Research Supervision
Information and Tools
Print PDF

Selecting examiners

Overview and research

It is helpful for some candidates to be able to visualise a possible audience for their work, rather than just 'the examiners' and so discussing potential examiners early in candidature can assist in this.

However, visualising examiners is not the same as selecting examiners, which is perhapsa supervisor's most critical task. Generally supervisors discuss potential examiners with candidates as it is understood that the candidate will have a good sense of the researchers in their field and who would do justice to the work. It is also useful to ask candidates to state who they would not want as an examiner, generally someone they know to have strongly opposing views, methodologies and/or practices. One area which often causes difficulties in the examination process is the selection of examiners who are not sympathetic towards, or do not have an understanding of, the research methodology adopted by the candidate.

When selecting examiners it is worth keeping in mind that there is now some research to suggest that experienced examiners (rather than inexperienced examiners) will be more likely to see the thesis within the context of the research education experience i.e. the equivalent of three years work, not the 'Nobel Prize'. An often quoted comment from experienced supervisors and examiners is that they avoid sending theses to inexperienced examiners as they are perceived to be tougher than their more experienced colleagues. One of the main reasons for this view is that inexperienced examiners have little in the way of other theses by which to benchmark. As one experienced examiner said; "They have a sample size of one, their own" (Kiley & Mullins, 2004). As a result of this research some universities in the UK insist that the two examiners, between them, have examined at least four doctoral theses.

The selection of appropriate examiners can also provide candidates with potential sponsorship for example a postdoctoral position, or as support in applying for positions. "Professor Bloggs, a world expert in the field, and one of the examiners for my doctoral dissertation, commented that 'This is one of the best theses I have read in many years of examining'".

A third consideration when selecting examiners is whether they suffer from 'the "drawbridge mentality"? This is a common disease. The examiner, having achieved a higher degree himself believes that he should be the last person to enter the ivory tower before the drawbridge is raised, and unworthy and unwashed multitudes lay siege to the castle" (Delamont at al, 2004, p. 146). Another way of putting this comes from early research in Australia into the criteria experienced supervisors use to select examiners. This research suggests that one of the critical factors is someone who will give a fair and balanced opinion of the work. Checking out whether potential examiners do possess these qualities can be time consuming but experience suggests that it is time very well spent.

A fourth consideration, and often the first one that most candidates and supervisors think of, is someone with an understanding of the topic and in particular the methodology and at the same time, broad minded enough to appreciate alternative and novel approaches. Topic and methodology matching can be particularly difficult in multi-disciplinary doctoral examination.

In summary, recent research involving experienced supervisors suggests that supervisors look for:

Professional and academic qualities

  • Topic/methodology fit
  • Understanding of the system from which the dissertation is coming
  • Understanding of the academy
  • Experience in supervising and examining
  • Availability

Personal issues

  • High standards but fair
  • Intellectual courtesy and generosity
  • Reliability

The above text was based on the following research:

Delamont, S., Atkinson, P., & Parry, O. (2004). Supervising the doctorate: A guide to success (2nd ed.). Berks: SRHE & OUP.

Kiley, M. and Mullins, G. (2004) Examining the examiners: How inexperienced examiners approach the assessment of research theses, International Journal of Educational Research, 42, 2 121-135

Mullins, G. and Kiley, M. (2002) It's a PhD, not a Nobel prize: How experienced examiners assess theses, Studies in Higher Education, 27, 4

Trafford, V. (2003) Questions in doctoral vivas: Views from the inside, Quality Assurance in Education 11, 2 114-122.

Ideas and tools

Given the different roles of supervisors, consider how you might coach a candidate regarding the selection of examiners e.g. assist in the preparation of a clear summary of the work that can be sent to potential examiners to facilitate the examination process e.g. remind the candidate, well in advance, that "at least two months before a they expect to be ready to submit a thesis, he/she must notify the Director, Student and Academic Services (SAS) in writing of the intention to submit, stating the title of the thesis and the date on which it is expected to be submitted for examination".

ANU information

The ANU policy related to the selection of examiners has undergone some change recently with the development of the College structure. Each College has developed its own policies and guidelines with the overall ANU policy (PhD and MPhil). Contact the graduate convener for your discipline for further information.

 

For College-specific information contact:

Currently ANU colleges are compiling information for selecting examiners. In the meantime, contact the College Associate Dean (HDR) for more general college information.