![Sample our Education journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5932/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Education.jpg"})
Abstract
It is rare for a PhD candidate who submits a thesis for examination to fail outright. If a thesis exhibits significant flaws the candidate may be required to make major revisions and re‐submit the work for re‐examination. The written comments of examiners before and after resubmission can provide important insights into the process of examination and the qualities examiners identify in a marginal thesis. Drawing on 101 of the most recent, completed theses across fields in one Australian university, this article investigates the differences in examiner comment on the qualities of theses by the same candidates before and after major revision and re‐submission (N = 6), and between these theses and those that were ‘passed’ at the first examination (N=95). Critical comments about the literature review and the degree to which the examiner moved into a supervisory role were found to be strong indicators of theses at the margin’.