phd research proposal defense

PhD Thesis Proposal Defense: Common Questions and Feedback

This past two weeks I attended a number of proposal defense of PhD students at my University. In this post, I discuss the general format of a proposal defense as well as discuss the most common questions asked and feedback given to the students by the external examiners.

Structure of a PhD proposal defense

Outcomes of a phd proposal defense, common questions and feedback for chapter 1 of the proposal, common questions and feedback for chapter 2 of the proposal, common questions and feedback for chapter 3 of the proposal, general feedback, final thoughts, related posts.

A proposal defense has: the student defending his proposal, two external examiners, the student’s supervisors, the audience, and the chair of the defense. The defense is structured as follows:

• The chair opens the session by welcoming and acknowledging the student, his supervisors and the external examiners.
• The chair also outlines how the defense will be undertaken including any rules that should be adhered to.
• The chair then welcomes the PhD student to introduce himself and make a presentation (usually 15 minutes).
• After the presentation by the student, the chair opens the floor to the external examiners to give their comments, ask questions and give feedback to the student on how to improve the proposal.
• The student is then required to respond to the questions asked and comments given.
• The chair then makes his remarks.
• Afterwards, the PhD student, his supervisors and the audience are requested to leave the room to allow the chair and the examiners to make their determination. The student and his supervisors are then called back in and the determination is spelt out to them.

There are about 4 possible outcomes after the student presents and defends his proposal:

• The proposal passes with minor or no corrections.
• The proposal passes with major corrections.
• The student retakes the proposal by re-writing it (may include change of topic) and defending it again.
• The proposal is rejected.

Rarely will a student be asked to re-take or will a proposal be rejected especially if it has been adequately supervised. This is because before the proposal is submitted for oral defense, it must be reviewed and signed by the supervisors.

Below is a list of the common questions and feedback for chapter 1:

• What is your working definition of [concepts]?
• Which sector do you want to focus on?
• From a [country/region] perspective, please explain what is the problem?
• How do you intend to solve the problem you have identified?
• What will your proposed solution comprise of?
• Who are the recipients of your proposed solution?
• What is the primary outcome of the research?
• Your objectives use [concept] while your problem statement talks of [a different concept]. What’s the difference between the two [concepts]?
• In the research objectives, there is an interchange and insertion of different words. Be careful about the concepts you use. There needs to be consistency in the concepts used throughout the proposal.
• What is the knowledge gap? That is, what is known and what is unknown that your study will attempt to address?
• How do you relate [different variables included in the topic]? Is one a precedent of the other?
• Are you investigating or examining? The topic says investigating while the objectives talk of examining.
• The presentation does not discuss [sector of focus], the opportunities that exist, and the challenges it faces. This would give the student a good basis for undertaking the research.
• There is no continuity in the objectives.
• There is no discussion of the study’s contribution to knowledge and practice, which is very important for PhD-level study.
• The background has many concepts that throw off readers on what the focus of the study is.
• The problem statement is not focused.
• What is the placement of the study regionally?
• The objectives are too long and broad; they should be specific.
• What is the underlying hypothesis of your study?
• One of the research questions is biased. The researcher should take a neutral stand.

Below is a list of the common questions and feedback for chapter 2:

• Which theories have inspired your work and who are the proponents of those theories?
• For each theory discussed in your proposal, briefly state what it says and how it informs your study.
• How are the theories related to your study?
• Why did you select those theories and not [other theories]?
• There are no empirical studies reviewed in your proposal.
• Your work must converge with other peoples’ work to be able to show the gap that your study is trying to fill.
• How did the choice of theories help you come up with your study’s concepts and variables?
• How will you measure the variables [in the topic]?
• You have just touched the surface of the empirical review, which should be a substantial section of your literature review.
• It is not clear what the research gap is from the literature review.
• After the empirical review, that’s when you now discuss the conceptual framework.
• The conceptual framework should clearly show the dependent and independent variables and their relationships.

Below is a list of the common questions and feedback for chapter 3:

• Kindly explain what your research philosophy is.
• What will your [quantitative] model comprise of?
• How are you going to verify and validate your [quantitative] model?
• Why is the sampling formula appropriate to your sector and study? Justify the sampling formula used in the proposal.
• Justify the choice of the sampling technique [e.g. purposive sampling].
• Justify your choice of data collection and data analysis methods.
• Are you going to use an inductive approach or a deductive approach to your study?
• There needs to be consistency between your objectives and research philosophy.
• If you have a number of population categories, you need to clearly articulate the sampling techniques for each category.
• The data analysis methods should be clearly articulated.
• The ethical considerations of your study should be adequately discussed.
• The data collection instruments should be part of the proposal defense.
• Your choice of research design and methods should be justified.
• What is your unit of analysis?
• Who are your study’s population?
• Will you have different questionnaires for different respondents?
• The data collection tools should have adequate background information questions to enable comparisons across different socio-economic and demographic groups.
• Why are you lagging a variable? Justify the need to lag the variable.
• Justify the choice of the model [e.g. Structural Equation Model].
• Which specific multivariate analysis will you use?
• Which tests are you going to conduct for the model and why? [e.g. normality, multicollinearity tests etc]
• The variables of your study should be defined.

In addition to the chapter-specific questions and feedback given, the students also received feedback on:

• The formatting of their proposals, including the font styles and size allowed, the numbering of the documents,
• The inclusion of front pages such as cover page, declaration, abstract, table of contents,
• The inclusion of back pages such as reference list and appendices which should include letter of introduction, consent letter for study respondents, data collection instruments, and work plan (Gantt chart) for the study.
• The style of referencing recommended by the School e.g. APA, which should be consistent throughout the proposal. The proposal defense should also include some of the citations so as to give it an authoritative feel.

From my observations during the four proposal defenses I attended, a proposal defense is an opportunity for the PhD student to defend his work and to convince the interviewing panel that the student knows what he is doing and what is required of him moving forward. Most of the panellists will do their best to make the student feel comfortable rather than intimidate him so PhD students should not panic when preparing to defend their proposals.

Of importance is adequate preparation before the defense and making sure that the proposal and presentation follow the guidelines provided by the School. Lastly, PhD students should keep in mind that the aim of the proposal defense is to help improve upon the student’s proposal and ensure that the research will meet the scientific rigour and standards of a PhD-level work.

How To Write Chapter 1 Of A PhD Thesis Proposal (A Practical Guide)

How To Write Chapter 2 Of A PhD Thesis Proposal (A Beginner’s Guide)

How To Write Chapter 3 Of A PhD Thesis Proposal (A Detailed Guide)

How To Format A PhD Thesis In Microsoft Word (An Illustrative Guide)

Comprehensive Guidelines for Writing a PhD Thesis Proposal (+ free checklist for PhD Students)

Grace Njeri-Otieno

Grace Njeri-Otieno is a Kenyan, a wife, a mom, and currently a PhD student, among many other balls she juggles. She holds a Bachelors' and Masters' degrees in Economics and has more than 7 years' experience with an INGO. She was inspired to start this site so as to share the lessons learned throughout her PhD journey with other PhD students. Her vision for this site is "to become a go-to resource center for PhD students in all their spheres of learning."

Recent Content

SPSS Tutorial #11: Correlation Analysis in SPSS

In this post, I discuss what correlation is, the two most common types of correlation statistics used (Pearson and Spearman), and how to conduct correlation analysis in SPSS. What is correlation...

SPSS Tutorial #10: How to Check for Normality of Data in SPSS

The normality assumption states that the data is normally distributed. This post touches on the importance of normality of data and illustrates how to check for normality of data in SPSS. Why...

Want to Get your Dissertation Accepted?

Discover how we've helped doctoral students complete their dissertations and advance their academic careers!

Join 200+ Graduated Students

Get Your Dissertation Accepted On Your Next Submission

Get customized coaching for:.

• Crafting your proposal,
• Collecting and analyzing your data, or
• Preparing your defense.

Trapped in dissertation revisions?

How to create a dissertation proposal defense powerpoint (+example), published by steve tippins on june 21, 2022 june 21, 2022.

Last Updated on: 2nd February 2024, 02:45 am

As part of the dissertation process, you will need to create a dissertation proposal defense PowerPoint to present a summary of the plan for your study. You will need to show how important your study is and how it is useful. 

When creating the PowerPoint, keep in mind that you need to make sure all of your audience can understand all aspects of your study.  The exact content for the defense PowerPoint varies by college, discipline and department, so it is important that you discuss with your committee chair about the requirements. However, we will give some general guidelines that apply to most institutions.

The defense typically takes 20‐30 minutes. You should keep the timeframe in mind as you consider the information you will have in your presentation. 

Except for aspects of your presentation, such as the research question(s) or hypothesis(es), do not just read the slides. Instead, explain or expand on what is on the slides. To ensure you keep within the timeframe, practice narrating your PowerPoint presentation. 

Although the APA manual does not provide guidelines for creating a PowerPoint presentation, you will need to follow some of the APA style guidelines within your PowerPoint. 

For example, provide in-text citations for quotes, paraphrases, images, graphs, and other information that should be cited. Also, you will need to provide a list of pertinent references. 

The following are other format requirements for the slides :

• Create 17-20 slides.
• Do not provide a lot of information. Be concise and write a few sentences (approximately 1-7 on each slide). 
• Because your slides will contain only a small amount of information, any extra information that you want to touch on should be put in the notes section of the PowerPoint. 
• Write the information in your slides for visual appeal and optimum communication, using a legible font size. 
• You can use graphics and images to enhance and reinforce the information. However, ensure that they do not distract from your information.
• You can use bullet points but keep them to a minimum of 3-4 for each listing.

Example Dissertation Proposal Defense PowerPoint Format

The dissertation proposal will consist of three chapters, which you will be providing information on in the presentation. Although the contents and order of the contents may vary, there are some basic parts of the proposal that are usually required.  

The following is a breakdown of the usual contents that are included in the presentation. Each of these headings below represents the titles of each slide. The information below the headings is the type of content you will need to provide. 

Title (1 slide) : 

• Dissertation’s Title 
• Department of Program of Study/Name of University
• Chair and Committee Members

Statement of the Problem (1 slide):

• Provide the problem that your dissertation will address. 

Purpose of the Study (1 slide):

• Provide what the study will do relative to the issue(s) defined in the statement of the problem.

Significance of the Study (1 slide):

• Provide the main argument of why the solution to the problem that you propose is important. 

Research Question(s)/Hypothesis(es ) (1 slide):

• Provide the research question(s) or hypothesis(es) relevant to your field of study, written exactly as it is in your dissertation proposal.

The Literature Review (2 slides):  

• These slides should consist of a coherent, organized overview of the main literature that frames your study’s problem, and the gap in literature that your study will address. Make sure that you include the sources. 

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework (1 slide):

• This slide should consist of the theoretical/conceptual framework that will help you make sense of the phenomenon that you will investigate. 

