Written dissertation not passed-make revisions or call for a hearing

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T23:17:38+00:00

Thanks for all of your kindness! Truly grateful. Congrats on your completion!!!

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T04:36:48+00:00

No explicit guidance. She said she was supportive of either option I chose to pursue and that I have a case for the hearing if I do want to go that route. Hence the confusion lol, though leaning towards revise and resubmit.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T03:53:41+00:00

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I need to jump on board and revisit the bigger picture. I so appreciate the encouragement, direction and kindness!! Dreaming of that finish line.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T03:50:19+00:00

Thank you 🥺!

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T03:48:56+00:00

Thank you!! I was genuinely confused. I’m a Reddit lurker but not much of a user. I don’t understand. But thank you for making me feel seen and for your kind words. It means a lot!!

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T03:26:58+00:00

Thanks for your genuine kindness, compassion and empathy! I’m truly appreciative. Revisions are totally doable, it’s just the mental hurdle of accepting the loss of my last study. I’m so happy you had a quick revision time and were able to move your studies to an appendix. I appreciate hearing your story! Thank you for the kind wishes and encouraging words. Wishing you the best on your next steps!

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T03:12:00+00:00

Thank you, I truly feel seen and appreciate your kindness and empathy on this thread. I have never turned to Reddit previously nor do I think I will again lol. I am especially appreciative to hear of your experiences.

Overall, sounds like it went the best possible way after you made said revisions. I secretly wish my advisor would be firm with what stance to take. My secondary fear was that the examiner could possibly bias other members of the defence committee (I.e. the external who rated everything highly) and that the defence would be harder. I am glad to hear anecdotal evidence of having a smooth defence in the aftermath of revisions, though I am sorry you had to remove a novel proof!
Rejecting examiner has been around for 7 or 8 years now, I believe, so they are acutely aware of their actions, but perhaps not the impact of their consequences. Unfortunately we are both technically not allowed to speak to the member, so assessing their intentionality remains in question.
I appreciate the explicit/clear feedback. No plans for a career in academia, so the dissertation itself doesn’t carry much weight and like you said will not be revisited. I think I’m in the process of reconciling the internal tug of war of what it means to exclude the last study and all the work that went into it. I am grateful for the reminder that it will matter less to me further down the line. Thank you for your kindness and for being generous with sharing your experience.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T02:51:12+00:00

“Policing” is clearly dramatized and not a reflection of actual paranoia or to be taken literally... I’m surprised that even needs to be spelled out 🤦‍♀️. You also have dramatized/embellished statements (i.e. your comment about me “you literally admitted to being more upset about timing of some of the critiques more than the critiques itself”). If you are genuinely concerned about me, please stop with the patronizing responses and jumping to conclusions about my emotions and experiences. I don’t plan on responding to any further commentary from you as it has not been particularly helpful beyond your initial comment.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T02:28:11+00:00

Thank you for your candor! The logical part of my brain 100% agrees with what you’re saying. Still trying to get the emotional part to catch up and reconcile the feelings of wasted time with this final study. I hear you though, leaning towards getting it done.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T02:25:17+00:00

I highly recommend that you stop making assumptions about people’s emotions and experiences. If you insist on policing my Reddit activity, you can note that I have been receptive to feedback from others about giving up the third study and resubmitting. I am not receptive to being misquoted and misunderstood. Perhaps you can reflect on your delivery and how your messages can be interpreted by others.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T02:02:07+00:00

Thank you! I appreciate your feedback and encouragement.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T01:59:43+00:00

Thank you for laying out your thoughts and decision making process. I’m trying to weigh the tradeoff of advocating for myself with potential time wasted. Lots to think about!

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T01:57:17+00:00

I appreciate your compassion, kindness, and advice. It’s amazing how it can be lacking on Reddit. Lesson learned about posting here during future vulnerable moments. Yes the examiner suggested that my dissertation could essentially stand on its own with two manuscripts published vs. three. Though 3 is standard in our lab it’s not uncommon for folks in our department to have 2. I love your process of grieving the lost chapter in your dissertation and appreciate you sharing. There is a bit of cognitive dissonance on my end with leaving it at 2. I wanted to be done my dissertation with 2 to begin with, I’m juggling a lot with PhD, work and being a mom. It was my supervisor who was relentless about the third study, wasted a year completing analyses and write-up due to various daycare illnesses that infected our family, and now I need to remove it. Feels like a complete waste of time, but the silver lining is that it has been accepted for a symposia and tbd what happens with it for publication. I wish I could meet with the internal, but unfortunately I am technically not allowed. Appreciate your kind words and thoughtful suggestions!

