The examiners generally aren't there to catch you out, but they will rigorously assess your knowledge and defense of your thesis. I don't think even the most confident of people cruise through their viva, everyone will have wobbly or waffly bits. However, if you really prepare, you'll probably have 70% of it nailed.

There are specialist viva courses in most unis. However, some do seem to place emphasis on viva horror stories - that rarely happen. Your university should also offer interpersonal skill courses and public speaking courses.

Books? I can't really think of any specific ones. Rowena Murray writes a lot on vivas - see this article and references therein:
http://education.guardian.co.uk/egweekly/story/0,5500,1042654,00.html

Hi,

Basically *prepare*. Know your PhD inside out. Put yourself in the examiners position and write a list of all possible questions, particularly difficult questions you think they'd ask. Then *know* the answers. Remember a PHD is AN answer, not THE answer...so they will be critical.

Don't put yourself in a position where you can be tripped up i.e., failing to explain an argument or using references that you've not read.

Prepare a 5, 10 & 15 minute presentation. Even if they don't want any presentation you will probably get asked a general question about your thesis, so you'll have a good 10-15 minutes worth of confident prepared material to talk about.

Since you are already back on the academic bandwagon with masters degree, then you may as well go straight to the PhD, and as mentioned above, do courses as you research.

Zelda, don't take it personally, they are just covering their backs. He probably consulted with HR, or was afraid of the wrath of HR, and went of the easiest option. Also be happy you were genuinely in the running for the post as confirmed by other faculty members. Lots of times, people are just part of the recruitment process to make up the numbers.

I meant 'pacify'.


No edit facility.

If you have red-bricks for other degrees then that should pasify the academic snobs, so don't worry. Go for the one with the best supervisor.

I think it would very mean of them if they sprung anything above and beyond a normal Q&A on you (without notice). Email the supervisor and ask if you are very concerned.

^^ excuse poor writing - I'm half asleep.

Where is that editing facility we were promised????

I would have thought that if the funding is from another source - well then you'll be okay. But if you are probably going to need money from the same research council - then I given the competition for funding, they would not be too keen on offering it again.

I do not know of any joint doctoral programmes between Italy and the UK (particularly in law). Generally, PhDs just involve one university in the UK, although a second supervisor might be allocated from another university. If you want to use another university, you normally obtain a visiting researcher/fellowship position.

With respect to law, both LSE and QMUL (probably SOAS, KCL, and UCL will also have visiting opportunities) offer visiting opportunities (I think!), and both have an interests/experts in corporate governance/securities markets.

This was discussed in another thread with respect to using a published article in a thesis, and the general conclusion was that different universities have different rules, and supervisors have different opinions on the matter.

A number of uni's will consider using previously assessed work and/or published work as 'self-plagarism' which falls under general plagarism rules.

I guess your supervisors are intimating that you should tweak it enough so that it's not noticeably the same as your MRes. This would seem to indicate that as long as you don't copy word-for-word, you'll get away with it.

But check your uni's specific rules - some places do seem very strict about it, and will even apply the rule to undergraduate essays.

^^ blame it all on employment law

Of course, you're not going to do any of the above, and you just want to use the presentations as a learning experience. But recruiters will always cover their backs, and personally I think it's a fair policy. Recruitment procedures cost a lot of money, so they wouldn't want to jeopardise the procedure.

You also have to consider that some candidates may be aware that you applied for the job, but may not be aware that you are out of the running. They may openly object to your attendance in the presentation - which would be v. embarrassing for you and the panel.

I think that's a reasonable policy in light of the litigious nature of recruitment procedures these days. It wouldn't in the least bit surprise me if I was told 'no you can't attend as you were an applicant'. In a recent presentation I gave, the one faculty member who was an internal candidate, did not attend.

Possible issues concerning a 'conflict of interests':
- the rejected applicant may distract the presenters via intimidation.
- the rejected applicant, being a member of the recruiting faculty, may use that position to influence the opinions of other faculty members, particularly the recruitment panel.
- the rejected applicant may pose unduly difficult questions to the presenter.

O, and good luck!

With respect to interviews, ascertain if it's formal or informal, and/or involves a panel of interviewers. Look at 'selling' your research proposal, particularly concentrating on how the research adds to the body of knowledge on the subject. Also use the opportunity to ask them about what they can offer you.