Hello to everyone,
I am facing a horrible situation. To put it briefly,
1. In 2008 I submit my PhD thesis (social science) in a highly ranked UK university,
2. The examiners do not like it and mandate revisions,
3. My supervisor provides me plenty of support to re-write, and he (and I) are satisfied with the result,
4. I resubmit in 2010, but... the examiners do not like it again!!!
I am in despair... What did I do wrong? I was following closely the advice of my supervisor (a well respected full professor in his field), how else could I have written the thesis differently? As a 'customer' of the university, how possible that I invested years of my efforts in doing research according to their guidelines and at the end I am not provided any reward???
I feel that I am treated in an unjust, unfair way... The feedback of the examiners is rather off the point, and I suspect that they granted to the revised thesis enough attention - I think that they were biased from the first assessment and did not want to change their minds. I also suspect that some internal politics is going on here, as most of the opposition against my thesis is from the internal examiner (a department colleague of my supervisor, and I do not know how well or badly they relationship is... I understand that they talk little to each other)... and I could be the 'scapegoat' of some game I am not aware of.
Could you please advice me what to do:
1) I would like to make an appeal against the examiners' decision, but how? I know that I cannot question their academic judgement, but how to argue about the presence of bias, prejudice, or uninformed assessment? (i.e., what kind of evidence better supports these claims?)
2) I would like, otherwise, to send this university to the hell and to apply to another UK/EU institution which would like to make me get a PhD in a 'short track' route, as the thesis is mostly there already - do you know if this is possible, and which university could do this?
Thanks a lot!
I feel so bad... please help!
Eleonora

what does your supervisor think of the situation? do they think that the examiners' decisions are fair or not? Would your supervisor back you up if you filed a complaint? would they personally take it up with someone higher?

Sorry to hear about your situation. I would say have a look at your university academic guidance for post grades - there should be a section in there about there procedures for appeals etc. And like pink_numbers says what does your supervisor say about this? Is there a head of post grad studies you could contact with supervisor permission maybe to see what they would suggest. I would say you need talk supervisor - find out there opinion. I would think proving bias, prejudice etc be a very difficult route.

Hope you get some answers and support soon

I had a similar experience to yours in that when I went through my PhD defence then a few months back, the external examiner did not like my thesis one bit, and all his remarks were basically peripheral. Even my advisor said that the remarks on the written report were unfair, although he did not seem to show that antagonism in the oral defence. I did pass, but on the copy which has to be edited and revised for supervisor's approval which he passed to me, he 'bled' the whole thing to death, and even on a separate sheet of comments spanning a length of 4 pages, filled up to the max, he disagreed or commented with nearly everything I said and wanted something to be done. Within a stressful 1 month, my advisor told me to take his remarks with discretion since she is the ultimate one approving the thesis for final submission to the division of grad studies for final convocation. I empathize with your situation especially because I can see how politics and bad or biased examiners can affect the outcome. Have you talked to your advisor about the possibility of a change in anyone among the committee and the examiners? Are there such policies in place? Also, can you appeal the ruling on your thesis to the faculty of graduate studies/research in your university, or the Dean accordingly?

It sounds like there is some internal politics going on. What does the external think as surely they are supposed to have the final say? Have you followed their recommendations? If so they can hardly disagree with themselves?

Have you checked with the postgraduate tutor in your department to see what they say? Or check with your research office of the uni to see what the official policy is? What about the Students' Union - they might have a postgrad rep who can take up these matters on your behalf?

If it's a personal difference between opinions who is to say that the examiners are right or if it's a personal vandetta it really has nothing to do with you? What does your supervisor say about all this?

Eleonora,
This is truly and appalling situation to be in and very, very unfair. It does sound as though you've been robbed of your opportunity to a fair exam and all because of office politics. I wish I knew of a 'short-track' phd otherwise I'd be on it myself. I also had extremely bad luck with my work but to be honest, universities are biased against the student. They quickly close ranks if there is any possibility that their fragile egos are about to get bruised. You're right about the appeal against academic judgment, that won't work. The only thing you might be able to look at is a a 'procedural issue' that wasn't followed.