When a PhD is less than Appealing
For a PhD student the final submission and examination of the thesis normally represent a pinnacle of achievement. Sadly, this was not my own experience with the Open University. The thesis examination went badly for me, and it was decided that I was not to be awarded a PhD. The university informed me that I had the option of taking the matter to an appeal. When you appeal you have little idea what to expect. Failing to get one's PhD is pretty traumatic, so you hope that the university will be sympathetic. Having no experience of appeals, you expect that you will get full information and guidance as you negotiate the process. And since some appeals can involve supervisory malpractice you would naturally hope to be offered the services of an independent "appeal adviser", someone who would assist you with presentation of the appeal. This is especially important where, as I was, you are an isolated external student living 300 miles from the university. Throughout the appeal process your natural assumption will be that the university's chief objective is to seek a just outcome, recognising that on occasions universities and external examiners do make mistakes. You also hope that matters will be dealt with promptly. Finally, since the appeal could be stressful, you expect the university to show appropriate consideration. So, in the event how did the university measure up to these expectations? Regrettably, the response was disappointing, and the appeal process proved to be prolonged, stressful and dispiriting. I have discussed my "case" with other postgraduate students who have submitted appeals, both at the OU and elsewhere, and my experience is by no means unique. I was a part-time, external student with the OU from 1974, and I submitted my thesis in 1983. I was informed that I was to be awarded an MPhil. After suffering lengthy delays during the appeal process I decided to obtain legal assistance. I finally won my appeal in 1987, but was required to make changes to my thesis before resubmission. After the delay of four years my research findings had become somewhat dated, and clarifying the precise conditions for resubmission incurred a further delay. Finally, in 1989 I was able to resubmit (click for thesis abstract). Happily, the re-examination was successful, and last year I received my degree. I still puzzle over this disagreeable period of my life, and try to discern the reasons for such a bizarre train of events. Clearly my geographical distance from the university did nothing to help me get matters resolved properly and promptly. However, more fundamentally, I feel that the way in which appeals are handled tends to work decisively against the interests of the student. Crucially, it is quite clear that being "in dispute" with one's university can mean precisely that. It is either "you" or "they" who will be the winner. Unfortunately, it is "they" who invent the rules, so it starts off as a very unequal battle. If an appeal is to be just and fair then the university must avoid adopting a purely combative stance, and should ensure that the student is given appropriate guidance. This was not so in my case. For example, at the beginning of the appeal process I was asked to submit a letter of appeal. However, I was given no indication as to what the form or content of such a letter should be, nor was I even told the grounds on which I could make the appeal. My attempts to obtain a copy of the regulations concerning examination procedures, to which I was entitled, were fraught by delays and obfuscatory responses from administrative staff. The relevant particulars were eventually released to me only after I had asked the senior assistant registrar to intervene on my behalf. I had the distinct impression that I was in combat. Later stages of the appeal process were dogged by similar substantial delays and lack of consideration. My advice to students who may be embarking on their own postgraduate appeals. Be prepared for a long haul: the correspondence with the university over my appeal and thesis resubmission ultimately extended to about 150 items. File all such correspondence carefully. Talk to other students who have been through appeals. Make contact with your support services, both within the university and your students' association. Attend an assertiveness training course. If necessary and you can afford the expense, get yourself a good lawyer. Never give up.
Please note: a significantly longer (unpublished) version of this paper is available, entitled Too much appeal. < Return to the main PhD Failure and Appeals page
| ||||||||||||||||
