Really? So if, say, the police fine you for something that isn't illegal but happens to offend their personal tastes, do you just pay?



Yes, they will - but in that case, if I really do not agree with the reviewer, I can pull the paper and submit it somewhere else. I cannot do that with the thesis (unless I went for a re-viva, but not even I am that crazy...)

The point is that a viva is not microcosmic of a 'democracy.'

If you make this much fuss over a mere formatting change...sheesh!

Yes, that sums it up!

I get it thxht. I think I would feel the same as you if they told me to rehash my thesis.

I would moan about it for a few days but then I would do it because there is no choice.

TreeofLife, yeah, that's what it comes down to, there's no choice. The word for that is "coercion". And it really isn't about the criticism as such - I am sure there is plenty more that could be improved in the thesis. I don't want to come across as the sort of person who just cannot take criticism, some of the other suggestions the examiners made are perfectly valid. This is about the extreme powerlessness, of literally having my career and future in the hands of two random human beings who can do whatever the f*** they like to me. And I was certainly lucky, as many others in this forum who were less lucky can confirm. This whole system is just deeply effed up.

My university has a 20+ page document with specific guidelines on how the thesis should be presented (it accepts some different formats, but each of these is well defined and needs declaring up front). Your university/faculty could have similar. It may well have been assumed you had consulted such documents prior to submission - you may have even ticked a box when you submitted to indicate that you were familiar with the regulations. If so, you don't have much of a case to argue.Supervisors may be drawing on their own experience from years ago which are not necessarily relevant to your contemporary examination process.

A thesis is not a book and a book is not a thesis. Most people who intend to publish as a book subsequently have the labourious task of converting their text into a book after their viva. You've probably done things in an order that will be more convenient for you (though at the potential inconvenience of the examiners), so the task of making it more 'thesis-y' is probably easier than your peers face the other way around.

You could refuse but I'm not sure it'd be worth it.

An additional point to consider - if you insist on sticking with your 'book' format and the university permit you to do so, you may shoot yourself in the foot when it comes to getting it published, as reputable publishers may see the reuse of a verbatim document as a copyright issue, particularly if you signed a copyright declaration which gives the University some claim over the text in its current form.

That is the nice thing about the PhD defense in other countries. You write your thesis, you submit it and it can be accepted or be refused. No corrections. Of course there will be criticism and suggestions how to improve but you are not actually correcting something.

I think this is really nice. Of course your supervisor reads it and gives input but that's it. Personally I see no point in the corrections, as this is a academic achievement in form of a degree (unlike a paper). I see no point in changing my point of view just because an external examiner has a different opinion. We can of course discuss that, but you should not change content afterwards. Maybe it would be better to receive a grade for the thesis instead of changing it according to the opinion of an examiner.

However, things like structure are a different thing.

Yeah I agree really. If I mention A, B and C and forget to mention D that makes some minor point it really doesn't change the outcome of my results, so what's the point in me spending weeks making these sort of amendments because it's what someone else would have done? It's a big waste of everyone's time. Makes it important to choose the 'right' examiner I guess.

This is your thesis and if you did not come up with the idea to mention that particular point then it just is like that. If you forget to mention several important points or your results are not conclusive etc. you just fail because your thesis was obviously not good enough. The corrected version might be often a "better" version but not really your accomplishment.

HazyJane, that is a good point - my university has the option of deferring the publication of the thesis on its online directory for 2 years in order to avoid that.

I'm glad of course they didn't find anything wrong with the content, it just all seems so pointlessly pedantic.

I guess it will be a case of trying to do this with the least possible amount of effort...

I actually saw a post here from a person who had a similar situation, and said their restructured thesis was much worse than the original, which eventually even their examiners realised. I hope mine will, too...

The PhD Defence/Viva is your opportunity to defend your work. That's when you can justify presenting your work in the manner that you have done. Anything that goes against the norm requires justification - that's the academic way. And, frankly, I think you missed your opportunity to defend the way you've presented your thesis.

If you'd had this conversation within the viva you'd have given the examiners the chance to reflect on why you have produced your thesis in this manner, and given them the opportunity to agree with you or disagree with you. As it is, you have been examined, the corrections have been decided and you just need to do them, or risk not getting the PhD.

If that's a gamble you want to take, then fine. For me, it would not be worth it.

Do the corrections and get it done.

Trying to fight it is a waste of your time and energy. Just get them done and then move on.

The PhD thesis is not going to be the best thing you ever write, and I've said elsewhere on this forum, that many academics 2, 5, 10 years down the road look back to their thesis and think "hmm...that was a bit crap wasn't it?"

Not saying that your thesis is, but in the grand scheme of things, it's not worth fighting the changes. When you apply for academic jobs, it's not about the thesis itself that is of importance, it's everything else that you've done since the thesis.

The point of the thesis is to demonstrate that you have the capacity to produce good research, where being awarded the doctorate means you are 1) an expert in your field and 2) an accredit or qualified high-end researcher.

But the thesis itself, will change substantially. As I draft journal articles from my thesis, plenty of material has been rewritten, altered, changed, different frameworks use and so on. It's an organic thing, research, and the thesis is a part of this.

Regarding the pedantic stuff, if you think this is bad, just wait till you spend years publishing. Even if your thesis might be good as a book as is, it's highly likely that a publisher will still ask you to do substantial rewrites and changes.

And journal articles? Forget it. Reviewers will ask you to do a heap of things, some that you'll have to do, and some that you can fight or justify in not doing. And even after you do everything they ask, your article may very will still get rejected before publishing.

Believe me, if I'd had an opportunity I would have done just that. They never put it up for debate tho. They simply stated "this needs a literature chapter" and moved on to something else. Maybe I should have interrupted/shouted over them, but it seems I'm too polite for my own good.

Awsoci, it's certainly not the best writing ill ever do, that's not my issue. My issue is that for me, the degree I've worked so hard for has just been completely invalidated because I was basically told "no one gives a shit what you think matters, now jump through this hoop".

I thought when I finally got the PhD (even with corrections) I would be proud and happy and have a sense of achievement. They ruined that for me. Now I'm just depressed and wonder why I ever wasted my time with this bureaucratic bullshit...