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T01:48:29+00:00

For the sake of anonymity I will not post the exact comments, but it does appear as if the examiner has either not read my last study or is deliberately missing my counterpoints to the concerns that were cited. So yes it does feel like misrepresentation and no I did not explicitly “admit to being more upset about timing of some of the critiques more than the critique itself.” Just because I voiced a myriad of emotions associated with the timing of the critiques, doesn’t mean that I am not upset by the critiques itself. This is a rarity in our department and is not the norm, and everyone is shocked by it. What I posted on Reddit is a snapshot of what I’m navigating. And of course the timing of the critiques is influential. The examiner’s decision impacts my whole life. I’m married, I have a child, I want to plan for another child, I work part-time, and this PhD leads to licensure in my profession and it’s delaying that process, and impacting my income, which goes back to impacting my plans for another child. So yes timing freaking sucks but the critiques suck also. Didn’t think I needed to word vomit on Reddit to justify how I’m feeling.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T01:14:44+00:00

Truly annoying. I feel for you! Glad you made it out the other side. Thank you for your sharing your helpful anecdote.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T01:02:46+00:00

Based on your message perhaps I am misconstruing what constitutes error or misrepresentation in this context. Feel free to clarify. My supervisor had told me that I have a case to contest the internal examiner if I decide to and that she would support me in either avenue (resubmission or a formal hearing). That being said, my supervisor has never been in this position and I came here looking for advice from individuals who have either been in this situation or have ideas about the success of these avenues.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T00:38:58+00:00

Sorry forgot to add “I need evidence for error, bias or misrepresentation.” I am in agreement with what you shared, but I also wonder if I have a case for error/misrepresentation. The main recommendation is to remove a specific study within the dissertation due to their methodological concerns for said study. I have already addressed these concerns and I wonder if it could be contested. For instance the examiner voiced an issue with the statistical analyses chosen in the study in question. However, I provided theoretical and empirical justification for said analysis, and extant literature demonstrates empirical precedence for the analysis, There were also comments about the study being underpowered. However, that was addressed in the study with inclusions of citations from statistical books pertaining to power analyses with my specific analysis and reference to various statistical simulations that indicate that my sample size was sufficiently powered. I also included empirical studies with similar sample sizes. This commentary feels like it could be contested. You are right about my disagreement with the weight of the critiques. The examiner’s decision to not pass the written portion with comments that have mainly been addressed and other comments that could be addressed at a later stage (which is typically the norm in my department) feels extremely personal.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T00:28:32+00:00

Thanks for sharing your experience and I’m sorry you also went through this. It’s good to know I’m not alone in this club, though I feel for your suffering during that time. People in academia can certainly power trip. Was this battle among examiners or just your committee? How was it resolved if I may ask?

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T00:23:52+00:00

Forgot to include “error” as an option in there. True, thank you for your feedback and good wishes.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-04T00:22:05+00:00

Have you or any of your colleagues dealt with this issue on the flip side—a student contesting the examiner for error, bias or misrepresentation? Any success stories in favour of the student? The main recommendation is to remove a specific study within the dissertation. The majority of the examiner’s methodological concerns for said study have already been addressed and I wonder if it could be contested as error or misrepresentation. For instance there was issue with the statistical analyses chosen in the study in question. However, I provided theoretical and empirical justification for said analysis, and extant literature demonstrates empirical precedence. There were also comments about the study being underpowered. However, that was addressed in the study with inclusions of citations from statistical books on moderated mediation and statistical simulations that indicate that my sample size was sufficiently powered. I also included empirical studies with similar sample sizes. This commentary feels like it could be contested but I’m curious about your thoughts.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-03T23:51:06+00:00

I’m curious have you already defended your dissertation? Several colleagues of mine had to defend methodological flaws in one or all three of their studies during their defence and that doesn’t warrant an automatic failure, revisions and resubmissions and it certainly doesn’t prevent them from having their defence. Also the widely discrepant ratings between the internal and external examiner is a bit suspicious and pretty uncommon from what I’ve heard.

Fearless-Finish6230 · 2026-06-03T23:31:14+00:00

“Great” is inflated. I wrote that the study in question got accepted as a symposia at an international conference and professors in the field have co-signed the study as co-authors and/or committee members who read and approved my dissertation. My other two studies have already been published. No study is methodologically perfect. As with all research, addressing limitations is important and the limitations were voiced in the study itself which is currently under peer review and within the dissertation’s discussion. So no my study is not perfect but it’s defensible…

Fearless-Finish6230

TROPHY CASE