Research Design (1 slide):

• Provide the framework for the methods of data collection and data analysis. Indicate whether the study will be quantitative or qualitative.

Sample and Population (1 slide):

• Provide the population that refers to the entire group that you will draw conclusions about, and the sample that refers to the specific group that you will collect data from.

Data Collection (1 slide):

• Provide the methods by which you will obtain the data. If the research design is quantitative, provide methods such as correlation and regression, mean, mode and median or others. If the design is qualitative, provide methods such as, interviews, questionnaires with open-ended questions, focus groups, observation, game or role-playing, case studies, or others.

Data Analysis (1-2 slides):

• This slide should contain the process you will use to understand, gather, compile, and process the data you will obtain. 

Limitations (1 slide):

• In this slide, explain the nature of the limitations and how they will be overcome during your research. 

Delimitations (1slide):

• Provide the characteristics that describe the boundaries of your study and limit the scope, such as sample size, geographical location, population traits, or others.

References (1-2 slides):

• Only provide those sources that you referred to in the presentation. Do not provide all the sources that you have in your dissertation proposal.

Thank You/Questions (1 slide):

• Use this final slide to thank your committee and to request questions from them.

Note : For information about citing your references, refer to Chapters 9 and 10 of the APA Manual 7 th edition.

For instructions on how to create a PowerPoint, see How to Create a Powerpoint Presentation .

View this video for “ Tips and Tricks for your Proposal Defense Day Presentation ” 

You can find several examples of students’ Dissertation Proposal Defense presentations online by searching for “Dissertation Proposal Defense PowerPoint.”  You can also find one at this webpage .

Steve Tippins

Steve Tippins, PhD, has thrived in academia for over thirty years. He continues to love teaching in addition to coaching recent PhD graduates as well as students writing their dissertations. Learn more about his dissertation coaching and career coaching services. Book a Free Consultation with Steve Tippins

Related Posts

Dissertation

What makes a good research question.

Creating a good research question is vital to successfully completing your dissertation. Here are some tips that will help you formulate a good research question.  What Makes a Good Research Question? These are the three Read more…

Dissertation Structure

When it comes to writing a dissertation, one of the most fraught questions asked by graduate students is about dissertation structure. A dissertation is the lengthiest writing project that many graduate students ever undertake, and Read more…

Choosing a Dissertation Chair

Choosing your dissertation chair is one of the most important decisions that you’ll make in graduate school. Your dissertation chair will in many ways shape your experience as you undergo the most rigorous intellectual challenge Read more…

Make This Your Last Round of Dissertation Revision.

Learn How to Get Your Dissertation Accepted .

Discover the 5-Step Process in this Free Webinar .

Almost there!

Please verify your email address by clicking the link in the email message we just sent to your address.

If you don't see the message within the next five minutes, be sure to check your spam folder :).

Hack Your Dissertation

5-Day Mini Course: How to Finish Faster With Less Stress

Interested in more helpful tips about improving your dissertation experience? Join our 5-day mini course by email!

Preparing For Your Dissertation Defense

13 Key Questions To Expect In The Viva Voce

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) & David Phair (PhD) . Reviewed By: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | June 2021

Preparing for your dissertation or thesis defense (also called a “viva voce”) is a formidable task . All your hard work over the years leads you to this one point, and you’ll need to defend yourself against some of the most experienced researchers you’ve encountered so far.

It’s natural to feel a little nervous.

In this post, we’ll cover some of the most important questions you should be able to answer in your viva voce, whether it’s for a Masters or PhD degree. Naturally, they might not arise in exactly the same form (some may not come up at all), but if you can answer these questions well, it means you’re in a good position to tackle your oral defense.

Viva Voce Prep: 13 Essential Questions

• What is your study about and why did you choose to research this in particular?
• How did your research questions evolve during the research process?
• How did you decide on which sources to include in your literature review?
• How did you design your study and why did you take this approach?
• How generalisable and valid are the findings?
• What were the main shortcomings and limitations created by your research design?
• How did your findings relate to the existing literature?
• What were your key findings in relation to the research questions?
• Were there any findings that surprised you?
• What biases may exist in your research?
• How can your findings be put into practice?
• How has your research contributed to current thinking in the field?
• If you could redo your research, how would you alter your approach?

#1: What is your study about and why did you choose to research this in particular?

This question, a classic party starter, is pretty straightforward.

What the dissertation or thesis committee is assessing here is your ability to clearly articulate your research aims, objectives and research questions in a concise manner. Concise is the keyword here – you need to clearly explain your research topic without rambling on for a half-hour. Don’t feel the need to go into the weeds here – you’ll have many opportunities to unpack the details later on.

In the second half of the question, they’re looking for a brief explanation of the justification of your research. In other words, why was this particular set of research aims, objectives and questions worth addressing? To address this question well in your oral defense, you need to make it clear what gap existed within the research and why that gap was worth filling.

#2: How did your research questions evolve during the research process?

Good research generally follows a long and winding path . It’s seldom a straight line (unless you got really lucky). What they’re assessing here is your ability to follow that path and let the research process unfold.

Specifically, they’ll want to hear about the impact that the literature review process had on you in terms of shaping the research aims, objectives and research questions . For example, you may have started with a certain set of aims, but then as you immersed yourself in the literature, you may have changed direction. Similarly, your initial fieldwork findings may have turned out some unexpected data that drove you to adjust or expand on your initial research questions.

Long story short – a good defense involves clearly describing your research journey , including all the twists and turns. Adjusting your direction based on findings in the literature or the fieldwork shows that you’re responsive , which is essential for high-quality research.

#3: How did you decide on which sources to include in your literature review?

A comprehensive literature review is the foundation of any high-quality piece of research. With this question, your dissertation or thesis committee are trying to assess which quality criteria and approach you used to select the sources for your literature review.

Typically, good research draws on both the seminal work in the respective field and more recent sources . In other words, a combination of the older landmark studies and pivotal work, along with up-to-date sources that build on to those older studies. This combination ensures that the study has a rock-solid foundation but is not out of date.

So, make sure that your study draws on a mix of both the “classics” and new kids on the block, and take note of any major evolutions in the literature that you can use as an example when asked this question in your viva voce.

#4: How did you design your study and why did you take this approach?

This is a classic methodological question that you can almost certainly expect in some or other shape.

What they’re looking for here is a clear articulation of the research design and methodology, as well as a strong justification of each choice . So, you need to be able to walk through each methodological choice and clearly explain both what you did and why you did it. The why is particularly important – you need to be able to justify each choice you made by clearly linking your design back to your research aims, objectives and research questions, while also taking into account practical constraints.

To ensure you cover every base, check out our research methodology vlog post , as well as our post covering the Research Onion .

#5: How generalizable and valid are the findings?

This question is aimed at specifically digging into your understanding of the sample and how that relates to the population, as well as potential validity issues in your methodology.

To answer question this well, you’ll need to critically assess your sample and findings and consider if they truly apply to the entire population, as well as whether they assessed what they set out to. Note that there are two components here – generalizability and validity . Generalizability is about how well the sample represents the population. Validity is about how accurately you’ve measured what you intended to measure .

To ace this part of your dissertation defense, make sure that you’re very familiar with the concepts of generalizability , validity and reliability , and how these apply to your research. Remember, you don’t need to achieve perfection – you just need to be aware of the strengths and weaknesses of your research (and how the weaknesses could be improved upon).

Need a helping hand?

#6: What were the main shortcomings and limitations created by your research design?

This question picks up where the last one left off.

As I mentioned, it’s perfectly natural that your research will have shortcomings and limitations as a result of your chosen design and methodology. No piece of research is flawless. Therefore, a good dissertation defense is not about arguing that your work is perfect, but rather it’s about clearly articulating the strengths and weaknesses of your approach.

To address this question well, you need to think critically about all of the potential weaknesses your design may have, as well as potential responses to these (which could be adopted in future research) to ensure you’re well prepared for this question. For a list of common methodological limitations, check out our video about research limitations here .

#7: How did your findings relate to the existing literature?

This common dissertation defense question links directly to your discussion chapter , where you would have presented and discussed the findings in relation to your literature review.

What your dissertation or thesis committee is assessing here is your ability to compare your study’s findings to the findings of existing research . Specifically, you need to discuss which findings aligned with existing research and which findings did not. For those findings that contrasted against existing research, you should also explain what you believe to be the reasons for this.

As with many questions in a viva voce, it’s both the what and the why that matter here. So, you need to think deeply about what the underlying reasons may be for both the similarities and differences between your findings and those of similar studies.

#8: What were your key findings in relation to the research questions?

This question is similar to the last one in that it too focuses on your research findings. However, here the focus is specifically on the findings that directly relate to your research questions (as opposed to findings in general).

So, a good way to prepare for this question is to step back and revisit your research questions . Ask yourself the following:

• What exactly were you asking in those questions, and what did your research uncover concerning them?
• Which questions were well answered by your study and which ones were lacking?
• Why were they lacking and what more could be done to address this in future research?

Conquering this part dissertation defense requires that you focus squarely on the research questions. Your study will have provided many findings (hopefully!), and not all of these will link directly to the research questions. Therefore, you need to clear your mind of all of the fascinating side paths your study may have lead you down and regain a clear focus on the research questions .

#9: Were there any findings that surprised you?

This question is two-pronged.

First, you should discuss the surprising findings that were directly related to the original research questions . Going into your research, you likely had some expectations in terms of what you would find, so this is your opportunity to discuss the outcomes that emerged as contrary to what you initially expected. You’ll also want to think about what the reasons for these contrasts may be.

Second, you should discuss the findings that weren’t directly related to the research questions, but that emerged from the data set . You may have a few or you may have none – although generally there are a handful of interesting musings that you can glean from the data set. Again, make sure you can articulate why you find these interesting and what it means for future research in the area.

What the committee is looking for in this type of question is your ability to interpret the findings holistically and comprehensively , and to respond to unexpected data. So, take the time to zoom out and reflect on your findings thoroughly.

#10: What biases may exist in your research?

Biases… we all have them.

For this question, you’ll need to think about potential biases in your research , in the data itself but also in your interpretation of the data. With this question, your committee is assessing whether you have considered your own potential biases and the biases inherent in your analysis approach (i.e. your methodology). So, think carefully about these research biases and be ready to explain how these may exist in your study.

In an oral defense, this question is often followed up with a question on how the biases were mitigated or could be mitigated in future research. So, give some thought not just to what biases may exist, but also the mitigation measures (in your own study and for future research).

#11: How can your findings be put into practice?

Another classic question in the typical viva voce.

With this question, your committee is assessing your ability to bring your findings back down to earth and demonstrate their practical value and application. Importantly, this question is not about the contribution to academia or the overall field of research (we’ll get to that next) – it is specifically asking about how this newly created knowledge can be used in the real world.

Naturally, the actionability of your findings will vary depending on the nature of your research topic. Some studies will produce many action points and some won’t. If you’re researching marketing strategies within an industry, for example, you should be able to make some very specific recommendations for marketing practitioners in that industry.

