate and the committee), but I've never actually been present when someone failed. So if someone from my department asked me about common mistakes they should avoid, I'd tell them not to worry about it: making it to the defense is the hard part, and then passing it is really straightforward. It's more of a celebratory ritual than an actual test.

But of course this depends on how the defense is handled in your department.

• 2 Where I did my PhD it was even further to the side you describe. Before the defense one gets an email with a formal letter attached stating that the thesis has been approved (i.e. stating that the work is worthy of a PhD). Essentially the only way to fail at the defense is if it turns out you did not do the work yourself. –  Tobias Kildetoft Commented Sep 5, 2015 at 10:14
• 4 @Calchas - In case you can afford the time, I guess people in this thread would be willing to hear about the reasons why that bloke got a flat out "No" . What exactly did he do to deserve it? –  299792458 Commented Sep 6, 2015 at 15:50
• 1 @TheDarkSide From what I understand, it was obvious to everyone he was not going to pass, it is not quite as simple as he did no work but I remember vaguely seeing him always playing computer games in the office rather than doing any work. In his final year, I understand his advisor counselled him to change his registration to an MSci by Research and work towards that, but he didn't wish to do that. Actually the PhD examiners did have power to make that award instead of a PhD, but they decided to fail him immediately . I don't believe he appealed their decision. It was not a normal case. –  Calchas Commented Sep 6, 2015 at 17:16
• 2 @TheDarkSide: maybe the university procedures don't really account for someone who wants to defend the indefensible, so if the candidate ignores all advice and insists, then they're entitled to submit and defend, and the only way to stop them would be to expel them first (which is even more hassle)? –  Steve Jessop Commented Sep 7, 2015 at 11:24
• 2 @Mehrdad: I don't know the details (it was some years ago, and I wasn't directly involved). As I remember it, during the week before the defense one of the readers found a serious mistake in a central part of the work, which everything else depended on. It looked like it could plausibly be fixed, but it wasn't 100% clear whether or how it could. The student was reluctant to cancel the defense, and he worked like crazy to try to fix the mistake before the defense, but he didn't succeed and didn't pass. However, he passed on his second try, after spending a few months fixing everything. –  Anonymous Mathematician Commented Sep 7, 2015 at 16:10

Let me turn the question around and answer what I want a PhD candidate to demonstrate during a defense. There are in reality only 3 things:

Demonstrate mastery of the subject, i.e., understand where the problem you researched comes from, why it is relevant, what others have already done, and why their approaches are insufficient.

That you have made a creative contribution to resolving the question you worked on. The creative contribution may really have been only a single idea or insight, grounded in an understanding of the field. In reality, you will have likely developed it jointly with your adviser.

That you have followed up this idea with diligent, comprehensive work that explored the potential and consequences of the idea.

If you cover these three topics, you will be on the good side.

Now for the common mistakes: Among the bad or difficult PhD defenses I have sat through -- of which unfortunately there were a number -- the candidate typically covered only one or two of the areas above. I can think of defenses where a candidate demonstrated good, diligent work, but was almost entirely unaware of the scientific background of the work. I can also think of defenses where the candidate understood the field well, but all of the work was essentially applying existing methods to problems to which it had previously been applied. And I can think of defenses where the candidate had had an idea, but whether the idea was worthwhile pursuing or not had not been explored in any kind of detail through follow-up work. In other words, I've seen PhD candidates make all kinds of mistakes. In reality, I think that the problem was in all of these cases not with the defense, but with the candidate, as usually becomes apparent during the Q&A session at the end.

• 1 Just for my own sake so I don't screw up when it's my turn -- how do you want the balance to be between the presentation and the dissertation? For example, if a dissertation covers all 3 but the presentation is only supposed to be 30 minutes so it focuses on 1 or 2 of the areas, is that a mistake ? It seems hard to cover any one of the areas in a short presentation while all 3 seem possible in the full text. –  tpg2114 Commented Sep 5, 2015 at 4:37
• 13 The mistakes you list also seem to indicate that the candidate's advisor has done a poor job. –  Marc Claesen Commented Sep 5, 2015 at 5:23
• @tpg2114 I guess it depends on the form the defense takes, but where I am i would see it as the examiners' job not to finish the defence until they are sufficiently satisfied with all 3. I guess you could mess up by de-railing all their questions, but I'd expect that to indicate one of the 3 was missing anyway. –  Jessica B Commented Sep 5, 2015 at 6:01
• 1 @tpg2114: Have a brief introduction (maybe 5 minutes) of the field and the question you're looking at, and then spend the rest of your time on the other two points. Your mastery of the subject will become apparent throughout the defense and the questions. –  Wolfgang Bangerth Commented Sep 5, 2015 at 12:57
• @MarcClaesen: Yes. As well as cases where a student forced the issue because they had a job lined up and requested the defense even though the adviser was not convinced it was time yet. –  Wolfgang Bangerth Commented Sep 5, 2015 at 12:58

IMO, the most common is being defensive (perhaps encouraged by the name of the ritual). For instance if a member asks "Why did you use Smith's procedure...", and the candidate starts backtracking and apologizing, saying "I suppose I could have used Jones' procedure, that would have been better", when the question simply asks you to explain why you used Smith's procedure.

