While at dinner today someone told me about the Swedish PhD Defense procedure. At the time I found it really odd and hard to believe as it was completely different to the system used in most other countries. A little further research into the topic made for some very interesting reading.
The really interesting aspect of it is the role of the opponent. In Sweden, an opponent is someone who presents your PhD thesis at your dissertation! Yes, you read that right.
The opponent is someone external (usually) selected by the faculty to oppose a candidate's thesis. They are supposed to read the thesis so thoroughly that they are the ones who present the thesis at the defense and not the candidate! They are also supposed to cross-examine (i.e. critically question) the candidate in detail (hence the term opponent). At the end, the opponent in conjunction with the committee determine if the candidate passes or fails.
I found this to be a very interesting system. Clearly you need to be clear and concise in your writing if you expect someone else to understand and present your work. You also need to be rigorous and have a clear idea of what you're doing since a majority of the defense in spent in the cross-examination phase. However you are subject to the whims and fancies of your opponent. You definitely want an opponent who doesn't hate you while at the same time is well-versed in your research and understands it well.
So who do you think should be your opponent?
The really interesting aspect of it is the role of the opponent. In Sweden, an opponent is someone who presents your PhD thesis at your dissertation! Yes, you read that right.
The opponent is someone external (usually) selected by the faculty to oppose a candidate's thesis. They are supposed to read the thesis so thoroughly that they are the ones who present the thesis at the defense and not the candidate! They are also supposed to cross-examine (i.e. critically question) the candidate in detail (hence the term opponent). At the end, the opponent in conjunction with the committee determine if the candidate passes or fails.
I found this to be a very interesting system. Clearly you need to be clear and concise in your writing if you expect someone else to understand and present your work. You also need to be rigorous and have a clear idea of what you're doing since a majority of the defense in spent in the cross-examination phase. However you are subject to the whims and fancies of your opponent. You definitely want an opponent who doesn't hate you while at the same time is well-versed in your research and understands it well.
So who do you think should be your opponent?
No comments:
Post a Comment