To help you flesh out points for this question, look back at your original justification for the research (i.e. in your introduction and literature review chapters). What were the driving forces that led you to research your specific topic? That justification should help you identify ways in which your findings can be put into practice.

#12: How has your research contributed to current thinking in the field?

While the previous question was aimed at practical contribution, this question is aimed at theoretical contribution . In other words, what is the significance of your study within the current body of research? How does it fit into the existing research and what does it add to it?

This question is often asked by a field specialist and is used to assess whether you’re able to place your findings into the research field to critically convey what your research contributed. This argument needs to be well justified – in other words, you can’t just discuss what your research contributed, you need to also back each proposition up with a strong why .

To answer this question well, you need to humbly consider the quality and impact of your work and to be realistic in your response. You don’t want to come across as arrogant (“my work is groundbreaking”), nor do you want to undersell the impact of your work. So, it’s important to strike the right balance between realistic and pessimistic .

This question also opens the door to questions about potential future research . So, think about what future research opportunities your study has created and which of these you feel are of the highest priority.

#13: If you could redo your research, how would you alter your approach?

This question is often used to wrap up a viva voce as it brings the discussion full circle.

Here, your committee is again assessing your ability to clearly identify and articulate the limitations and shortcomings of your research, both in terms of research design and topic focus . Perhaps, in hindsight, it would have been better to use a different analysis method or data set. Perhaps the research questions should have leaned in a slightly different direction. And so on.

This question intends to assess whether you’re able to look at your work critically , assess where the weaknesses are and make recommendations for the future. This question often sets apart those who did the research purely because it was required, from those that genuinely engaged with their research. So, don’t hold back here – reflect on your entire research journey ask yourself how you’d do things differently if you were starting with a  blank canvas today.

Recap: The 13 Key Dissertation Defense Questions

To recap, here are the 13 questions you need to be ready for to ace your dissertation or thesis oral defense:

As I mentioned, this list of dissertation defense questions is certainly not exhaustive – don’t assume that we’ve covered every possible question here. However, these questions are quite likely to come up in some shape or form in a typical dissertation or thesis defense, whether it’s for a Master’s degree, PhD or any other research degree. So, you should take the time to make sure you can answer them well.

If you need assistance preparing for your dissertation defense or viva voce, get in touch with us to discuss 1-on-1 coaching. We can critically review your research and identify potential issues and responses, as well as undertake a mock oral defense to prepare you for the pressures and stresses on the day.

Psst… there’s more (for free)

This post is part of our dissertation mini-course, which covers everything you need to get started with your dissertation, thesis or research project. 

You Might Also Like:

12 Comments

Very interesting

Interesting. I appreciate!

Really appreciating

My field is International Trade

Interesting

This is a full course on defence. I was fabulously enlightened and I gained enough confidence for my upcoming Masters Defence.

There are many lessons to learn and the simplicity in presentationmakes thee reader say “YesI can”

This is so helping… it has Enlightened me on how to answer specific questions. I pray to make it through for my upcoming defense

Lovely to hear that 🙂

Really educative and beneficial

Interesting. On-point and elaborate. And comforting too! Thanks.

Thank you very much for the enlightening me, be blessed

Thankyou so much. I am planning to defend my thesis soon and I found this very useful

Very interesting and useful to all masters and PhD students

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

University of Washington Information School

Doctorate in information science.

• Advising & Support
• Capstone Projects
• Upcoming Info Sessions
• Videos: Alumni at Work
• Request more information

Proposal Defense Policy & Procedure

The proposal and its purpose.

The Information School encourages and supports the wide range of dissertation topics and methodologies generated from the study of information science. The dissertation proposal represents a formal understanding between the Supervisory Committee and the doctoral Candidate. This agreement outlines the work to be done and the intellectual rigor the Committee expects from the Candidate. The proposal functions as a map guiding the Candidate towards the effective completion of the dissertation project.

The dissertation proposal should substantially advance the doctoral candidate toward completion of the dissertation.  It may take the form of the preliminary chapters of the dissertation.

The Elements

The doctoral Candidate works closely with the Chair of the Supervisory Committee and other voting members of the Supervisory Committee in determining the composition of the dissertation proposal and in writing the proposal.

The proposal should contain detail sufficient to describe the significance, background and rationale for the dissertation and the work the Candidate will perform for the dissertation.

The following list of elements is typical for a dissertation proposal in the information field.  However, the School recognizes that this list may not fit all dissertation proposals and thus should be considered as illustrative only. 

• Statement of the Problem – includes the background, context in the information field and in the broader scheme of academic pursuits, key questions, significance of the problem, and description of chosen methodology.
• Grounding and Rationale – provides a discussion of need in the area of study which may include a comprehensive review of theoretical, conceptual, technological or methodological precedents which directly relate to the dissertation topic. This section may also include a detailed analysis of the precedents that justify the need for the research, or review the literature that relates to the research.
• Research Plan – details the methods that will be used or the processes that will be followed during the course of investigation. This section describes how the questions posed by the dissertation will be addressed.

The Defense

The Candidate, assisted by the Chair as necessary, schedules a date, a time, and a room for the defense.  The Candidate submits details regarding the proposal defense, including date, time and location of the defense, members of the Supervisory Committee, proposal defense title, as well as an abstract, to the iSchool web calendar, the Chair of the Ph.D. Program, and Student Services Office.

At least two weeks before the scheduled proposal defense date, the final written proposal must be submitted to all members of the Supervisory Committee.  At this time or earlier, the voting members of the Committee, in consultation with the Candidate, determine the length and outline the structure of the defense. 

The defense is a scheduled and announced public event.  Any person may attend.  However, the deliberations of the Supervisory Committee are private.

The Process

Students presents their dissertation proposal orally, with visual accompaniment as desired by the candidate, to the supervisory committee and the public.

The dissertation proposal defense proceeds as outlined below. 

Prior to the start of the examination :

• The Candidate must be physically present at the exam.
• The Chair (or at least one Co-Chair), the GSR, and one general committee member must be physically present at the exam.
• If the Chair is not physically present, then the exam must be rescheduled. 
• If the GSR is not physically present at the time of the exam, a substitute GSR may be secured subject to Graduate School rules.  If no GSR can be found, then the exam must be rescheduled.
• If a general member is not physically present then, the exam should be adjourned and rescheduled to a later time/date.
• A majority of the Supervisory Committee must be physically present at the exam.  E.g. a Supervisory Committee with the minimum 4 required members (Chair, GSR, and 2 general members) must have the Chair, the GSR, and at least one general member physically present at the exam. A Supervisory Committee with 5 members (Chair, GSR, and 3 general members) must have the Chair, the GSR, and at least one general member physically present at the exam.

Once the Exam Starts"

• The Supervisory Committee may meet initially in private, with or without the Candidate present.
• The Chair announces when the Candidate and the public may join the Committee for the defense.
• The Candidate presents the key elements of the dissertation proposal.
• The Supervisory Committee and/or the public questions the Candidate.
• The public may question the Candidate as time permits.
• Finally, the Supervisory Committee reconvenes in private for deliberations.  The voting members vote for one of the following:
• a.  Accept —a PDF version of the proposal will be submitted to Student Services. The proposal will be available to the public for reading.
• b.  Accept with minor revisions —the Committee requests minor revisions, which are approved by a process that is established by the Chair. A PDF version of the proposal will be submitted to Student Services. The proposal will be available to the public for reading.
• c.  Accept with revisions —revisions require approval by the Chair and selected members or the supervisory Committee.  See Process** below.
• d.  Reject —the Supervisory Committee may recommend either 1) that a second defense is permitted after a period of additional preparation, or 2) that the student is dropped from the Ph.D. program in Information Science at the University of Washington.

A simple majority vote is required. In the event that a simple majority vote does not occur, the deliberations of the Supervisory Committee are continued and a decision is made within ten days of the proposal defense date.

If after ten days the Supervisory Committee cannot make a decision, then the candidate may reconstitute the Committee, and schedule a new defense.

*Process for 'Accept with Revisions'

The revision process proceeds as follows:

• The committee informs the candidate verbally of the revisions required and the date by which revisions are to be completed.
• The chair, in consultation with the committee prepares a written description of the required revisions. A copy of the letter is provided to Student Services to place in the student's permanent academic file.
• The chair and the candidate determine the date by which the revisions must be completed, normally within 3 months.
• The chair distributes the written description to the candidate and the committee.
• Two weeks after the revisions are submitted by the candidate, the committee informs the candidate whether the revisions are accepted or rejected.
• If accepted, a paper copy and PDF version of the proposal are submitted to Student Services; at least one copy is available to the public for reading.
• If rejected, the committee recommends, as outlined above, to either permit a second defense or to drop the student from the program.
• If the revisions are not completed successfully within the specified time period, the chair may extend the time for revision to up to one year from the date of the proposal defense. After one year, the chair may petition the Ph.D. committee for an extension.
• If the revisions are not completed successfully in the time frame designated, and if the supervisory committee and the Ph.D. committee concur, the proposal is rejected and the student is dropped from the Ph.D. program in Information Science at UW.

Full Results

Customize your experience.

PhD Thesis Guide

This phd thesis guide will guide you step-by-step through the thesis process, from your initial letter of intent to submission of the final document..

All associated forms are conveniently consolidated in the section at the end.

Deadlines & Requirements

Students should register for HST.ThG during any term in which they are conducting research towards their thesis. Regardless of year in program students registered for HST.ThG in a regular term (fall or spring) must meet with their research advisor and complete the  Semi-Annual PhD Student Progress Review Form to receive credit.

Years 1 - 2

• Students participating in lab rotations during year 1, may use the optional MEMP Rotation Registration Form , to formalize the arrangement and can earn academic credit by enrolling in HST.599. 
• A first letter of intent ( LOI-1 ) proposing a general area of thesis research and research advisor is required by April 30th of the second year of registration.
• A second letter of intent ( LOI-2 ) proposing a thesis committee membership and providing a more detailed description of the thesis research is required by April 30th of the third year of registration for approval by the HST-IMES Committee on Academic Programs (HICAP).

Year 4 

• Beginning in year 4, (or after the LOI-2 is approved) the student must meet with their thesis committee at least once per semester.
• Students must formally defend their proposal before the approved thesis committee, and submit their committee approved proposal to HICAP  by April 30 of the forth year of registration.
• Meetings with the thesis committee must be held at least once per semester. 

HST has developed these policies to help keep students on track as they progress through their PhD program. Experience shows that students make more rapid progress towards graduation when they interact regularly with a faculty committee and complete their thesis proposal by the deadline.

Getting Started

Check out these resources  for finding a research lab.

The Thesis Committee: Roles and Responsibilities

Students perform doctoral thesis work under the guidance of a thesis committee consisting of at least three faculty members from Harvard and MIT (including a chair and a research advisor) who will help guide the research. Students are encouraged to form their thesis committee early in the course of the research and in any case by the end of the third year of registration. The HST IMES Committee on Academic Programs (HICAP) approves the composition of the thesis committee via the letter of intent and the thesis proposal (described below). 

