Hi everyone,
I recently submitted my PhD thesis for examination. I would like to know what doctoral approval committees normally decide in the case where one examiner recommends a pass while the other recommends a resubmission.

Has this happened to you or are you just wanting to the know? - They will have to come to some kind of consensus - they may go down the route of pass with major corrections (rather pass with minor) if that is an option at the particular university. The viva is an opportunity for the candidate to convince the examiners (in particular the one who recommended an R & R) of the originality of the work, why certain decisions were made, e.g. methodology, types of data analysis etc and how well you know your field and can comment on the impact your research may have. I *think* that I managed to talk myself out of a pass with major to pass with minor in my viva as it was commented that I did really well, and demonstrated that I would be capable of making the changes they suggested , and really knew my research area well.

n.b. in the case you mentioned either way, none of the examiners recommended an outright fail or MPhil, so that is really positive btw!

Difficult question, but here are some guesses...

1. Relationship?: Some sociable professors ask their friends to be the examiners. These examiners are not exactly in your field, so they may simply recommend a pass. They have good relationship with your professor; they know that asking for resubmission suggests your professor did not provide good guidance for your thesis. However, the final decision of the committee also depends on the collegiality of the department.

2. Whose rank is higher?: If this examiner is someone prominent in the field, the committee may not want to offend this professor. (Your supervisor should select the examiner carefully.) So, hopefully, your supervisor is a Full Professor, but the examiner is an Associate Professor.

3. Publication as a support?: If you have publications in reputable journal, then there is possibly better chance... Therefore, it may suggest the examiner is biased…

4. The examiner has excellent writing skill as compared to you?: Some PhD thesis has substance, but it may not be very well written. It needs some more polishing… or re-submission.

When the examiner recommends a resubmission, there should be some justifications. If your professor is “strong” and “vocal”, he or she could defend you or suggest a third examiner. But it is also sometimes possible to have politics between your professor and the examiner… Unfortunately, this examiner could be likely an expert in your field and someone who has IQ, but less EQ. It is only a PhD thesis, some examiners are more kind.

Hi everyone,
thank you so much for your feedback. Two days ago a received feedback regarding my thesis. two examinors passed me with minor corrections. the third examinor recommended i resubmit the thesis after major corrections. the Report i received was that the committe could not reach a consensus since the third examiner insisted on me re-submitting the thesis. Having received the reports from the three examinors, i was so shocked from the report from the examinor who asked for a resubmition. It was so contradictory to the other two reports. it felt like this examinor never had a chance to go through my thesis, there was more anger in the report than examination. I persued my studies in a South African university which does not have vivas and therefore their decisions entirely depend on the committee. I am so gutted because everything the third supervisor wants is in the thesis and would have loved to have a chance to defend my work. the changes suggested are going to contradict the good comments made by the other two supervisors.

Hi Psychresearcher and Meaninginlife,
thank you so much for your feedback. Two days ago a received feedback regarding my thesis. two examiners passed me with minor corrections. the third examiner recommended i resubmit the thesis after major corrections. the Report i received was that the committe could not reach a consensus since the third examiner insisted on me re-submitting the thesis. Having received the reports from the three examiners, i was so shocked from the report from the one who asked for a resubmition. It was so contradictory to the other two reports. it felt like this examinor never had a chance to go through my thesis, there was more anger in the report than examination. I persued my studies in a South African university which does not have vivas and therefore their decisions entirely depend on the committee. I am so gutted because everything the third supervisor wants is in the thesis and would have loved to have a chance to defend my work. the changes suggested are going to contradict the good comments made by the other two supervisors.