Research to date on the examination process for postgraduate research theses has focused largely on the deconstruction of examiners' reports. This article reports on a study of the processes that experienced examiners go through, and the judgements they make before writing their reports. A sample of 30 experienced examiners (defined as having examined the equivalent of at least five research theses over the last five years), from a range of disciplines in five universities was interviewed. Clear trends emerged with regard to: the criteria used by examiners and the levels of student performance expected by them; critical judgement points in the examination process; the examiners' perceptions of their own role in the process; the influence on examiners of previously published work, the views of the other examiner(s) and their knowledge of the student's supervisor and/or department, and the level of perceived responsibility between student and supervisor.
%0 Journal Article
%1 mullins2002nobel
%A Mullins, Gerry
%A Kiley, Margaret
%D 2002
%J Studies in Higher Education
%K evaluation examination phd supervisor thesis
%N 4
%P 369--386
%R 10.1080/0307507022000011507
%T 'It's a PhD, not a Nobel Prize': How experienced examiners assess research theses
%U http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0307507022000011507
%V 27
%X Research to date on the examination process for postgraduate research theses has focused largely on the deconstruction of examiners' reports. This article reports on a study of the processes that experienced examiners go through, and the judgements they make before writing their reports. A sample of 30 experienced examiners (defined as having examined the equivalent of at least five research theses over the last five years), from a range of disciplines in five universities was interviewed. Clear trends emerged with regard to: the criteria used by examiners and the levels of student performance expected by them; critical judgement points in the examination process; the examiners' perceptions of their own role in the process; the influence on examiners of previously published work, the views of the other examiner(s) and their knowledge of the student's supervisor and/or department, and the level of perceived responsibility between student and supervisor.
@article{mullins2002nobel,
abstract = { Research to date on the examination process for postgraduate research theses has focused largely on the deconstruction of examiners' reports. This article reports on a study of the processes that experienced examiners go through, and the judgements they make before writing their reports. A sample of 30 experienced examiners (defined as having examined the equivalent of at least five research theses over the last five years), from a range of disciplines in five universities was interviewed. Clear trends emerged with regard to: the criteria used by examiners and the levels of student performance expected by them; critical judgement points in the examination process; the examiners' perceptions of their own role in the process; the influence on examiners of previously published work, the views of the other examiner(s) and their knowledge of the student's supervisor and/or department, and the level of perceived responsibility between student and supervisor. },
added-at = {2017-08-21T15:33:48.000+0200},
author = {Mullins, Gerry and Kiley, Margaret},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/222e643a91a749f729c76be6330581973/jaeschke},
doi = {10.1080/0307507022000011507},
eprint = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0307507022000011507},
interhash = {1b703b1242a7fbfa1991f8d5fd6829f1},
intrahash = {22e643a91a749f729c76be6330581973},
journal = {Studies in Higher Education},
keywords = {evaluation examination phd supervisor thesis},
number = 4,
pages = {369--386},
timestamp = {2017-08-21T15:33:48.000+0200},
title = {'It's a PhD, not a Nobel Prize': How experienced examiners assess research theses},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0307507022000011507 },
volume = 27,
year = 2002
}