Research Advisor

The research advisor is responsible for overseeing the student's thesis project. The research advisor is expected to:

• oversee the research and mentor the student;
• provide a supportive research environment, facilities, and financial support;
• discuss expectations, progress, and milestones with the student and complete the  Semi-Annual PhD Student Progress Review Form each semester;
• assist the student to prepare for the oral qualifying exam;
• guide the student in selecting the other members of the thesis committee;
• help the student prepare for, and attend, meetings of the full thesis committee, to be held at least once per semester;
• help the student prepare for, and attend, the thesis defense;
• evaluate the final thesis document.

The research advisor is chosen by the student and must be a faculty member of MIT* or Harvard University and needs no further approval.  HICAP may approve other individuals as research advisor on a student-by-student basis. Students are advised to request approval of non-faculty research advisors as soon as possible.  In order to avoid conflicts of interest, the research advisor may not also be the student's academic advisor. In the event that an academic advisor becomes the research advisor, a new academic advisor will be assigned.

The student and their research advisor must complete the Semi-Annual PhD Student Progress Review during each regular term in order to receive academic credit for research.  Download Semi Annual Review Form

*MIT Senior Research Staff are considered equivalent to faculty members for the purposes of research advising. No additional approval is required.

Thesis Committee Chair

Each HST PhD thesis committee is headed administratively by a chair, chosen by the student in consultation with the research advisor. The thesis committee chair is expected to:

• provide advice and guidance concerning the thesis research; 
• oversee meetings of the full thesis committee, to be held at least once per semester;
• preside at the thesis defense; 
• review and evaluate the final thesis document.

The thesis committee chair must be well acquainted with the academic policies and procedures of the institution granting the student's degree and be familiar with the student's area of research. The research advisor may not simultaneously serve as thesis committee chair.

For HST PhD students earning degrees through MIT, the thesis committee chair must be an MIT faculty member. A select group of HST program faculty without primary appointments at MIT have been pre-approved by HICAP to chair PhD theses awarded by HST at MIT in cases where the MIT research advisor is an MIT faculty member.**

HST PhD students earning their degree through Harvard follow thesis committee requirements set by the unit granting their degree - either the Biophysics Program or the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences (SEAS).

** List of non-MIT HST faculty approved to chair MIT thesis proposals when the research advisor is an MIT faculty member.

In addition to the research advisor and the thesis committee chair, the thesis committee must include one or more readers. Readers are expected to:

• attend meetings of the full thesis committee, to be held at least once per semester;
• attend the thesis defense; 

Faculty members with relevant expertise from outside of Harvard/MIT may serve as readers, but they may only be counted toward the required three if approved by HICAP.

The members of the thesis committee should have complementary expertise that collectively covers the areas needed to advise a student's thesis research. The committee should also be diverse, so that members are able to offer different perspectives on the student's research. When forming a thesis committee, it is helpful to consider the following questions: 

• Do the individuals on the committee collectively have the appropriate expertise for the project?
• Does the committee include at least one individual who can offer different perspectives on the student's research?  The committee should include at least one person who is not closely affiliated with the student's primary lab. Frequent collaborators are acceptable in this capacity if their work exhibits intellectual independence from the research advisor.
• If the research has a near-term clinical application, does the committee include someone who can add a translational or clinical perspective?  
• Does the committee conform to HST policies in terms of number, academic appointments, and affiliations of the committee members, research advisor, and thesis committee chair as described elsewhere on this page?

[Friendly advice: Although there is no maximum committee size, three or four is considered optimal. Committees of five members are possible, but more than five is unwieldy.]

Thesis Committee Meetings

Students must meet with their thesis committee at least once each semester beginning in the fourth year of registration. It is the student's responsibility to schedule these meetings; students who encounter difficulties in arranging regular committee meetings can contact Julie Greenberg at jgreenbe [at] mit.edu (jgreenbe[at]mit[dot]edu) .

The format of the thesis committee meeting is at the discretion of the thesis committee chair. In some cases, the following sequence may be helpful:

• The thesis committee chair, research advisor, and readers meet briefly without the student in the room;
• The thesis committee chair and readers meet briefly with the student, without the advisor in the room;
• The student presents their research progress, answers questions, and seeks guidance from the members of the thesis committee;

Please note that thesis committee meetings provide an important opportunity for students to present their research and respond to questions. Therefore, it is in the student's best interest for the research advisor to refrain from defending the research in this setting.

Letters of Intent

Students must submit two letters of intent ( LOI-1 and LOI-2 ) with applicable signatures. 

In LOI-1, students identify a research advisor and a general area of thesis research, described in 100 words or less. It should include the area of expertise of the research advisor and indicate whether IRB approval (Institutional Review Board; for research involving human subjects) and/or IACUC approval (Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee; for research involving vertebrate animals) will be required and, if so, from which institutions. LOI-1 is due by April 30 of the second year of registration and and should be submitted to HICAP, c/o Traci Anderson in E25-518. 

In LOI-2, students provide a description of the thesis research, describing the Background and Significance of the research and making a preliminary statement of Specific Aims (up to 400 words total). In LOI-2, a student also proposes the membership of their thesis committee. In addition to the research advisor, the proposed thesis committee must include a chair and one or more readers, all selected to meet the specified criteria . LOI-2 is due by April 30th of the third year of registration and should be submitted to HICAP, c/o Traci Anderson in E25-518.

LOI-2 is reviewed by the HST-IMES Committee on Academic Programs (HICAP) to determine if the proposed committee meets the specified criteria and if the committee members collectively have the complementary expertise needed to advise the student in executing the proposed research. If HICAP requests any changes to the proposed committee, the student must submit a revised LOI-2 for HICAP review by September 30th of the fourth year of registration. HICAP must approve LOI-2 before the student can proceed to presenting and submitting their thesis proposal. Any changes to the thesis committee membership following HICAP approval of LOI-2 and prior to defense of the thesis proposal must be reported by submitting a revised LOI-2 form to HICAP, c/o tanderso [at] mit.edu (Traci Anderson) . After final HICAP approval of LOI-2, which confirms the thesis committee membership, the student may proceed to present their thesis proposal to the approved thesis committee, as described in the next section.

Students are strongly encouraged to identify tentative thesis committee members and begin meeting with them as early as possible to inform the direction of their research. Following submission of LOI-2, students are required to hold at least one thesis committee meeting per semester. Students must document these meetings via the Semi- Annual PhD Student Progress Review form in order to receive a grade reflecting satisfactory progress in HST.ThG.

Thesis Proposal and Proposal Presentation

For MEMP students receiving their degrees through MIT, successful completion of the Oral Qualifying Exam is a prerequisite for the thesis proposal presentation. For MEMP students receiving their degrees through Harvard, the oral qualifying exam satisfies the proposal presentation requirement.

Proposal Document

Each student must present a thesis proposal to a thesis committee that has been approved by HICAP via the LOI-2 and then submit a full proposal package to HICAP by April 30th of the fourth year of registration. The only exception is for students who substantially change their research focus after the fall term of their third year; in those cases the thesis proposal must be submitted within three semesters of joining a new lab. Students registering for thesis research (HST.THG) who have not met this deadline may be administratively assigned a grade of "U" (unsatisfactory) and receive an academic warning.

The written proposal should be no longer than 4500 words, excluding references. This is intended to help students develop their proposal-writing skills by gaining experience composing a practical proposal; the length is comparable to that required for proposals to the NIH R03 Small Research Grant Program. The proposal should clearly define the research problem, describe the proposed research plan, and defend the significance of the work. Preliminary results are not required. If the proposal consists of multiple aims, with the accomplishment of later aims based on the success of earlier ones, then the proposal should describe a contingency plan in case the early results are not as expected.

Proposal Presentation

The student must formally defend the thesis proposal before the full thesis committee that has been approved by HICAP.

Students should schedule the meeting and reserve a conference room and any audio visual equipment they may require for their presentation. To book a conference room in E25, please contact Joseph Stein ( jrstein [at] mit.edu (jrstein[at]mit[dot]edu) ).

Following the proposal presentation, students should make any requested modifications to the proposal for the committee members to review. Once the committee approves the proposal, the student should obtain the signatures of the committee members on the forms described below as part of the proposal submission package.

[Friendly advice: As a professional courtesy, be sure your committee members have a complete version of your thesis proposal at least one week in advance of the proposal presentation.]

Submission of Proposal Package

When the thesis committee has approved the proposal, the student submits the proposal package to HICAP, c/o Traci Anderson in E25-518, for final approval. HICAP may reject a thesis proposal if it has been defended before a committee that was not previously approved via the LOI-2.

The proposal package includes the following: 

• the proposal document
• a brief description of the project background and significance that explains why the work is important;
• the specific aims of the proposal, including a contingency plan if needed; and
• an indication of the methods to be used to accomplish the specific aims.
• signed research advisor agreement form(s);
• signed chair agreement form (which confirms a successful proposal defense);
• signed reader agreement form(s).

Thesis Proposal Forms

• SAMPLE Title Page (doc)
• Research Advisor Agreement Form (pdf)
• Chair Agreement Form (pdf)
• Reader Agreement Form (pdf)

Thesis Defense and Final Thesis Document

When the thesis is substantially complete and fully acceptable to the thesis committee, a public thesis defense is scheduled for the student to present his/her work to the thesis committee and other members of the community. The thesis defense is the last formal examination required for receipt of a doctoral degree. To be considered "public", a defense must be announced to the community at least five working days in advance. At the defense, the thesis committee determines if the research presented is sufficient for granting a doctoral degree. Following a satisfactory thesis defense, the student submits the final thesis document, approved by the research advisor, to Traci Anderson via email (see instructions below).

[Friendly advice: Contact jrstein [at] mit.edu (Joseph Stein) at least two weeks before your scheduled date to arrange for advertising via email and posters. A defense can be canceled for insufficient public notice.]

Before the Thesis Defense 

Committee Approves Student to Defend: The thesis committee, working with the student and reviewing thesis drafts, concludes that the doctoral work is complete. The student should discuss the structure of the defense (general guidelines below) with the thesis committee chair and the research advisor. 

Schedule the Defense: The student schedules a defense at a time when all members of the thesis committee will be physical present. Any exceptions must be approved in advance by the IMES/HST Academic Office.

Reserve Room: It is the student's responsibility to reserve a room and any necessary equipment. Please contact imes-reservation [at] mit.edu (subject: E25%20Room%20Reservation) (IMES Reservation) to  reserve rooms E25-140, E25-141, E25-119/121, E25-521. 

Final Draft: A complete draft of the thesis document is due to the thesis committee two weeks prior to the thesis defense to allow time for review.  The thesis should be written as a single cohesive document; it may include content from published papers (see libraries website on " Use of Previously Published Material in a Thesis ") but it may not be a simple compilation of previously published materials.

