Collaborative Ph.D. Examination

Abstract

In many universities, there is either no requirement for an oral examination or for examiners to guide Ph.D. candidates prior to submission of their thesis. This policy is usually the result of the “tyranny of distance” and/or the positivism philosophy of “impartial observer.” This chapter argues for the Interpretivist approach of enriching the learning experience of examiner, candidate, supervisor and university by requiring the advantages of complex sustained interaction. Extensive evidence has shown that group learning is far more productive than individualistic learning. While individual universities need to make the resources argument for a more collaborative Ph.D. process, this chapter presents the management learning literature. It provides this literature in support of the argument that examiners need to be inter-actively involved with supervisors and examiners, especially in IS which changes rapidly and is experiencing a move from positive to interpretive methodologies.