• 17 You mean it's not supposed to literally be a defense of your thesis? That takes all the fun out of it! :( –  Mason Wheeler Commented Sep 4, 2015 at 21:09
• 3 @MasonWheeler: I was certain you're going to link this: xkcd.com/1403 –  tomasz Commented Sep 7, 2015 at 1:36
• I'd thought for sure this picture would suit the situation if something ever did. –  Vandermonde Commented Sep 7, 2015 at 3:52

In the end, the person in the room who probably knows most about the work done is the candidate.

• Don't get nervous
• Make sure your slides cover what you did, in sufficient detail. Don't overdo it, your time is limited. Make sure (e.g. by rehearsing) you fit in the allotted time. Might have to only show a slice for this, select it carefully.
• When asked about stuff outside your direct work, it can be better to say you don't know than to try to come up with an explanation on the spot.
• Check possible questions (within reason!) and have answers ready

• 2 All due respect, but bullet 4 is easier said than done. You can't anticipate everything . –  299792458 Commented Sep 6, 2015 at 15:42

I have been to multiple defenses, some common/general mistakes:

Not knowing why they use certain methods as opposed to others. Meaning that you can answer what you are doing and how the formula works, but you can't answer why not use X method instead.

Not knowing the specifics of certain methods/formulas and their reasons. Ex: we take X from Y, and you can't answer why you can/should take X from Z. more realistically: we take a measurement from the center, why not the top or bottom?

Charts with too little information, and trying to make connections that "are there" in most datasets, but doesn't imply they will be in yours. Don't create curved lines if you are missing dots.

Not knowing what is the importance of whatever it is that you are doing. Can you answer the question: "How is this useful for someone else?"

Answers in the following form: why are you using "matlab?", you: because my advisor said so. Expected response: because my advisor has plenty of experience with it and we know it can solve the problem better than other software.

The worst mistake you can make is to insist on defending on a certain date, over your advisor's objections. (I have seen this happen.)

If I may be forgiven a small anecdote: My aunt was asked a question in her defense (physics) that she didn't know how to answer. She said to the questioner, "Perhaps a sketch will help make this clear," and attempted to draw some coordinate axes... which didn't come out straight... and after several erasures and retries, the questioner got fed up and said, "It's okay, I know you know it, let's move on."

• 4 I'm sorry, but I didn't follow the point of your anecdote. Could you please make that explicit? It seems to give the impression that you are suggesting derailment. –  299792458 Commented Sep 6, 2015 at 15:45
• 1 @TheDarkSide - I don't understand what or who might be getting derailed... but the anecdote is supposed to give an example of a committee wanting to help the baby bird get out of the nest (i.e. the department). –  aparente001 Commented Sep 6, 2015 at 18:03

A common mistake to avoid is getting too nervous or defensive, and trying to cover up the limits of your knowledge. The committee will try to explore the limits of your knowledge and keep pressing for answers to increasingly difficult questions until you say "I don't know." Be expecting this. It's OK to not know the answer, especially when the question is not core to your thesis. If you can identify why a question is not core to your thesis, and articulate that clearly, you get bonus points for that (as long as you do it tactfully and don't imply that it's a bad question). Also, depending on the committee, they may be looking for a better answer like "I don't know, but for X reason(s) I suspect the answer might be Y and I would go about finding the answer by Z." If the question is core to your thesis, offer to find out the answer and get back to them (especially if they're on your committee).

The better your presentation, the more questions you're likely to get that try to expand outward into territory you haven't prepared for. Take that as a good sign!

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged phd defense thesis-committee ..

• Featured on Meta
• Upcoming sign-up experiments related to tags

Hot Network Questions

• Alternatives to raising a mains-fed shower?
• A deceiving simple question of combinations about ways of selecting 5 questions with atleast 1 question from each sections
• Meaning of "virō" in description of Lavinia
• What is this flying boat I just saw fly over?
• Why don't they put more spare gyroscopes in expensive space telescopes?
• What is the most general notion of exactness for functors between triangulated categories?
• Would an industrial level society be able to visually identify orbital debris from a destroyed mega structure?
• How to avoid init methods when 2 objects need the reference of each other?
• Statement of Contribution in Dissertation
• what does this phrase mean "placed on her end"?
• How to get accent cedilla between z and a?
• Is it possible for Mathematica to output the name of a matrix as opposed to its matrix form?
• How to see image size in Firefox?
• Can the laser light, in principle, take any wavelength in the EM spectrum?
• Total/sum multiple fields and group by in QGIS
• Possible negative connotations of "Messy Kitchen" for a blog and social media project name
• Ideal test/p-value calculation for difference in means with small sample size and right skewed data?
• Blend a list of colors with hues from 0 to 1 in increments of 0.1
• Compactly supported étale cohomology and affine space fibration
• Why is "Colourless green ideas sleep furiously" considered meaningless?
• Is it possible that the editor is still looking for other reveiwers while one reviewer has submitted the reviewer report?
• Transforming sentences with perfect infintive
• Does every proof need an axiom saying it works?
• Could a Google Chrome extension read my password?