Publicize the Defense:   The IMES/HST Academic Office invites the community to attend the defense via email and a notice on the HST website. This requires that the student email a thesis abstract and supplemental information to  jrstein [at] mit.edu (Joseph Stein)  two weeks prior to the thesis defense. The following information should be included: Date and time, Location, (Zoom invitation with password, if offering a hybrid option), Thesis Title, Names of committee members, with academic and professional titles and institutional affiliations. The abstract is limited to 250 words for the poster, but students may optionally submit a second, longer abstract for the email announcement.

Thesis Defense Guidelines

Public Defense: The student should prepare a presentation of 45-60 minutes in length, to be followed by a public question and answer period of 15–30 minutes at discretion of the chair.

Committee Discussion:  Immediately following the public thesis presentation, the student meets privately with the thesis committee and any other faculty members present to explore additional questions at the discretion of the faculty. Then the thesis committee meets in executive session and determines whether the thesis defense was satisfactory. The committee may suggest additions or editorial changes to the thesis document at this point.

Chair Confirms Pass: After the defense, the thesis committee chair should inform Traci Anderson of the outcome via email to tanderso [at] mit.edu (tanderso[at]mit[dot]edu) .

Submitting the Final Thesis Document

Please refer to the MIT libraries  thesis formatting guidelines .

Title page notes. Sample title page  from the MIT Libraries.

Program line : should read, "Submitted to the Harvard-MIT Program in Health Sciences and Technology, in partial fulfillment of the the requirements for the degree of ... "

Copyright : Starting with the June 2023 degree period and as reflected in the  MIT Thesis Specifications , all students retain the copyright of their thesis.  Please review this section for how to list on your title page Signature Page: On the "signed" version, only the student and research advisor should sign. Thesis committee members are not required to sign. On the " Accepted by " line, please list: Collin M. Stultz, MD, PhD/Director, Harvard-MIT Program in Health Sciences and Technology/ Nina T. and Robert H. Rubin Professor in Medical Engineering and Science/Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science.

The Academic Office will obtain Professor Stultz's signature.

Thesis Submission Components.  As of 4/2021, the MIT libraries have changed their thesis submissions guidelines and are no longer accepting hard copy theses submissions. For most recent guidance from the libraries:  https://libguides.mit.edu/mit-thesis-faq/instructions  

Submit to the Academic Office, via email ( tanderso [at] mit.edu (tanderso[at]mit[dot]edu) )

pdf/A-1 of the final thesis should include an UNSIGNED title page

A separate file with a SIGNED title page by the student and advisor, the Academic Office will get Dr. Collin Stultz's signature.

For the MIT Library thesis processing, fill out the "Thesis Information" here:  https://thesis-submit.mit.edu/

File Naming Information:  https://libguides.mit.edu/

Survey of Earned Doctorates.  The University Provost’s Office will contact all doctoral candidates via email with instructions for completing this survey.

Links to All Forms in This Guide

• MEMP Rotation Form (optional)
• Semi-Annual Progress Review Form
• Letter of Intent One
• Letter of Intent Two

Final Thesis

• HST Sample thesis title page  (signed and unsigned)
• Sample thesis title page  (MIT Libraries)

• Directories
• Degrees & Programs
• Admission & Aid
• Academic & Career Advising
• Student Life
• Ph.D. in Engineering
• Program Home
• Focus Areas
• Program of Study
• Candidacy Examination

Research Proposal Defense

• Dissertation
• General Policies
• Faculty Directory
• Alumni and Dissertation Titles (Off-site resource)
• Faculty Information (Login required)

The purpose of the Research Proposal Defense is to test the validity of the dissertation proposal and the candidate's fitness to carry out the research work proposed.

Eligibility

The examination may be taken no earlier than the semester in which the candidate completes the eight credits of coursework as required by the focus area . The candidate must have finished the candidacy examination requirements .

Required Actions

The candidate is required to do the following:

• The candidate must complete and submit a Research Proposal Examination Request Form (PDF) to the Ph.D. in Engineering mailbox (207 Russ) no later than 30 days before the scheduled defense. The dissertation advisor and Program Director must sign this form.
• The format of the proposal must conform to the regulations outlined by the Graduate School in the Graduate Policy and Procedures Manual . The substance of this proposal forms a major part of the oral portion of the exam. As such, it must be a complete document with a thoughtful, in-depth treatment of the dissertation topic. It should be substantial enough to form the basis of a meaningful oral examination, establishing a worthy research problem and developing an effective research plan. It should only be written after the student has done enough work on the problem to speak meaningfully about it, including discussion of the preliminary investigations. Above all, it should be a technically sound and scholarly document.
• At least two weeks prior to the scheduled defense, the Research Proposal must be submitted to the candidate's Dissertation Committee.

Examination Format

On the day of the defense, the examination begins with a short presentation by the candidate outlining the problem chosen, the procedures and methods to be used, the work already completed, and the additional work proposed to be completed for the Ph.D. degree. The Dissertation Committee then questions the candidate. The committee may also ask questions of a more general nature in order to test the adequacy of the candidate's preparation for the proposed research. At the conclusion of the examination, the dissertation advisor announces one of four decisions:

• The candidate passed the Research Proposal Defense and may proceed to independent study and research for the doctoral degree.
• The examination is temporarily adjourned. The candidate must revise the Research Proposal and be examined again within the next six months.
• The candidate failed, but may submit a new Research Proposal and submit to another Research Proposal Defense after completing additional coursework, independent study, or research.
• The candidate failed and will not be readmitted to another examination.

Members of the Dissertation Committee must sign a Record of Research Proposal Defense Form. A copy of the signed form will be given to the student and dissertation advisor.

Take the Next Step

Finding the right college means finding the right fit. See all that the College of Engineering and Computer Science has to offer by visiting campus.

Engineering and Computer Science, College of

[email protected]

Departments and Programs

• Biomedical, Industrial, and Human Factors Engineering
• Computer Science and Engineering
• Electrical Engineering
• Mechanical and Materials Engineering
• Success Stories

About Wright State

• Accreditation
• National Recognition
• Quick Facts
• Academic Calendar

Information For

• Counseling and Wellness
• Disability Services
• Human Resources
• Information Technology (CaTS)
• Parking and Transportation

• Make a Gift
• Wright State Cares

• X (formerly Twitter)
• Copyright © 2024
• Accessibility
• Emergency Preparedness
• Web Support

PhD Dissertation Defense Slides Design: Start

• Tips for designing the slides
• Presentation checklist
• Example slides
• Additional Resources

Purpose of the Guide

This guide was created to help ph.d. students in engineering fields to design dissertation defense presentations. the guide provides 1) tips on how to effectively communicate research, and 2) full presentation examples from ph.d. graduates. the tips on designing effective slides are not restricted to dissertation defense presentations; they can be used in designing other types of presentations such as conference talks, qualification and proposal exams, and technical seminars., the tips and examples are used to help students to design effective presentation. the technical contents in all examples are subject to copyright, please do not replicate. , if you need help in designing your presentation, please contact julie chen ([email protected]) for individual consultation. .

• Example Slides Repository
• Defense slides examples Link to examples dissertation defense slides.

Useful Links

• CIT Thesis and dissertation standards
• Dissertations and Theses @ Carnegie Mellon This link opens in a new window Covers 1920-present. Full text of some dissertations may be available 1997-present. Citations and abstracts of dissertations and theses CMU graduate students have published through UMI Dissertation Publishing. In addition to citations and abstracts, the service provides free access to 24 page previews and the full text in PDF format, when available. In most cases, this will be works published in 1997 forward.
• Communicate your research data Data visualization is very important in communicating your data effectively. Check out these do's and don'ts for designing figures.

Power Point Template and other Resources

• CEE Powerpoint Slide Presentation Template 1
• CEE Powerpoint Slide Presentation Template 2

Source: CEE Department Resources https://www.cmu.edu/cee/resources/index.html

• CMU Powerpoint Slide Template

Source: CMU Marketing and Communications

https://www.cmu.edu/marcom/brand-standards/downloads/index.html

• Use of CMU logos, marks, and Unitmarks

Email me for questions and schedule an appointment

Top 7 tips for your defense presentation

1. show why your study is important, remember, your audience is your committee members, researchers in other fields, and even the general public. you want to convince all of them why you deserve a ph.d. degree. you need to talk about why your study is important to the world. in the engineering field, you also need to talk about how your study is useful. try to discuss why current practice is problematic or not good enough, what needs to be solved, and what the potential benefits will be. , see how dr. posen and dr. malings explained the importance of their studies..

• Carl Malings Defense Slides with Notes
• I. Daniel Posen Defense Slides with Notes

2. Emphasize YOUR contribution 

Having a ph.d. means that you have made some novel contributions to the grand field. this is about you and your research. you need to keep emphasizing your contributions throughout your presentation. after talking about what needs to be solved, try to focus on emphasizing the novelty of your work. what problems can be solved using your research outcomes what breakthroughs have you made to the field why are your methods and outcomes outstanding you need to incorporate answers to these questions in your presentation. , be clear what your contributions are in the introduction section; separate what was done by others and what was done by you. , 3. connect your projects into a whole piece of work, you might have been doing multiple projects that are not strongly connected. to figure out how to connect them into a whole piece, use visualizations such as flow charts to convince your audience. the two slides below are two examples. in the first slide, which was presented in the introduction section, the presenter used a flow diagram to show the connection between the three projects. in the second slide, the presenter used key figures and a unique color for each project to show the connection..

• Xiaoju Chen Defense Slides with Notes

4. Tell a good story 

The committee members do not necessarily have the same background knowledge as you. plus, there could be researchers from other fields and even the general public in the room. you want to make sure all of your audience can understand as much as possible. focus on the big picture rather than technical details; make sure you use simple language to explain your methods and results. your committee has read your dissertation before your defense, but others have not. , dr. cook and dr. velibeyoglu did a good job explaining their research to everyone. the introduction sessions in their presentations are well designed for this purpose. .

• Laren M. Cook Defense Slides with Notes
• Irem Velibeyoglu Defense with Notes

5. Transition, transition, transition

Use transition slides to connect projects , it's a long presentation with different research projects. you want to use some sort of transition to remind your audience what you have been talking about and what is next. you may use a slide that is designed for this purpose throughout your presentation. , below are two examples. these slides were presented after the introduction section. the presenters used the same slides and highlighted the items for project one to indicate that they were moving on to the first project. throughout the presentation, they used these slides and highlighted different sections to indicate how these projects fit into the whole dissertation. .

You can also use some other indications on your slides, but remember not to make your slides too busy.  Below are two examples. In the first example, the presenter used chapter numbers to indicate what he was talking about. In the second example, the presenter used a progress bar with keywords for each chapter as the indicator. 

