I've been talking to my supervisors about examiners but we haven't finalised anything yet. I have been told that certain internal people are 'off the table', but I haven't asked who! Regarding the external, as my work is also multi-disciplinary, we are going to focus on getting someone who will click with the qualitative parts of my thesis, as there's a risk that a purely quants person might dismiss it for being small-scale when it's actually the biggest part of the thesis.

Sorry, realised after I posted the above that I had conflated 'multi-disciplinary' and 'mixed methodology' - my brain has been in meltdown for several days! But if there is one aspect of your thesis that might be understood less well by a non-expert, it may be best to choose an external based on that?

That's a good point. Mine is also mixed methods, though I think the quantitative side holds more weight. I need to discuss this my supervisors. Its a tricky one, do you choose someone that is an expert in the specific topic (but may completely undermine the research as it opposes her opinion) or someone who is an expert in the area but not in the specific field, and who is more likely to be less biased perhaps (and nicer?)?

It is difficult! I've been advised to consider two things - getting someone who will value the quals stuff, and getting someone who will know a bit about the field. I think I would personally take a good look at the publications of any suggested names (not least because of the importance of citing them if relevant!), to make sure they don't seem to have any strong 'agenda' that would lead them to undermine my research. You might feel better after bringing it up with your supervisors, as there's a good chance they'll have started giving it some thought.

One other consideration - if you have access to anyone who knows a bit about some of the personalities in your field, it might be worth asking them. For example, I have found out that of three main experts in my quals methodology, two are nice and one is a nightmare as an examiner :)

That is very clever chickpea, thanks for sharing! :) I was waiting till first draft was submitted to supervises to then think about viva examiners, but maybe I need to get started on it sooner!

It is wise to start thinking about it sooner than later and discussing with your sup. It may take a while for the potential examiner to have the availability to examine you and they are allowed (at my university anyway) up to 3 months between submission and examination. So, it is best to have some names in mind so that it is a smooth process and one that does not involve long periods of waiting around for the examiners to become available etc.

That's very true. It'd be a nightmare to be sat waiting for 3 months!

The process seems a bit too drawn out for my liking as it is. When people who are not studying a PhD ask me when I will get my PhD, I have to explain that its not so straightforward and that it depends on a lot of things e.g. how speedy your sup is at reading the draft, how long examiners take to read it, examiners availability for viva, whether you get corrections and to what scale, how long to submit corrections, how long for the corrections to be accepted etc. Phew!

I agree! The length of the time and the dependency on others is what frustrates me! Its not an independent examination, rather its an examination your supervisors' skills and dedication too in some ways. And the viva is so dependent on the examiner's nature and mood!

Exactly. I was discussing these same points with a friend of mine who passed her PhD in 2014, and got the award last year. Her sup sat in her viva and was confident she had passed with no corrections, then the examiners kept her waiting 30 minutes to make the decision. She got minor thankfully. But the point is that your sup could think your thesis is perfect and an examiner find faults.

A big reason why I am applying for jobs at the moment is I know it will take my sup quite a while to read the thesis and I do not have the funds to be waiting around. Best case scenario while considering how lengthy the process is is that I graduate next summer! Its a bit of a downer when friends assume that it is over when you submit and that no, we will not be celebrating at Christmas haha

I agree, the uncertainty of it all is awful! I am always being asked by family members when it 'finishes', and the only thing I can point to is the end of my funding even though that's not when it will actually finish! When I first started my PhD I didn't have a handle on this at all, and thought the goal was 80k words in three years - didn't realise all the end stages could drag on forever!

Its ridiculous how funding it supposed to end almost a year before you are actually awarded the certificate. Feeling angry today with the whole PhD process ... *aaarghhh*

Zutterfly: did you include a section on the strengths and limitations of the methodological/research approach in your overall Discussion chapter? I have a detailed limitations section in each of my study chapters so I'm wondering what I should include in this section? The few thesis in my department that I have looked all have this section ...

I know - I found out recently that my department has a target of getting PhD submissions down to 3.5 years - funny that they know how long the average one takes and yet persist in telling you it should take no longer than 3 years all in!