Dissertation Defense

• Dissertation Defense: Home
• Preparing for the Defense
• Example Defense Questions
• Attending a Defense

Sample Defenses

• Student Experience Feedback Buttons
• Zoom Resources
• Dissertation Publishing in ProQuest
• School of Education Educator Dispositions

Jump to DSE Guide

Welcome to the sample dissertation library! Doctoral students often wonder what it's like to defend their dissertations and in this guide you will find various samples to give you an idea of what to expect when it's your turn. While not all defenses are recorded, you can use these samples to help you prepare for your own defense.

Was this resource helpful?

• << Previous: Attending a Defense
• Next: Zoom Resources >>
• Last Updated: Sep 12, 2023 2:22 PM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/c.php?g=1006027

© Copyright 2024 National University. All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Policy | Consumer Information

• Youth Program
• Wharton Online

Final Defense Check List

Final Defense Stage

• Apply for the degree: https://srfs.upenn.edu/student-records/GradApp
• When scheduling your deposit appointment via Calendly, please be sure to enter Gidget Murray’s contact under “coordinator” NOT your PhD Faculty Coordinator. [email protected]
• Dissertation defenses may be in-person or presented via remote conferencing. All forms required for depositing will be submitted electronically , and title page signatures are not required. A printed copy of the dissertation will not be required, and the dissertation must be submitted electronically via ETD Administrator .
• Inform your department administrator so they may help with scheduling
• Email the final defense notification form to the Doctoral Programs Office at least 2 weeks before your final defense
• Nancy Zhang should be listed as “Graduate Group Chairperson”: Nancy Zhang, Ge Li and Ning Zhao Professor, Professor of Statistics and Data Science
• Click Available Forms
• Then, Penn Graduate Forms
• Under “add new requirement” select, Dissertation Defense/Oral Exam
• Complete the form to reflect your dissertation information
• Click Submit Form
• Your committee will receive an email with instructions to go into Penn Graduate Forms and approve your dissertation
• Complete Job Placement survey that is emailed to you
• Complete the PhD Exit Survey (degree office will be automatically notified)
• Complete the Survey of Earned Doctorates, https://sed-ncses.org and save the completion certificate– you will upload this to ETD Administrator under “Administrative Documents”
• Upload your properly formatted dissertation PDF into ETD Administrator and click Submit . For help, visit our step-by-step instructions .
• Deposit dissertation with the Graduate Division via your deposit appointment

Helpful Links and Reminders:

• Special dissertation defense and deposit instructions for PhD students continue to be in effect: Dissertation defenses may be conducted in-person or remotely
• All required forms for depositing are submitted virtually in Penn Graduate Forms
• Nancy Zhang should be listed as Graduate Group Chairperson as follows: Nancy Zhang, Ge Li and Ning Zhao Professor, Professor of Statistics
• A printed copy of the dissertation is not required for deposit
• The dissertation must be submitted electronically in ETD Administrator

Graduate degrees main website:

https://provost.upenn.edu/for-students/graduate-and-professional-education/graduate-degrees/

Frequently Asked Questions

https://provost.upenn.edu/for-students/graduate-and-professional-education/graduate-degrees/graduation-information/graduation-faqs/

Graduation Calendar: https://provost.upenn.edu/for-students/graduate-and-professional-education/graduate-degrees/graduation-information/degree-calendar/

Review the Doctoral Dissertation Formatting: https://provost.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/users/user3179/PhD%20Candidate%20Formatting%20Checklist_0.pdf

Survey of Earned Doctorates https://sed-ncses.org

​PhD Exit survey – If you have technical difficulties accessing the PhD Exit Survey, please contact [email protected]

*PhD candidates must forward completion verifications of both surveys to  [email protected]

Planning and Passing Your PhD Defence: A Global Toolbox for Success

• November 2021
• ISBN: 9780429347900
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

• Universidad San Francisco de Quito (USFQ)

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Fiona Charlton
• Peter Smith
• Joey V Barnett

• Katherine Firth
• Liam Connell
• Peta Freestone

• Roger D. Aines
• Amy L. Aines
• Account Audit Account J

• NURS EDUC TODAY
• Geraldine Davis

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

• Graduate School
• Current Students
• Final Doctoral Exam

Doctoral Exam Guide

Final oral defence, workday student support.

Graduate students can find "how to" guides and support information on our Workday support page .

Purpose of the Final Oral Defence

• To ensure that the candidate is able to present and defend the dissertation and its underlying assumptions, methodology, results, and conclusions in a manner consistent with the doctoral degree being sought;
• To communicate the results of the work to the campus community.

Structure of the Final Oral Defence

The detailed Final Oral Defence procedures are outlined in the Exam Instructions . A copy of these instructions is provided to the examining committee approximately one week before the Oral Defence.

The basic structure of the Oral Defence is:

• Candidate makes a public presentation of the dissertation (maximum 30 minutes)
• Examining committee members question the candidate
• Members of the audience are invited to ask questions of the candidate
• Examining committee holds an in-camera discussion where it decides on the overall recommendation it will make to Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies (see Evaluation Protocol below)
• Chair conveys the recommendations of the examining committee to the candidate

Candidates are encouraged to arrive 30 minutes early to get comfortable and set-up in the exam room. Exams start promptly at the official start time. The doors to the exam room are closed at the start of the exam and no one may enter the exam room, either physical or virtual, once the Final Oral Defence has begun. The Oral Defence usually takes two to two and a half hours.