Use transition sentences to connect slides 

Remember transition sentences are also important; use them to summarize what you have said and tell your audience what they will expect next. if you keep forgetting the transition sentence, write a note on your presentation. you can either write down a full sentence of what you want to say or some keywords., 6. be brief, put details in backup slides , you won't have time to explain all of the details. if your defense presentation is scheduled for 45 minutes, you can only spend around 10 minutes for each project - that's shorter than a normal research conference presentation focus on the big picture and leave details behind. you can put the details in your backup slides, so you might find them useful when your committee (and other members of the audience) ask questions regarding these details., 7. show your presentation to your advisor and colleagues, make sure to ask your advisor(s) for their comments. they might have a different view on what should be emphasized and what should be elaborated. , you also want to practice at least once in front of your colleagues. they can be your lab mates, people who work in your research group, and/or your friends. they do not have to be experts in your field. ask them to give you some feedback - their comments can be extremely helpful to improve your presentation. , below are some other tips and resources to design your defense presentation. .

• Tips for designing your defense presentation

How important is your presentation, and cookies?

• Next: Tips for designing the slides >>
• Last Updated: Jan 9, 2024 11:18 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.cmu.edu/c.php?g=883178

• eng.umd.edu
• Faculty Directory
• Staff Directory
• Current Students

Ph.D. Proposal Defense

Upon passing the Qualifying Exam , it is expected that students will choose a Ph.D. thesis advisor, if they have not already done so, and begin their Ph.D. thesis research. Within 12 to 18 months of passing the QE , the student needs to select a Ph.D. Thesis Examination Committee and schedule his or her Ph.D. Proposal Defense . The Ph.D. Proposal Defense consists of 1) a written part and 2) an oral presentation to the Ph.D. Thesis Examination Committee.

• The written part consists of an introduction to the field, a problem statement, the objectives of the research and the approach that will be taken, the expected results, and a timeline of the work. A concise review of the literature is expected, along with a bibliography of the most important literature. The length of the written Ph.D. Proposal is expected to be between 15 to 20 double space pages (12pt font) with 1 inch margins.  Members of the Committee should receive the proposal two weeks prior to the defense .
• The Ph.D. Proposal will be presented to the Ph.D. Thesis Examination Committee during a one hour defense/ examination. The student should plan for a 30 minute presentation of the research plan and expected results.

One week prior to your proposal defense, please notify the MSE Chair, Dr. JC Zhao.

See Also: Ph.D. Requirements and Ph.D. Qualifying Exam  

13 Tips to Prepare for Your PhD Dissertation Defense

How well do you know your project? Years of experiments, analysis of results, and tons of literature study, leads you to how well you know your research study. And, PhD dissertation defense is a finale to your PhD years. Often, researchers question how to excel at their thesis defense and spend countless hours on it. Days, weeks, months, and probably years of practice to complete your doctorate, needs to surpass the dissertation defense hurdle.

In this article, we will discuss details of how to excel at PhD dissertation defense and list down some interesting tips to prepare for your thesis defense.

Table of Contents

What Is Dissertation Defense?

Dissertation defense or Thesis defense is an opportunity to defend your research study amidst the academic professionals who will evaluate of your academic work. While a thesis defense can sometimes be like a cross-examination session, but in reality you need not fear the thesis defense process and be well prepared.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/c/JamesHaytonPhDacademy

What are the expectations of committee members.

Choosing the dissertation committee is one of the most important decision for a research student. However, putting your dissertation committee becomes easier once you understand the expectations of committee members.

The basic function of your dissertation committee is to guide you through the process of proposing, writing, and revising your dissertation. Moreover, the committee members serve as mentors, giving constructive feedback on your writing and research, also guiding your revision efforts.

The dissertation committee is usually formed once the academic coursework is completed. Furthermore, by the time you begin your dissertation research, you get acquainted to the faculty members who will serve on your dissertation committee. Ultimately, who serves on your dissertation committee depends upon you.

Some universities allow an outside expert (a former professor or academic mentor) to serve on your committee. It is advisable to choose a faculty member who knows you and your research work.

How to Choose a Dissertation Committee Member?

• Avoid popular and eminent faculty member
• Choose the one you know very well and can approach whenever you need them
• A faculty member whom you can learn from is apt.
• Members of the committee can be your future mentors, co-authors, and research collaborators. Choose them keeping your future in mind.

How to Prepare for Dissertation Defense?

1. Start Your Preparations Early

Thesis defense is not a 3 or 6 months’ exercise. Don’t wait until you have completed all your research objectives. Start your preparation well in advance, and make sure you know all the intricacies of your thesis and reasons to all the research experiments you conducted.

2. Attend Presentations by Other Candidates

Look out for open dissertation presentations at your university. In fact, you can attend open dissertation presentations at other universities too. Firstly, this will help you realize how thesis defense is not a scary process. Secondly, you will get the tricks and hacks on how other researchers are defending their thesis. Finally, you will understand why dissertation defense is necessary for the university, as well as the scientific community.

3. Take Enough Time to Prepare the Slides

Dissertation defense process harder than submitting your thesis well before the deadline. Ideally, you could start preparing the slides after finalizing your thesis. Spend more time in preparing the slides. Make sure you got the right data on the slides and rephrase your inferences, to create a logical flow to your presentation.

4. Structure the Presentation

Do not be haphazard in designing your presentation. Take time to create a good structured presentation. Furthermore, create high-quality slides which impresses the committee members. Make slides that hold your audience’s attention. Keep the presentation thorough and accurate, and use smart art to create better slides.

5. Practice Breathing Techniques

Watch a few TED talk videos and you will notice that speakers and orators are very fluent at their speech. In fact, you will not notice them taking a breath or falling short of breath. The only reason behind such effortless oratory skill is practice — practice in breathing technique.

Moreover, every speaker knows how to control their breath. Long and steady breaths are crucial. Pay attention to your breathing and slow it down. All you need I some practice prior to this moment.

6. Create an Impactful Introduction

The audience expects a lot from you. So your opening statement should enthrall the audience. Furthermore, your thesis should create an impact on the members; they should be thrilled by your thesis and the way you expose it.

The introduction answers most important questions, and most important of all “Is this presentation worth the time?” Therefore, it is important to make a good first impression , because the first few minutes sets the tone for your entire presentation.

7. Maintain Your Own List of Questions

While preparing for the presentation, make a note of all the questions that you ask yourself. Try to approach all the questions from a reader’s point of view. You could pretend like you do not know the topic and think of questions that could help you know the topic much better.

The list of questions will prepare you for the questions the members may pose while trying to understand your research. Attending other candidates’ open discussion will also help you assume the dissertation defense questions.

8. Practice Speech and Body Language

After successfully preparing your slides and practicing, you could start focusing on how you look while presenting your thesis. This exercise is not for your appearance but to know your body language and relax if need be.

Pay attention to your body language. Stand with your back straight, but relax your shoulders. The correct posture will give you the feel of self-confidence. So, observe yourself in the mirror and pay attention to movements you make.

9. Give Mock Presentation

Giving a trial defense in advance is a good practice. The most important factor for the mock defense is its similarity to your real defense, so that you get the experience that prepares for the actual defense.

10. Learn How to Handle Mistakes

Everyone makes mistakes. However, it is important to carry on. Do not let the mistakes affect your thesis defense. Take a deep breath and move on to the next point.

11. Do Not Run Through the Presentation

If you are nervous, you would want to end the presentation as soon as possible. However, this situation will give rise to anxiety and you will speak too fast, skipping the essential details. Eventually, creating a fiasco of your dissertation defense .

12. Get Plenty of Rest

Out of the dissertation defense preparation points, this one is extremely important. Obviously, sleeping a day before your big event is hard, but you have to focus and go to bed early, with the clear intentions of getting the rest you deserve.

13. Visualize Yourself Defending Your Thesis

This simple exercise creates an immense impact on your self-confidence. All you have to do is visualize yourself giving a successful presentation each evening before going to sleep. Everyday till the day of your thesis defense, see yourself standing in front of the audience and going from one point to another.

This exercise takes a lot of commitment and persistence, but the results in the end are worth it. Visualization makes you see yourself doing the scary thing of defending your thesis.

If you have taken all these points into consideration, you are ready for your big day. You have worked relentlessly for your PhD degree , and you will definitely give your best in this final step.

Have you completed your thesis defense? How did you prepare for it and how was your experience throughout your dissertation defense ? Do write to us or comment below.

The tips are very useful.I will recomend it to our students.

Excellent. As a therapist trying to help a parent of a candidate, I am very impressed and thankful your concise, clear, action-oriented article. Thank you.

Thanks for your sharing. It is so good. I can learn a lot from your ideas. Hope that in my dissertation defense next time I can pass

The tips are effective. Will definitely apply them in my dissertation.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for data interpretation

In research, choosing the right approach to understand data is crucial for deriving meaningful insights.…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right approach

The process of choosing the right research design can put ourselves at the crossroads of…

• Career Corner

Unlocking the Power of Networking in Academic Conferences

Embarking on your first academic conference experience? Fear not, we got you covered! Academic conferences…

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Research recommendations play a crucial role in guiding scholars and researchers toward fruitful avenues of…

• AI in Academia

Disclosing the Use of Generative AI: Best practices for authors in manuscript preparation

The rapid proliferation of generative and other AI-based tools in research writing has ignited an…

Setting Rationale in Research: Cracking the code for excelling at research

Mitigating Survivorship Bias in Scholarly Research: 10 tips to enhance data integrity

The Power of Proofreading: Taking your academic work to the next level

Facing Difficulty Writing an Academic Essay? — Here is your one-stop solution!

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

What should universities' stance be on AI tools in research and academic writing?

Popular search terms:

No results found for “ ”.

Search another word or try popular search words.

PhD: HSR Program Details

Phd thesis handbook.

This thesis handbook is for the PhD students for Health Systems Research and Health Professions Education Research program.

Milestones 

Phd major milestones.

• Comprehensive course and exam
• Form the committee (can happen before comprehensives)
• Proposal defence
• Submit protocol for Research Ethics Board (REB), review and approval (approval may take several months, can do scoping reviews while waiting for REB)
• Research and writing
• Final oral exam (FOE)
• Modifications and Thesis Submission

Supporting Activities

• Intake meeting (Memorandum of Agreement (MOU) plus forms for annual review meeting forms)
• Annual review meeting (emphasis lead and supervisor) and form and financial declaration of employment and awards
• Meeting with the committee (at least two times annually) [or equivalent communication about thesis progress]
• Publishing your work 

Selecting a Suitable Thesis Topic  

Purpose of a phd thesis.

The PhD thesis is an original piece of scholarly research. It is a major undertaking that reflects the highest standards of scholarship and makes a significant contribution to knowledge and practice in the field of health systems research. PhD research is one in which there is an element of originality (the work represents a unique contribution to the field) and either the potential for three published papers as a result or an equivalent amount of work. The thesis research is conducted under the guidance of a supervisor and in consultation with the thesis research committee.

