Viva Guidelines for Phd Students

Viva Guidelines for Phd Students

Department of Information Science

Viva Guidelines for PhD Students

You will be advised of the date and time of your viva by your supervisor and/or Mrs Thornhill. The Examiners will meet beforehand to discuss your thesis and then call you into the viva. The Examiners may raise the points below but remember that every thesis is different and will be viewed as an individual piece of work. It is not, therefore, possible to predict all the questions that will arise in relation to your thesis, specifically, but it would be sensible to prepare responses to the following questions and points.

Presentation and Mechanics

The Examiners will check that the presentation of the thesis is satisfactory. In particular:

  • The thesis should be presented in accordance with University guidelines ( - 1 ½ spaced on A4 paper.
  • Typographical errors (spelling, punctuation, grammar etc.) will be identified. Examiners may mark typographical errors directly onto the thesis or make a separate list.
  • The bibliography should be complete and the references and bibliography should be in standard departmental style – please ask your supervisor for a copy of the guidelines if you do not already have one.
Content

The thesis should consist of your own account of your investigations and should indicate how the work advances the study of the subject. Generally, the thesis should be an integrated whole and present a coherent argument. The thesis should tell a credible, overall story with a clear beginning, middle and
end with closure. Points that the Examiners might explore include:

  • Is the subject worth studying? Why was it chosen? Why is it important?
  • Is the literature review complete and up-to-date? Do you seem “well acquainted with the general field of knowledge to which your subject relates” as specified in the Notes for Guidance ( Have you kept yourself up to date since submitting the thesis?
  • Are appropriate methods used and are they discussed and justified with reference to relevant methodology literature?
  • Is the sample large enough/appropriate?
  • Are any limitations of the study acknowledged and justified adequately?
  • Are appropriate methods used to analyse the data?
  • Are any statistics correctly analysed using appropriate tests?
  • Are the data clearly presented?
  • Does the discussion of the data explore the findings/results and comment meaningfully on them?
  • Do you reflect on where your data fits into existing literature on the topic?
  • Do the conclusions/recommendations follow logically from the results, summarise the main or most important findings and address the study’s aims/ objectives/research questions/hypotheses.
  • Would you do anything differently if you had your time again? Did you encounter any problems? How did you overcome them?
  • What are the implications of the work? Can the work be taken further?
  • What is “value added”, innovative or creative about the work?
  • Is the work “worthy of publication” as specified in the Notes for Guidance?
Top View