Audiovisual Equipment

The examination rooms in the Graduate Student Centre come equipped with a projector and screen (room 200) or a large monitor and auxiliary screen (room 203), a white board, and a podium. Most candidates prefer to bring their own laptops to the examination; it is possible to use the wall mounted PC in either room, in which case candidates should either have their presentations available on cloud storage or bring a thumb drive.

The displays in rooms 200 and 203 are equipped with VGA and HDMI inputs. Candidates using laptops without these outputs must bring the appropriate adaptors.

Candidates planning to use Zoom to enable remote attendance should indicate their preference when making the exam booking.

Language Requirement

Candidates for the Final Doctoral Examination must have fulfilled all course and/or language requirements of the degree program. It is the responsibility of the candidate's graduate program to ensure these requirements have been met, and that the candidate's oral language proficiency is adequate for full communication between the examination committee and the candidate.

The Final Doctoral Examination is a public event at UBC and as such will be conducted in English. The candidate's oral proficiency in the language of the examination must be adequate for full communication between the examination committee and the candidate. For theses in language programs, some questions can be posed or answered in the language concerned, provided the examination committee can follow proceedings (by translation if necessary) in this other language.

Remote Attendance at in-person Exams

For information regarding Virtual Defences held entirely on Zoom, see Schedulng the Oral Defence, and the Virtual Exam Protocol .

Managing remote attendees can pose both technological challenges and challenges for candidates in managing divided attention. For these reasons, Hybrid Defences with more than one remote attendee should be discussed with the doctoral exams team in advance. We will work with candidates and supervisors to make sure these defences run smoothly .

Normally, examiners required for quorum at an in-person defence should be physically present in the room. The external examiner or a third member of the supervisory committee may attend the defence remotely. 

Doctoral exams team use a Meeting OWL to support videoconferencing with Zoom. Candidates who wish to have remote attendees should indicate this on their Booking Request. The OWL can be used in either room.

For exams in other suitable rooms on campus, the research supervisor should verify that appropriate equipment is available in the room. Devices such as an OWL, or other mobile AV device may be used.

Should any technological issues arise during the course of the exam, the exam may be paused for a reasonable amount of time to resolve them. Only those examining committee members who have been present for the full duration of the exam can cast a vote in the proceedings. If members required for quorum lose connection and it cannot be restored, the exam will need to be rescheduled.

Please also note that the examination chair has the right to discontinue a remote connection if it is interfering with the proper conduct of the examination.

Attendance of the External Examiner

The external examiner's participation in a candidate's Final Oral Defence offers the opportunity for a valuable dialogue about the dissertation and the research it presents. Therefore, the participation of the external examiner in the Final Oral Defence is encouraged, but it is not required.

Inviting the external examiner to participate in the Final Oral Defence is at the discretion of the research supervisor; Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies will not extend such an invitation. For information about inviting the external examiner, please see Scheduling the Oral Defence .

Recording the Examination

See Recording the Examination .

Evaluation Protocol for the Oral Defence

The examining committee is asked to make an overall recommendation after evaluating two aspects of the candidate's performance:

• The Oral Defence : The committee should evaluate the candidate’s performance while presenting the synopsis, responding to questions, and defending the work. The committee must decide whether or not the performance met the standard of excellence expected of a doctoral candidate at UBC.
• The Dissertation: The committee should evaluate the overall merit of the dissertation, considering scholarship, scope and impact of the contribution made, and the quality of writing. They are asked to take into consideration the external examiner’s report, the assessments of the other examining committee members, and candidate's responses to questions during the Oral Defence. The committee will decide what revisions, if any, will be required before the dissertation can be considered fully acceptable.

Evaluation options available to the examining committee are:

• No revision or only minor revisions are required. The committee charges the research supervisor to verify that the required changes have been made.
• Substantive revisions are required. The committee chooses two or more of its members, including the research supervisor, to verify that the required changes have been made.
• The dissertation is unsatisfactory. Major rewriting and rethinking are required.
• The dissertation is unacceptable; it is fundamentally flawed and therefore beyond revision.

The examining committee is then asked to select one of the following overall recommendations:

• Pass. Pending final submission of the dissertation to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies, the University should award the doctoral degree to this candidate.
• Re-examination required. The candidate should be allowed a second attempt to pass the Final Doctoral Examination. (No more than one subsequent attempt is permitted.)
• Fail. The University should not grant the doctoral degree to this candidate.

In any category where the committee's judgment is unanimous, or nearly so (in that at most one examiner dissents), the chair will express it using the check-boxes on the chair's Report form. Dissenting opinions will be noted in the text of the Chair’s Report. In any category where two or more examiners disagree with the majority view, the chair will select a box labelled “No Decision” and provide a written description of the differing views in the text of the report. If this occurs, the chair will inform Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies as soon as possible (typically within one business day of the examination). The Dean of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies will review the Chair's Report and promptly determine an appropriate course of action, in consultation with the examination chair and the examining committee.

The examination chair is responsible for completing the Chair's Report form and submitting it to Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies within one week of the Oral Defence.

