Hi Jamie, I am fairly confident that receiving a pass with major corrections is a pretty common outcome for many PhD candidates. I'm basing this on my own supervisors' comments and on the examination advice pages provided by universities on their websites for PhD candidates (I researched these pages fairly extensively while waiting for my own results). I just don't think people advertise it widely when they receive it and they don't need to...it is a pass and they have to do some corrections-afterwards the thesis is usually better for it.

I am also fairly confident that many supervisors and academics, who go on to do some great research, also received these results-set to and corrected their thesis (swearing under their breath while doing so) and then went on to be the excellent teachers and researchers that they now are. The process is so subjective. I think most examiners do have a sound understanding of what constitutes a passing thesis (with or without corrections) compared to one that won't pass, but beyond this....it can be so very subjective. How else can you explain getting one external who thinks a thesis is a pass and needs no corrections to another who thinks it is a pass with substantive corrections. (And both examiners very experienced, with the first a real leader in their field).

Do you have to submit back to externals or are these corrections going to an internal chair? Is this part of the process causing you some stress.

It is a shame your supervisor is so busy and can't get back within a week, but 3 weeks, while frustrating and a bit longer than you would hope, is not completely unreasonable. It sounds like you are very much on track and your supervisor thinks so as well. Most of us have to work and complete corrections at the same time and this is difficult and stressful but it will pass. It sounds like you are almost there though, so hang in there, it will all be over soon. Best wishes P.

I'm not sure I understand. Is there a reason why you are emailing your supervisors about a strategy for success?
Are you giving them your corrections in a piecemeal fashion?
You were given a list of needed corrections so is there a reason why you didn't complete them all before handing it back to your supervisors?
This is your PhD not theirs and it sounds to me that you might be struggling to accept total ownership of the process. I am guessing that is because you are absolutely desperate to get this all finished. Unfortunately it doesn't work like that and you need to be careful that you are not pissing your supervisor off by trying to force the issue.

Hey J_W, It seems a bit surprising to me that your sup who was responsive is now being unresponsive. It seems odd because obviously they want you to pass. I wonder if they think you are sorted anyway and they don't feel the need to invest too much more time with you? But then still why not reply. It sounds like maybe they are busy and because you just need fairly minimal input from them now (compared to their other projects, students and time investments), you are going to the bottom of the to do list. I guess you just have to chase them up and remind them of your time-scale. Maybe ask to meet and agree on a time-scale for feedback in person. Reasoning: the request to meet in person - which would use more of their time - might scare them into thinking let me get this off my to do list so he stops hassling me! It does sound to me like ultra-busy-ness and your stuff is now small fry to them. But (obviously) to you this is not small fry. And as your supervisors they need to give you guidance so that you can feel confident that you have addressed the corrections as required and will get your PhD awarded. I'd say keep chasing up. Is there a deadline for your corrections? Maybe highlight your desire to submit them on X date.

Hi there Jamey and Tudor, my understanding and experience of the corrections process is that once results are available, a meeting is arranged between candidate and supervisors. This meeting involves agreeing on which corrections will be made, which will not be made and why, and then how to present the evidence of change along with the corrected thesis.

The candidate then makes the changes on both the thesis doc (using tracked changes) and includes a record of all changes on a table or document. The corrected thesis and table are emailed to both supervisors for a final check, which might result in a couple of adjustments regarding presentation or clarification or not, and if these are required, the candidate makes these adjustments then the file is then is passed back to both supervisors for a final check.

The primary supervisor then sends the file with thesis and table to the internal chair to review and (hopefully) approve the changes.

So, in this process, contact with supervisor occurred around 4 times or so.

1 A phone call to discuss results and the corrections process (I did not have a viva after submission as our oral presentations are made and defended with faculty before submission of thesis at my uni) Thus, results come to supervisors and candidates via an email report not at the end of a viva.
2 Then the initial meeting after results to decide on corrections and presentation.
3 Then on a form of quality checking or proofing of the completed corrections before the supervisor submits the corrected thesis to the internal chair on behalf of the candidate.
4 Finally, when the primary sup emails the candidate to indicate both sups have signed off on corrections and the primary has submitted the thesis and table to the internal panel chair or review committee.