Introduction – The PhD Thesis

Although courses are an important part of the PhD program, it is the research and thesis writing that provide the main opportunities for developing both a broad perspective and in-depth knowledge of a particular area of research.

Earning a PhD degree is more than simply completing a few courses, carrying out a piece of research and writing a thesis; it is the process of becoming a well-rounded researcher in health systems research or health professions education research: one that is knowledgeable about theory, methodologically rigorous, and can make a real-life impact. The PhD thesis demonstrates a wide, critical knowledge of the field; an ability to ask appropriate questions and set the research in its proper context; that the appropriate research methods have been mastered; and that the ideas and results are communicated effectively. It is about making an original contribution to a particular research field within a framework of research training. ‘Original contribution’ means finding a gap in knowledge and answering a question posed by that gap.

Selecting a Research Topic

There are many suitable topics for research in Health Systems Research and Health Professions Education Research. The selection of a research topic should be the result of a consultation between the student and supervisor. A good research topic is one that:

• Addresses an important real-life problem;
• Fills in gaps in current knowledge and understanding;
• Relevant to the field of HPER or HSR, and your emphasis (for HSR);
• You are passionate about and interested in.

Ideas for research topics may come from many sources including your past studies, readings, and perhaps most importantly, personal experiences. By the time you are admitted into the program, you should have already formed a general idea of your thesis topic.

While it is important for the topic to be within the general research area of your supervisor, it is not necessary for the supervisor to be an expert in the specific topic. By the time you finish your PhD, you should become an expert on that topic.

Review Past IHPME Thesis Topics

Selecting a supervisor / role of the supervisor, selecting a supervisor.

All PhD students are required to find a supervisor who will act as a mentor and guide as they proceed through their degree.

The choice of a faculty member who will supervise the thesis work required to fulfill degree requirements is one of the most critical decisions a graduate student will make and should not be taken lightly. A student will need not only a competent supervisor in a particular area but also willing to act as the student’s advocate when necessary. It is important that the student be able to work and communicate effectively with the supervisor and not feel overwhelmed or intimidated in the relationship. Each student requires the guidance of someone who will stimulate thoughts, who has sufficient interest in the student’s topic to produce insights jointly, and who will challenge the student to think in a novel manner about the research.

The following suggestions are included to help students find an appropriate supervisor:

• Emphasis they are affiliated with
• Content expertise
• Methodological expertise

(You are NOT restricted to content – someone out of your area with a “method” match can be great!)

• Ensure that your potential supervisor has the appropriate SGS appointment level: PhD students need a supervisor who is a Full SGS member . If you are interested in working with a supervisor who does not have this level of appointment, you may discuss it with them. They may suggest someone with the appropriate SGS appointment level and/or may serve as a co-supervisor.
• Students may get to know the potential supervisor whose research interests parallel their own. Consider doing a database ( ProQuest , PubMed , Scopus [2]) search to see what they have published and read some of their recent publications.
• If possible, talk to other trainees. They will tell you who is a good supervisor. Graduate students working with a specific supervisor are an invaluable source of information.
• There are tradeoffs in picking a supervisor by seniority/eminence. A very experienced supervisor may help “fast-track” your career. On the other hand, a senior person may not have a lot of time for you.
• A supervisor is also a mentor, often for the first few years of your career. Someone who is a good mentor can be really helpful.
• Don’t be afraid to approach potential supervisors cold, i.e., without any personal connection or contact. They expect it. It’s their job (usually among many others) to teach and mentor students.
• HSR: You may contact the emphasis lead of your area of interest for suggestions

For more information visit :

Role of the Thesis Supervisor

• The supervisor provides advice on all aspects of the thesis project. Specifically, they are responsible for providing direction to the student, advice on data sources and potential avenues of approach, instructions on the proper content and form of the thesis, review of the student’s progress, and serving as the first reader of the thesis. It is the responsibility of the supervisor to help the student think through conceptual and methodological issues and to raise questions about possible decisions faced/taken by the student.
• The supervisor and student are expected to read and sign a Memorandum of Agreement (Student-Supervisor MOU) [PDF] before undertaking thesis work. In HSR, this MOU should be submitted to the emphasis lead at or before the intake meeting in the summer before the start of the program.
• The supervisor and student are expected to meet on a regular basis at a mutually agreed schedule (many supervisors meet with their students on a bi-weekly basis, but frequency may change depending on need and the stage of the research).
• Additionally, the supervisor, in conjunction with the student, is expected to complete annual progress reports, annual statement of employment and awards , and meet with the emphasis leads/program directors to discuss it.

For more information:

What to Do if You Have Challenges Working With Your Supervisor:

• First, try to discuss it openly with your supervisor. Share your concerns and try to reach mutual agreement.
• If that doesn’t work, you may contact the Emphasis Leads (HSR) Program Director or Graduate Coordinator
• Contact the Centre for Graduate Mentorship & Supervision (CGMS) for expert advice

Selection of the Thesis Committee  

Purpose of the thesis committee  .

The thesis committee gives meaningful input into the thesis proposal and supports you through the research to completion and defence of the PhD thesis.

PhD Thesis Research Committee

The thesis committee should have a minimum of three members (including the supervisor) .   In consultation with the supervisor, the student selects two or more additional members for their committee. In the case of co-supervision, only one additional member is needed. Students and supervisors are encouraged to form a committee that can properly support the student, both methodologically and in content expertise.

• The supervisor , who functions as the Chair of the thesis research committee, must have a full membership to the School of Graduate Studies (SGS) and an appointment through IHPME. See “ IHPME Requirements to be a Supervisor ” for additional requirements.
• Committee members can have a graduate faculty membership (full or associate membership with SGS) elsewhere within the University of Toronto, these faculty do not have to apply for an appointment with IHPME.
• Clinical faculty with appointments elsewhere in the university that do not have a GFM need to apply for it through IHPME. They can send their CV to ihpme.appointments@utoronto.ca and will receive the details and a link for the application submission.
• It is possible to appoint a committee member from outside the university. In this instance, the supervisor must obtain a copy of the outside member’s CV and forward it to the IHPME Appointments Officer ihpme.appointments@utoronto.ca who will explain the application process to obtain the GFM.

When all committee members have been selected and have agreed to serve, the  Step I (Committee Confirmation)  form should be completed by the student, signed by the student and supervisor, and submitted to the Graduate Assistant. This information will be placed in the student’s file. 

Thesis Proposal Approval Process

Phd thesis research proposal.

The thesis research proposal is developed with the supervisor and the supervisory committee in a series of iterative steps. Normally the committee meets to discuss the thesis research project generally, after which, drafts of the proposal are submitted to the supervisor and committee for feedback and revision.

The thesis research proposal is usually 20-30 pages in length, double-spaced, excluding references. In consultation with your supervisor, you may write a longer proposal and then shorten it to the required length for the proposal defence. This longer version may serve you later as the basis for some of the chapters of the final thesis.

In developing the research proposal, students should consider the format of the thesis . The two formats used in IHPME are Traditional Thesis and Publication-Based Thesis. The proposal should contain the following elements:

• Title: The title should give a clear indication of the topic being studied.
• The Problem : The proposal should contain a description of the study problem which includes specification of the study question(s), justification for their selection in relation to previous research and to the literature, and the potential relevance of the research findings.
• Theoretical Framework and Background Information : Following a concise and critical review of the theoretical and research literatures, the proposal should discuss the major theoretical premises and the salient concepts which underlie the problem or question(s).  The proposal should then outline a framework, based on literature, for analyzing the problem and question(s).
• Design and Methods (some aspects may vary depending on the nature of the study): The type of research design should be clearly explained (e.g., survey, descriptive, interpretive, experimental, etc.) as should the reasons for selecting it, including its merits and limitations. The questions and/or hypotheses for the thesis research are formulated clearly. Sampling and recruitment procedures should be clearly outlined, including theoretical and practical reasons for selecting the population or database from which the sample is to be drawn. Sample size, or details of any database, should be included. Data collection methods should be described in detail as should their relationship to the theoretical and conceptual issues associated with the thesis research project.  The methods of analysis appropriate for the study design should be fully described and justified, including their strengths and weaknesses. The proposal should be clear about any conceptual or theoretical issues relating to the analysis of the data.
• Research Plan (timeline): The proposal should include a detailed plan, with estimates of time needed to complete each phase of the proposed research. Alternatives should be outlined for those elements of the plan which may prove problematic.

Proposal Approval

Once the supervisor and committee approve the proposal:

• The supervisor and/or committee identify an external examiner. The external examiner must be external to the student’s committee, and possess expertise in an area related to the thesis research.  For the proposal, this can be someone within the University of Toronto, ideally outside of IHPME.    
• The supervisor/committee must get the CV of the external examiner.
• ihpme.grad.assist@utoronto.ca
• HPER:  ihpme.hper@utoronto.ca
• The external examiner will be reviewed by the graduate coordinator for approval.
• Once the external examiner is approved, the supervisor or the student must send the research proposal to all members of the proposal examination committee including the external examiner at least four weeks prior to the meeting
• The graduate assistant will secure a chair for the defence and notify the student and committee as soon as possible.

Proposal Assessment Criteria (see below) are provided to each reviewer and are intended to serve as guidelines for the assessment.

The Proposal Defence

You should schedule 2 hours for the proposal defence. There must be at least 4 voting members present, including the external examiner. During the proposal defence, the student presents a brief summary (20 minutes max) of the thesis research proposal to the examination committee, followed by one or two rounds of questions and responses. Each committee member gets approximately 10 minutes to ask questions in the first round. 

The student then leaves the room and the examination committee votes on the proposal with the following options: 

• Approved (with a note of decisions regarding additional material and/or analyses to be included in the thesis that were not in the proposal) 
• Not approved (specify reason, and conditions to be fulfilled prior to re-examination. Date of reconvened examination (must be within 1 year)

The supervisor is responsible for recording the discussion and recommendations and revisions. Following the meeting, the supervisor is responsible for meeting with the student to discuss revisions recommended during the proposal approval meeting.

Research Proposal Assessment Criteria

The following criteria are to be considered by the supervisor and proposal examination committee members in adjudicating the merits of the student’s proposal.

• To what extent is the research question focused and researchable?
• To what extent is there a coherent and relevant review of the literature in support of the research question?
• To what extent are the design and methods appropriate and clearly articulated? Are sampling and recruitment strategies and other sources of information well thought out and appropriate? Are the variables clearly described and their operational definitions outlined  (in quantitative research:)? Are the planned analyses appropriate?
• Is the proposal work plan feasible?

The student can proceed to collection of data and preparation of their thesis research ONLY AFTER APPROVAL of their proposal has been obtained from the Approval Committee and only after Ethics Approval has also been obtained.

Submission of Thesis Project for Ethics Review

In accordance with the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans – TCPS 2 , all students conducting research that involves human participants (or data collected from them) must obtain University of Toronto research ethics approval for their research in addition to any approvals required by other institutions such as those of research sites or the home institutions of their supervisors.  Note that depending on the research site, risk level and other factors, ethics approval may take several months.