• Why Grad School at UBC?
• Graduate Degree Programs
• Application & Admission
• Info Sessions
• Research Supervisors
• Research Projects
• Indigenous Students
• International Students
• Tuition, Fees & Cost of Living
• Newly Admitted
• Student Status & Classification
• Student Responsibilities
• Supervision & Advising
• Managing your Program
• Health, Wellbeing and Safety
• Professional Development
• Dissertation & Thesis Preparation
• Final Dissertation & Thesis Submission
• Life in Vancouver
• Vancouver Campus
• Graduate Student Spaces
• Graduate Life Centre
• Life as a Grad Student
• Graduate Student Ambassadors
• Meet our Students
• Award Opportunities
• Award Guidelines
• Minimum Funding Policy for PhD Students
• Killam Awards & Fellowships
• Policies & Procedures
• Information for Supervisors
• Dean's Message
• Leadership Team
• Strategic Plan & Priorities
• Vision & Mission
• Equity, Diversity & Inclusion
• Initiatives, Plans & Reports
• Graduate Education Analysis & Research
• Media Enquiries
• Newsletters
• Giving to Graduate Studies

Strategic Priorities

• Strategic Plan 2019-2024
• Improving Student Funding
• Promoting Excellence in Graduate Programs
• Enhancing Graduate Supervision
• Advancing Indigenous Inclusion
• Supporting Student Development and Success
• Reimagining Graduate Education
• Enriching the Student Experience

Initiatives

• Public Scholars Initiative
• 3 Minute Thesis (3MT)
• PhD Career Outcomes

Defense and Dissertation Overview

Once a student’s box is checked, the BPH student should set up a one-on-one “Defense Packet Meeting” with the BPH Associate Director to review the Defense and Dissertation Process, which includes reviewing all required materials, logistics, timing, FAS/Harvard Griffin GSAS Form of the Dissertation, sample forms, and to answer student questions related to these processes.

• Defense Committee Chair: One member of the student’s DAC, often the DAC chair, is required to chair the oral defense. This required holdover from the DAC serves the purpose of providing insight to the examiners regarding the path the student has taken in completing the dissertation research. Their primary role is to assess committee satisfaction with the written dissertation, administer the exam, arbitrate any problems that may arise, and make final recommendations for completion of necessary corrections and additions to the dissertation. No other DAC members can serve on the defense committee .
• At least one member must be a BPH faculty member, often from the same academic department.
• One member of the examination committee must be from outside of Harvard University.
• The fourth member may be from either BPH or another Harvard-affiliated program.
• Co-authors and collaborators cannot be members of the Defense committee

DEFENSE TIMING AND FORMAT

• Students should notify the BPH Program as far in advance as possible with the details of the exam. 
• The student is required to notify the BPH office no later than 3 weeks in advance of the defense with the final dissertation title.
• At least two weeks before the date of exam, defense members should be sent copies of the dissertation for review. A copy of the dissertation should also be sent to the BPH program.
• If any defense committee member foresees problems with the exam, they should contact the chair of the defense committee in advance of the meeting. If major problems are found with the written document, the Committee can decide to postpone the oral defense until satisfactory changes are made. While rare in our program, these occasions can involve the insufficient or improper use of statistical methods, grossly overstated conclusions, insufficient background or discussion, or evidence of plagiarism.
• More details about the timing and format are provided in the “Defense Packet Meeting” held with each student.

STIPEND GUIDELINES

If a student successfully defends the dissertation before the 15th of the month, the stipend will be terminated at the end of that month. If the student successfully defends on or after the 15th, the next month’s stipend will be the final month the student is paid, at the discretion of their advisor.

Students are encouraged to speak to their advisors directly about how they should be paid as they complete their graduate work. If an advisor wishes to pay the student for one additional month, beyond what has been explained above, the advisor must notify the department’s financial administrator. For administrative reasons, a stipend cannot be issued to a student after their graduation/degree conferral date.

ORAL DEFENSE PROCEDURES

Part 1: Public Seminar As part of the exam, the PhD candidate will present a public seminar followed by a private oral examination.  The public presentation lasts no longer than 1 hour, which includes time for the advisor’s introduction, the student’s oral presentation and acknowledgements, and time for audience questions and answers.  The Defense Committee is required to attend the public seminar; however, it is customary for members of the defense committee to hold their questions until the private oral exam.

Part 2: Private Oral Examination A private oral examination follows the public seminar.  Initially, the student will be asked to leave the room for several minutes, along with the dissertation advisor if the dissertation advisor has decided to remain for the private exam.  During this time, the committee will discuss the merits of the dissertation, any issues with the dissertation, and areas they may want to focus on during the oral exam.  The student (and advisor if present) is then asked back into the room for the exam.

Each member of the defense committee will direct questions to the candidate based on their review of the dissertation and presentation of the seminar. The Defense Chair will moderate the discussion between the panel and the student.  The closed defense takes up to two hours and involves detailed technical questions as well as broader questions on the conclusions, impact, and limitations of the research.  Dissertation advisors may be present, but they must not participate in the exam (e.g., answer questions posed by the committee).