I was invited to email or phone my primary sup if I had any questions during this process but not to submit any of my corrections for reading other than at point 3 which occurred once I had made the corrections (outlined above).

You do realise you could simply have ignored my advice instead of responding with this self indulgent petulance right?
Of course everyone is desperate to finish when they have corrections but right now it is you who is asking for advice.
A little less defensiveness would help you. Most of us get through this without unduly pressuring our supervisors and snapping at those who express advice we dont like or want to hear. There is a clash between your view of how important your situation is and your supervisors view of it. At the end of a PhD you become yesterday's news as far as your supervisors are concerned. You have flown the nest. This happens to virtually everyone. Your supervisors have other priorities now and you would be well advised to be more respectful of that. It's not their fault that you are in this position. What you are posting here sounds a bit self absorbed.

In two years time when all this is over you will look back and wonder what all the fuss was about.
You just need to be patient at the moment.
It doesn't seem to be affecting your career anyway judging by your previous post.

[quote]Quote From Jamie_Wizard:
Hi T_Q and PjLu,

PJLU, yes. I had a meeting with my supervisor about the corrections shortly after the viva. Thanks for shedding light on the process at your institution. All of my interactions have been solely through my single supervisor. I guess I should ask if another faculty member, such as my advisor, should also read my thesis before it's submitted to the internal examiner. I believe such a process could have caught the issues before the viva exam.
/quote]

Jamie, I think you just need to follow the process for your institution and try not to worry too much. I shared (in tedious detail) my process, because I just wanted to show that in my institution, if the process is a pass with corrections and not an R & R, the supervisor input is both limited and structured. There is an expectation that you do the corrections as pretty much an independent scholar, with your supervisors providing a little bit of guidance on the process at the start and a form of brief proof checking at the end. I also don't think that having another person read your thesis before the viva would necessarily pick up things so that you receive a 'no corrections' or a 'minor' rather than a 'major' corrections. Things just happen and people can have very different perspectives and expectations.

You are doing so well and have what appears to be really good work at the moment and that is something to be grateful for, as so many others do not have this or the advantages of any form of tertiary education or even secondary.

Once you have submitted the corrections, you then, like myself, have to go through the whole waiting process again and that can be a bit wearying as well. Although my supervisor has checked where my corrections are in the process, and has let me know that I should hear fairly soon, so I am hoping I can soon post I am ready to graduate.

Part of my work involves supporting secondary students and their families (at school) My role as an Assistant and often an Acting Head is in the leadership, teaching and pastoral and academic care of a secondary school. Some of the students who do not achieve at school and who have wellbeing or other issues, including behavioural, have such sad and difficult background circumstances. Unbelievable hardship...it provides me with a different perspective when I am finding things personally tough.

Good luck J-W! I absolutely dread this. I am in my final year and the going is getting pretty tough. So much pressure, uncertainty and horribleness! And to think of vivas and corrections... life isn't worth living! I've never said this before but: I can't wait till it's over. Just think: you are nearly there!

It's so true, Pjlu, how such things give us perspective. A friend of mine recently lost her husband. When I think of her or give her a call, all of my PhD-related-things seem so small and insignificant - as indeed they are in the bigger scheme of things.

Cheers and keep us posted!
All the best : )

Hi there, the professor ,who is chair of my committee, sent a report which accepted and agreed with all of the changes. But, in having the committee scrutinise the thesis, they picked up on a internal citation that was not in alphabetical order and noted that my reference list is missing some electronic doi's, plus a figure needed a bit of an adjustment.

I've made these adjustments using this great program for finding electronic doi's called crossref, found the typo-and a few others that everyone, including myself, missed earlier-and have adjusted the figure and have submitted this directly back to the chair as per her request (none of these final adjustments need to go through the committee), so I am hoping shortly to have the chair's thumbs up.

It would be great if it were this week. Much closer now to the finish I think, and like a marathon (or half marathon), I am limping right up to the finish line. :)