In this post entitled ‘How not to Write a PhD thesis’ by Tara Brabazon, notice the vulnerability of doctoral researchers to injustices. For example, after the oral exam, one of Tara Brabazon’s students suffers the slap of ‘minor revisions needed’ for ONE revision to a footnote in the fifth chapter.
The nightmare story of the doctoral researcher in the comment section at the end of the piece should convince everyone of the need for more transparency in the oral exam, in the selection of external examiners, and in instructions for revision that are given to students.
Please read this post and let me know how some of the problems Brabazon discusses could be ameliorated or avoided. Note Brabazon is a British academic in the Humanities, so some of which she writes is particular to her discipline and her system.
How do the points Brabazon makes apply to doctoral education in other disciplines and countries. How do they not?