At the end of the examination, the student (and advisor if present) is once again asked to step out of the room for several minutes.  The Committee will discuss any revisions needed for the thesis and whether these revisions need to be reviewed and by whom.  Once the committee determines the outcomes, the student will be asked back into the room and the Committee provides the student with any [minor] changes needed to the dissertation. While it is extremely rare for the student to fail at this stage, the committee will provide recommendations to the student on their research, communication skills, and development as a scientist, as well as delineating the required changes to the dissertation.

PREPARING FOR THE DEFENSE/WRITING THE DISSERTATION

Students preparing to write and defend their dissertation must review University requirements as outlined in “ Dissertations ” with guidelines published at the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences.

Students are also welcome to visit the BPH Student Lounge (Building 2, Room 113) to look at copies of previous BPH bound dissertations.

Writing the Dissertation Each student must write a comprehensive PhD dissertation on their research topic and the original results of their research. There are a variety of ways a dissertation can be composed, but the core elements described below must be included. The dissertation must show original treatment of the subject, contain a scholarly review of the pertinent literature, provide evidence of independent research of publishable quality, and be clearly, logically, and carefully written. In addition to a compendium of the student’s research, including detailed methods and results, the dissertation must contain a thoughtful discussion of the conclusions, impact, and limitations of the research. The completed work should be critically reviewed by the dissertation advisor before being submitted to the Dissertation Defense Committee.

In some cases, the student has done all of the work in the dissertation; more often portions of the dissertation result from collaborative research. In all dissertations containing collaborative results, the dissertation should indicate concisely who contributed to the work and how.  For example, a chapter containing multi-authored, published work must include a complete reference of the publication and a brief description of the candidate’s and the colleagues’ contributions. For work that is not published but which resulted from multiple researchers, the contributors must be named and respective attributions made clear. This policy allows stylistic flexibility; depending on the amount of collaborative work in the dissertation and the status of publication(s), the attributions can be, preferably, on or accompanying the cover page for each chapter or within an extended acknowledgements section at the end of each chapter. It is recommended that if figures or figure panels are included that are the work of others that the figure panels be clearly identified and the work properly attributed. It is permissible for more than one student to include work from the same collaboration or publication as long as the required attributions are clear, justified, and complete.

Individual chapters can be that of published articles as long as there are also comprehensive Introduction and Conclusion chapters written by the student. While the text can be the same, use of journal reprints as a chapter is not permissible. A word document of the published article must be used, and the pages in the dissertation must be consecutively numbered. Furthermore, the figures and accompanying figure legends must be integrated into the main body of each chapter, preferably following the first mention of the given figure, not clustered at the end of the chapter. Any dissertation that varies significantly from the Graduate School or FAS guidelines, or is not neat and readable, is subject to required stylistic revision before acceptance by the University. (For further information, please visit https://gsas.harvard.edu/academics/dissertations ).

DEFENSE FORMS AND PAPERWORK

Dissertation Acceptance Certificate Before the examination, the BPH Program Office will provide the Defense Committee Chair with a copy of the official Dissertation Acceptance Certificate. This certificate must be signed by all readers of the dissertation at the end of the examination and returned to the BPH Program Office. This certificate will be scanned and sent to the student so it can be inserted as page one of the dissertation prior to the online submission. The student must submit the one original, official copy to the Registrar’s in Cambridge by the appropriate deadline.

If extensive corrections are to be made, the BPH Program Office will hold the certificate until the Defense Committee Chair, and/or assigned reviewer(s) provide a written notification to the BPH Program to confirm that the corrected work has been reviewed and approved.

Dissertation Defense Exam Report The Dissertation Defense Exam Report is completed by the members of the Dissertation Defense Committee to provide a record of any comments or recommendations they may have. The report must be signed by all members immediately after the private exam. The completed report must be submitted to the BPH Program Office at the same time as the Dissertation Acceptance Certificate.

Sample Dissertation Title Page Please click here to see a sample BPH Dissertation Title Page.  Again, please refer to the Dissertation website for guidelines about how to format your dissertation.

News from the School

The power of storytelling in public health

New center to tackle health disparities affecting LGBTQ community

Alcohol use disorder among reproductive-age women—and barriers to treatment

Prosthetics nonprofit wants to hear from its patients

Higher Ed Professor

Demystifying higher education.

• Productivity
• Issue Discussion
• Current Events

Preparing for the final dissertation defense

A fter all of the work necessary for completing a dissertation, preparing for the final dissertation defense can seem quite difficult. However, in my experience, the final dissertation can be an opportunity to show off your work and bring an appreciation for all that you have accomplished. In today’s post, I will discuss how to prepare for the final dissertation defense to set yourself up for success.

In the final dissertation defense, you and your dissertation committee meet to discuss the dissertation. Typically, these meetings run an hour or two long. The meeting often begins with you making a brief presentation and transitioning to a question-and-answer and discussion period. The defense format generally works similarly to that of the proposal defense, so you should find this process familiar.

At some institutions, defenses are public and open to the campus community; on other campuses, attendance is restricted to the student and committee (Brause, 2012). If your institution allows outside attendees, we highly recommend you attend a defense or two prior to your own.

For your defense, we suggest bringing a colleague as a friendly face and note taker, if permitted. Your committee usually provides a number of areas for edits and changes mixed in with their questions, and the defense will go more smoothly if you only have to worry about answering questions rather than taking notes as well. 

