NotesFAQContact Us
Search Tips
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
ERIC Number: EJ1088182
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2016
Pages: 12
Abstractor: As Provided
ISSN: ISSN-0304-3797
An Analysis of Ph.D. Examiners' Reports in Engineering
Prieto, Elena; Holbrook, Allyson; Bourke, Sid
European Journal of Engineering Education, v41 n2 p192-203 2016
In recent years, there have been increasing calls for an overall transformation of the nature of engineering Ph.D. programs and the way theses are assessed. There exists a need to understand the examination process to ensure the best quality outcome for candidates in engineering. The work we present in this paper uses data collected between 2003 and 2010 for a total of 1,220 Australian Ph.D. theses by analysing examiner reports. Our analysis indicates that Ph.D. theses in engineering, N?=?106, differ considerably from those in other fields in areas such as gender of candidates and examiners and the examiners' geographical location. We also found that assessment areas such as "significance and contribution of the thesis," "publications arising from the thesis," "breadth, depth and recency of the literature review" and "communication and editorial correctness" are areas in which the proportion of text of engineering examiners' comments differs significantly from other fields.
Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site:
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education; Postsecondary Education
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Identifiers - Location: Australia
Grant or Contract Numbers: N/A