======= Date Modified 05 31 2009 13:31:44 =======
Hi Guys,

A friend of mine is a PhD student. He submitted his first PhD thesis draft few days ago. Before that all his chapters were reviewed by his supervisor. Now, he found a scholar who he sent his methodology chapter to (it was long time ago). He replied only yesterday saying that, in his opinion, his method was not systematic enough (there are some errors which I am not going to explain because it is not my area and I wouldnt even know how to explain this). He is totally stressed right now and panics. So here's the questions: what should he do since his supervisor never said there was anything wrong with his methodology and method, in other words, it was fine???

Thanks for your comments and suggestions in advance.

M

First of all - the obvious: Don't panic.

Now, assuming your friend wants to submit asap and not rework whole sections of the thesis and take another 6 months to do that or so, I would say the following:

*Submit the thesis as is, or with an added section/paragraph highlighting some of the weaknesses of the methodology, but also explaining why it was used (e.g. the best one currently available, the one most suited for this kind of approach/problem, it is the "standard" one...)
*When it comes to the viva - know what the criticism of the methodology is, yes, where maybe errors were made, but also prepare for exactly these questions and defend the work.

Of course it is important to use the right tools, not make obvious errors, BUT it is also sometimes a question of being able to see one's own work in a critical light as well as defending the core outcomes/results/findings.

Hope that helps?!

If it's your friend's first draft, and not the *final* submitted version, why not wait for the supervisor's feedback on the thesis as a whole and raise questions about methodology after that? All drafts are work in progress and are subsequently amended to correct flaws or weaknesses. Unless I've misunderstood you...?