Most institutions mandate that you submit the final dissertation, approved by the chair, to the full committee at least two weeks before the defense. Even if this deadline is not required at your institution, follow a similar guide in order to respect the committee’s time and ensure they have sufficient opportunity to read your dissertation before the defense.

You increase the likelihood of the committee having an in-depth discussion of your work, rather than simply asking clarifying questions when you give the committee sufficient time to read the dissertation before the defense. While the proposal defense likely included edits, suggestions, and revisions to the study, the study is concluded by the time of the final defense. The committee will not ask you to go back and complete more interviews or add a new case study site—those issues were settled at the proposal defense. Giving the committee time to digest the study and ponder the results deeply ensures that the defense represents, in fact, more of a dialogue. 

Additionally, giving the committee adequate time to review the work allows them to raise any glaring issues that may be resolvable before the dissertation defense. If a dissertation committee member has such major issues with your work, these should be addressed before the meeting and, likely, the defense should be rescheduled. Your chair and committee are responsible for identifying major issues and even canceling the defense if necessary. In our view, no student should fail their defense unless they push ahead without their chair or committee’s support.

Neither you nor the chair or committee should put you in a position where failing the defense is a possibility. If your chair and/or committee raises concerns, take them seriously and do not be afraid to push back the defense date, as defending later than planned is much better than having an unsuccessful final defense.

During a successful defense, you will often notice a shift in the focus of conversation and questions during your defense. About halfway or so through, the questions will turn from focusing on your analysis, findings or recommendation to what is next for your work and how the dissertation will inform your future career. This natural progression signals that you have transitioned from a student to a colleague. Beyond this general observation, we find that the final defense tends to focus on four general types of questions. 

Type 1.  Questions About Differences Between Defense Presentation and Dissertation Document

Often, during their presentations, students bring up ideas or information that are not included or receive little attention within the dissertation document. As we have advised earlier, you should not include every single detail in your dissertation; sometimes even important and interesting ideas get left out—and this is okay. The committee may pick up on these ideas, ask questions about them, and ultimately ask that they be added to the dissertation during the post-defense revisions. 

Type 2.  Questions About Clarifying Information 

As in the proposal defense, many questions focus on clarification—particularly at the beginning of the defense. Sometimes an issue is legitimately unclear; other times, the committee wants to ensure you can articulate and defend claims not only in the written document but also orally. In responding to clarifying questions, articulate why you made certain decisions, note any tradeoffs that were made, and defend the research choices to demonstrate understanding of the topic, method, findings, and conclusions. 

Type 3.  Questions That Push You to Expand Your Findings and/or Conclusions

Committees often try to push you to expand your findings and conclusions. We commonly find that students seem timid, fearing being wrong or offering conclusions beyond the data. The committee will ask questions and push to see how far you can take the analysis and conclusions. Not only will this feedback improve the dissertation, but the ensuing dialogue also shows that you know the limitations of the data.

Type 4.  Questions About What’s Next

As noted earlier, the conversation during the final defense will likely turn at some point to the future. Where might you publish your dissertation? How might you put your recommendations into practice? These and similar questions are geared toward helping you think about what comes after graduation and how you can take the dissertation beyond simply an academic requirement for the doctoral program. In some ways, these questions can prove the most challenging, as you may not be sure what you want to do, but students’ answers to these questions can be the most rewarding aspect of the dissertation defense. 

This post is an excerpt my book, The Qualitative Dissertation in Education: A Guide for Integrating Research and Practice , with Karri A. Holley.

• Translators
• Graphic Designers

Please enter the email address you used for your account. Your sign in information will be sent to your email address after it has been verified.

17 Thesis Defense Questions and How to Answer Them

A thesis defense gives you the chance to show off your thesis work and demonstrate your expertise in your field of study. During this one- to two-hour discussion with the members of your thesis committee, you'll have some control over how you present your research, but your committee will ask you some prodding questions to test your knowledge and preparedness. They will all have read your thesis beforehand, so their questions will relate to your study, topic, methods, data sample, and other aspects.

A good defense requires mastery of the thesis itself, so before you consider the questions you might face,

1. What is your topic, and why did you choose it?

Give a quick summary in just a few sentences on what you've researched. You could certainly go on for hours about your work, but make sure you prepare a way to give a very brief overview of your thesis. Then, give a quick background on your process for choosing this topic.

2. How does your topic contribute to the existing literature? How is it important?

Many researchers identify a need in the field and choose a topic to bridge the gaps that previous literature has failed to cover. For example, previous studies might not have included a certain population, region, or circumstance. Talk about how your thesis enhances the general understanding of the topic to extend the reach beyond what others have found, and then give examples of why the world needs that increased understanding. For instance, a thesis on romaine lettuce crops in desert climates might bring much-needed knowledge to a region that might not have been represented in previous work.

3. What are the key findings of your study?

When reporting your main results, make sure you have a handle on how detailed your committee wants you to be. Give yourself several options by preparing 1) a very general, quick summary of your findings that takes a minute or less, 2) a more detailed rundown of what your study revealed that is 3-5 minutes long, and 3) a 10- to 15-minute synopsis that delves into your results in detail. With each of these responses prepared, you can gauge which one is most appropriate in the moment, based on what your committee asks you and what has already been requested.

