Just a quick query ...

I'm hearing conflicting opinions about the role of the internal examiner during the viva.

Some people are telling me that they are just there to check all is in order during the viva (that the extern is being fair), and is the person who will 'sign off' any revisions that need to be made to the thesis. However ... Others have told me that the internal examiner is actually harsher than the external (i.e. more ready to rip your work apart).

Does the internal examiner play a role in suggesting what revisions they feel you have to make (or is that just the extern)? Basically, can someone (who has ideally been through the viva process) clarify exactly what they do please.

Cheers.

In short, they do both the things you mentioned i.e. are meant to ensure fair play and usually will sign off revisions BUT can also be the worst (harshest) examiner of them all! I know 2 people who would most likely have passed first time (that is, without major revision for both and a 2nd viva for one) had it not been for a very difficult internal. My advice? Choose your internal examiner with as much care as the external! Good luck!!

Hello Goods, in mine, it was the external who did most of the talking - I'd say the question split was about 3/4 external, 1/4 internal. The internal had some questions but these mainly led from discussion with the external. The internal's job is to effectively chair the whole process, to explain the procedural elements to you and more importantly make sure you understand them. I've heard stories about harsh internals but I think that's more to do with how they were as individuals rather than what is officially expected of them in a viva.

With regard to revisions, yes internals have some influence, but it is usually a result of discussion with the external. In the case of minor corrections the internal does indeed sign them off, but if major revisions are required both of them need to see the thesis again.

As Ann says, I cannot emphasise enough selecting an internal with as much care as the external. I think alot of people forget this which is why they find their internals to be harsher than they expected.

Also, it's worth knowing that your internal doesn't have to be someone in your *department*, it can be any academic member of staff within your *university*. I had an internal from a different department as his methods and theoretical infuences were similar to mine. Other potential internals in my own department had a different emphasis which would not have been suitable.

Thank you so much for your responses. Will definitely keep your advice in mind when me and my supervisor are at the stage of selecting an internal (... I think I'm a few months away from that though!).

Once again, thanks!

The internal can do both and you should keep this in mind when selecting one i.e. don't choose anyone who may make things harder for you