Quality and equality in British PhD assessment

Abstract

This paper asks whether doctoral assessment has escaped the regulation of quality assurance procedures. Raising questions about the affective and micropolitical dimensions of an oral examination conducted in private, it explores how current concerns about quality assurance, standards, benchmarks and performance indicators in higher education apply to the assessment of doctoral/research degrees in Britain, and in particular to the viva voce examination. Successful PhD completion is a key performance indicator for universities and an important basis for the accreditation of their staff. Despite the rise of new managerialism, a general preoccupation with calculable standards and outcomes and an emphasis on student entitlements, transparency of decision making and information for``consumers'', there still seems to be considerable variation, and some mystification, in how doctoral assessment is conducted and experienced. The massification of doctoral studies and the doubling in number of institutions awarding their own doctorates, post-1992, are both likely to increase product variety still further.

Preparing doctoral candidates for the viva: issues for students and supervisors

“…Also of potential concern, given the confidential and closed viva process, is that there is no moderation of doctoral results, with no peer review or external examination function as is the case for taught undergraduate and postgraduate awards. That there can be no appeal of the outcome by a student on the grounds of academic judgement, but only on the basis of process, suggests that the doctoral candidate, as 'customer' in a developing market culture for education (Morley et al, 2003), may invoke their consumer rights to press for clearer criteria of outcomes and for visibility and transparency of process to ensure fairness and consistency. The extent to which fear of appeals and litigation associated with the 'customer' status of the student has resulted in an increase in 'cosy' arrangements between supervisor(s) and a colleague in another institution to act as external examiner, guaranteed not to 'rock the boat' (as discussed above), calls into question whether the viva, in the absence of rigour, has become a token formality with a consequent devaluing of the doctoral degree.…”

“…Whilst the evidence of abuse is predominantly anecdotal (Burnham, 1994), some research has identified a number of negative behaviours on the part of examiners. Tinkler and Jackson (2000) point to aggression, sarcasm and hostility, whilst Morley et al (2003) characterise some abuse in this context taking the form of belittling tactics that may humiliate the student together with discriminatory behaviour on the grounds of sex and race as well as other stereotyping. One example cited by Leonard (2001) to illustrate this point is the ridiculing of feminist scholarship by unsympathetic or ideologically opposed examiners that highlights the often unspoken but critical 'subterranean agendas of values and ideologies in doctoral assessment' (Morley et al, 2002: 268).…”

The award of the PhD degree in Kenyan universities: a quality assurance perspective

“…These are fairly broad and include the following: independence; a contribution to knowledge; originality; and suitability for publication. The thesis writing and the eventual oral defence are compulsory components of doctoral assessment processes in most countries (Powell & Green, 2007) and are closely related to the quality assurance of the doctorate awarded (Morley et al, 2003). Research in the UK has revealed great diversity in PhD examinations, both in institutional policy and practice (Tinkler & Jackson, 2000, 2002.…”

Learning and Assessment Practices of Doctoral Studies of Developing and Developed Countries: A Case Study of Doctoral Studies in Bangladesh

“…However, Burnham's investigation (cited in Morley, Leonard, & David, 2003) into the UK's traditional method of PhD assessment finds that PhD assessment processes have escaped qualityassurance regulations. In particular, the study finds that viva voce examinations, used as one of the major means of assessing PhD candidates, are commonly used to humiliate examinees and to diminish the credibility of those who had examined (p. 5).…”