4. What type of background research did you do for your study?

Here you'll describe what you did while you were deciding what to study. This usually includes a literary review to determine what previous researchers have already introduced to the field. You also likely had to look into whether your study was going to be possible and what you would need in order to collect the needed data. Did you need info from databases that require permissions or fees?

5. What was your hypothesis, and how did you form it?

Describe the expected results you had for your study and whether your hypothesis came from previous research experience, long-held expectations, or cultural myths.

6. What limitations did you face when writing your text?

It's inevitable — researchers will face roadblocks or limiting factors during their work. This could be a limited population you had access to, like if you had a great method of surveying university students, but you didn't have a way to reach out to other people who weren't attending that school.

7. Why did you choose your particular method for your study?

Different research methods are more fitting to specific studies than others (e.g., qualitative vs. quantitative ), and knowing this, you applied a method that would present your findings most effectively. What factors led you to choose your method?

8. Who formed the sample group of your study, and why did you choose this population?

Many factors go into the selection of a participant group. Perhaps you were motivated to survey women over 50 who experience burnout in the workplace. Did you take extra measures to target this population? Or perhaps you found a sample group that responded more readily to your request for participation, and after hitting dead ends for months, convenience is what shaped your study population. Make sure to present your reasoning in an honest but favorable way.

9. What obstacles or limitations did you encounter while working with your sample?

Outline the process of pursuing respondents for your study and the difficulties you faced in collecting enough quality data for your thesis. Perhaps the decisions you made took shape based on the participants you ended up interviewing.

10. Was there something specific you were expecting to find during your analysis?

Expectations are natural when you set out to explore a topic, especially one you've been dancing around throughout your academic career. This question can refer to your hypotheses , but it can also touch on your personal feelings and expectations about this topic. What did you believe you would find when you dove deeper into the subject? Was that what you actually found, or were you surprised by your results?

11. What did you learn from your study?

Your response to this question can include not only the basic findings of your work (if you haven't covered this already) but also some personal surprises you might have found that veered away from your expectations. Sometimes these details are not included in the thesis, so these details can add some spice to your defense.

12. What are the recommendations from your study?

With connection to the reasons you chose the topic, your results can address the problems your work is solving. Give specifics on how policymakers, professionals in the field, etc., can improve their service with the knowledge your thesis provides.

13. If given the chance, what would you do differently?

Your response to this one can include the limitations you encountered or dead ends you hit that wasted time and funding. Try not to dwell too long on the annoyances of your study, and consider an area of curiosity; for example, discuss an area that piqued your interest during your exploration that would have been exciting to pursue but didn't directly benefit your outlined study.

14. How did you relate your study to the existing theories in the literature?

Your paper likely ties your ideas into those of other researchers, so this could be an easy one to answer. Point out how similar your work is to some and how it contrasts other works of research; both contribute greatly to the overall body of research.

15. What is the future scope of this study?

This one is pretty easy, since most theses include recommendations for future research within the text. That means you already have this one covered, and since you read over your thesis before your defense, it's already fresh in your mind.

16. What do you plan to do professionally after you complete your study?

This is a question directed more to you and your future professional plans. This might align with the research you performed, and if so, you can direct your question back to your research, maybe mentioning the personal motivations you have for pursuing study of that subject.

17. Do you have any questions?

Although your thesis defense feels like an interrogation, and you're the one in the spotlight, it provides an ideal opportunity to gather input from your committee, if you want it. Possible questions you could ask are: What were your impressions when reading my thesis? Do you believe I missed any important steps or details when conducting my work? Where do you see this work going in the future?

Bonus tip: What if you get asked a question to which you don't know the answer? You can spend weeks preparing to defend your thesis, but you might still be caught off guard when you don't know exactly what's coming. You can be ready for this situation by preparing a general strategy. It's okay to admit that your thesis doesn't offer the answers to everything – your committee won't reasonably expect it to do so. What you can do to sound (and feel!) confident and knowledgeable is to refer to a work of literature you have encountered in your research and draw on that work to give an answer. For example, you could respond, "My thesis doesn't directly address your question, but my study of Dr. Leifsen's work provided some interesting insights on that subject…." By preparing a way to address curveball questions, you can maintain your cool and create the impression that you truly are an expert in your field.

After you're done answering the questions your committee presents to you, they will either approve your thesis or suggest changes you should make to your paper. Regardless of the outcome, your confidence in addressing the questions presented to you will communicate to your thesis committee members that you know your stuff. Preparation can ease a lot of anxiety surrounding this event, so use these possible questions to make sure you can present your thesis feeling relaxed, prepared, and confident.

Header image by Kasto .

• Academic Writing Advice
• All Blog Posts
• Writing Advice
• Admissions Writing Advice
• Book Writing Advice
• Short Story Advice
• Employment Writing Advice
• Business Writing Advice
• Web Content Advice
• Article Writing Advice
• Magazine Writing Advice
• Grammar Advice
• Dialect Advice
• Editing Advice
• Freelance Advice
• Legal Writing Advice
• Poetry Advice
• Graphic Design Advice
• Logo Design Advice
• Translation Advice
• Blog Reviews
• Short Story Award Winners
• Scholarship Winners

Take your thesis to new heights with our expert editing