For research based at Toronto Academic Health Science Network (TAHSN) hospitals, students need to obtain Research Ethics Board (REB) approval from the hospital first, and then submit the REB approval letter, approved application form, Research protocol, and appendices for administrative review by the University of Toronto REB. Administrative reviews are normally approved within two weeks. Once received, students should submit a copy of the REB approval letter to the Graduate Assistant to put in the student’s file.

Applications for approval can only be submitted after the proposal has been approved. Students must be listed as a researcher or investigator with the relevant Research Ethics Boards. While the University of Toronto sometimes exempts student research from full ethics review, students must apply for such exemptions and supply the appropriate documentation to the IHPME graduate office. Students must never assume that their research is exempt from ethics approval. Students who do not have documented University of Toronto ethics approval will not be allowed to proceed to their defence.

IHPME students are required to take the online tutorial TCPS 2: CORE (Course on Research Ethics), an introduction to the 2nd edition of the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS 2) . Upon completion, you will be able to print or email a Certificate of Completion to be submitted to the IHPME graduate office.

UofT REB Application

The Office of Research Ethics at the University of Toronto has launched an online application process. Here is the landing page to submit an application: My Research 

Please consult the Research Involving Human Subjects resource and Federal Guidelines (TCPS2)

For more information on Research Ethics, or if you have questions about submission, please contact: ethics.review@utoronto.ca  or 416 946 3273.

Research and Writing

Once the research proposal is approved and ethics approval is obtained the student may begin working on their doctoral research including participants’ recruitment, data collection, data analysis and writing. Some parts of the research such as scoping or systematic reviews may begin before REB approval is obtained. However, it is not advisable to begin before the proposal is approved because the proposal examination committee may have some comments and suggestions to improve the study.

Research and writing are conducted under the guidance of the supervisor in consultation with the thesis research committee. The committee should meet as a whole at least twice a year and submit a meeting report to the graduate assistant after each meeting .

Writing support:

Many students find writing to be one of the hardest parts of PhD. The Writing Centre , the Graduate Centre for Academic Communication (GCAC) and the Health Sciences Writing Centre both offer support for graduate students including one-on-one consultations. 

Financial Support for Research and Publication

Ideally, your supervisor will have some grants to cover some research-related expenses you may incur, such as compensation to study participants, transcription of interviews, travel for  data collection, presentation at conferences, or publication in open access journals 

• IHPME offers a small grant (currently $500) to support students.
• Many conferences offer travel fellowships for students to present their work. 
• SGS also offers a research travel grant and a conference grant for students.
• The University of Toronto has signed agreements with a number of publishers to support open access publication of research .

Final Oral Exam (FOE)

When the supervisor and thesis committee agree that the thesis is complete and ready for defence, they may proceed with setting up the final oral exam (FOE). The process of setting up the FOE takes approximately two months as outlined below; thus, you will need to plan ahead. 

Please consider the SGS deadlines and recommended dates and timeline below:

8 weeks before the FOE

Student or supervisor must submit the completed booking request form and full CVs of all proposed external appraiser and external and internal examiners to the graduate assistant (the external appraiser is often the same person as the external examiner). 

Graduate Office contacts:

• HSR ihpme.hsr.grad@utoronto.ca

The external and internal examiners will then be approved by the IHPME Graduate Coordinator and then by the School of Graduate Studies. This may take up to two weeks.

6 weeks before the FOE

• The student submits the thesis to the graduate assistant to send out to the external and internal examiners. The graduate assistant will send the thesis and letters to the examiners.    
• The student is responsible to send the thesis to their committee. 

2 weeks before the FOE

• A written appraisal from the external examiner should be received 2 weeks before the FOE. The supervisor and student should discuss the written appraisal and how to respond to the comments during the FOE.

2-1 weeks before the FOE

SGS will secure a chair for the FOE. The graduate assistant will notify the student, committee and examiners of the appointment of the chair and the time and location of the defence.

Day of the exam

The student should arrive 15-30 minutes early to meet with the graduate assistant and set up the room.. 

The Examination Committee

SGS provides comprehensive guidelines for the FOE and the composition of the exam committee.  

The initial process for the FOE is to select an external appraiser and the members of the FOE committee.

The FOE committee includes at least four but no more than six voting members. IHPME strongly encourages selecting a date and time that accommodates the entire FOE committee.

The FOE committee includes:

• Up to three members of the student’s supervisory committee may vote at the examination. Additional members of the supervisory committee may sit on the FOE as non-voting members.
• An external examiner.  SGS distinguishes between external appraiser, who reviews the written thesis and provides a written assessment, and external examiner who is part of the examination committee. While SGS allows different people to serve as external appraiser and external examiner, IHPME strongly prefers that the external appraiser also serves as the external examiner (who is a voting member of the FOE committee).
• An internal examiner
• Optional: a departmental representative (usually the emphasis lead, program director, or graduate coordinator) who is a voting member of the FOE committee.

Examiners and Appraisers :

It is the responsibility of the supervisor and student to nominate a suitable External Examiner/Appraiser. The supervisor recommends the External Examiner to the Program Director and the Graduate Coordinator for approval. 

All examiners and appraisers must have:

• An appointment with a graduate department (for examiners at the University of Toronto, this is the School of Graduate Studies). Note: Internal examiners may be granted a temporary appointment for the purpose of the thesis examination if sufficient advance request (greater than 2 months) is made to the Program Director (who in turn makes the request to the IHPME appointments committee).
• Recognized expertise in the field being examined.

External Appraiser:

• Must be external to the University of Toronto as well as to its affiliated teaching hospitals and their research institutes. 
• Must be a recognized expert on the subject of the thesis, and an Associate or Full Professor at their home institution, and experienced as a successful supervisor of doctoral candidates through to defence. An appraiser from outside the academic sector must possess the qualifications to be appointed to an academic position at this level. 
• has served as Masters or PhD Supervisor / Supervisee of the Candidate or the Supervisor;
• has, in the past six years, been a departmental colleague (e.g. in the same research institute or hospital division) of the Candidate or the Supervisor, or has collaborated on a research project, grant, scholarly work or publication, with either of them.

Note: The Vice Dean (Students), in considering nominations of external appraisers, will assess whether the nominee is at arm’s length. 

According to SGS, the FOE committee must include “at least two examiners who have not been closely involved in the supervision of the thesis. Those eligible include the External Appraiser, members of the faculty appointed to the Candidate’s graduate unit, and members of the faculty appointed to other graduate units of the University.”

However, in IHPME we apply stricter rules:   

The External Examiner:  

• Although the external appraiser need only fulfill the role of Appraiser i.e., provide a written assessment of the thesis, and need not ultimately vote, IHPME strongly encourages Appraisers to act as External Examiner and to vote at the examination committee. The External Examiner can participate in person or by teleconference/ online.
• If the external appraiser is unable to serve as an examiner, we expect the external examiner to meet the same criteria as the external appraiser in terms of their academic rank and conflict of interest

Similarly, IHPME applies stricter criteria for the Internal Examiner in that:

• The PhD internal examiner should have an associate professor rank or higher
• The PhD internal examiner may be internal to the University of Toronto. Preference is for an examiner who is external to IHPME, however, this is not a strict requirement and those who are internal to the department of IHPME are eligible
• The PhD internal examiner must have an arm’s-length relationship with the student and supervisor as defined by the same criteria as the external appraiser.
• In rare cases, when it is proven difficult to find an internal examiner who meets the above criteria, the Graduate Coordinator may approve an internal examiner who meets the SGS criteria but not the stricter IHPME ones.

What to Expect at the Defence

• A quorum of the Defence Committee must be present.
• Guidelines for the PhD Final Oral Examination – SGS
• The student is asked to leave the room.
• The defence Committee discusses the internal and external reviews.
• The student is recalled and presents their thesis (maximum 20 minutes, uninterrupted).
• One or two rounds of questions are posed to the student. (*Note: Questions can be asked about both the oral presentation and written thesis.)
• Student is asked to leave the room.
• The defence Committee votes on the acceptability of both the thesis and the oral defence.
• The Supervisor informs the student if modifications are required.

After the Defence

• Adjourn: if there is more than one negative vote and/or abstention, the examination is adjourned and a reconvened examination must be held within one year
• Pass: There are three options the thesis may be accepted “in present form”, with “editorial corrections” (one month to make changes with supervisor approval), or requiring “minor revisions” (three months to make changes with sub-committee approval).   See SGS Guidelines for the Doctoral Final Oral Examination (FOE) for more detailed information for each case.

After modifications and approval, the supervisor or subcommittee convenor informs SGS that the student has made the corrections, and the student uploads the thesis to ProQuest.  

As of September 1, 2009, the School of Graduate Studies will ONLY accept the submission of theses in electronic format. Please view SGS – Producing your Thesis webpage for information on electronically submitting your thesis.

• Students failing to complete all steps by the SGS deadlines will be required to register and pay fees for another term.
• The School of Graduate Studies notifies students about convocation arrangements 4–6 weeks in advance.

Finance Your Degree

At IHPME, we offer a variety of financial supports to help you succeed in our graduate programs.

Learn More About this Program

Hsr program director.

Katie N. Dainty Email Address: katie.dainty@​utoronto.ca

Graduate Administrator

Zoe Downie-Ross Phone Number: (416) 946-3486 Email Address: ihpme.grad.admin@​utoronto.ca

Coordinates student records, graduate funding, and student-related awards.

Graduate Admissions

Christina Lopez Email Address: ihpme.admissions@​utoronto.ca

Manages admissions and responds to all related inquiries.

Graduate Assistant

Nadia Ismail Phone Number: (416) 946-4100 Email Address: ihpme.grad.assist@​utoronto.ca

Coordinates various graduate initiatives including defences, student events, and graduation.

HSR Program Assistant

Anita Morehouse Phone Number: 416-946-3922 Email Address: ihpme.hsr.courses@​utoronto.ca

Manages the HSR courses including enrolment, grades, and access to Quercus.

• How we work

How to Present Research Proposal Convincingly and Effectively

Correct research proposal presentation is essential in getting your research approved.

Why Is a Proposal for Presentation Important?

A presentation is an essential component that will help you showcase your research from the best angle. It is a roadmap that shows your central research question, how you will find the solution, and what awarenesses and issues stand in your way. A way to present research proposal writing in the form of a paper is essential, but it sets limits on your abilities to demonstrate the content to the audience.

Having a set of slides is good because it is more understandable than writing. Showcasing your future project using graphics and tables is even better because the information becomes more convincing and coherent. Sometimes, the presentation allows individuals to say more than they could do when writing a research plan. Let’s move on and discover how to make research proposal presentation.

4 Steps to Create a Great Thesis Proposal Presentation

When you present your project, you literally sell it to the officials, proving its value and importance within the whole field. That’s why it’s essential to consider valuable points when working on the project. So, below are points to follow when preparing research proposal presentation.

• Show the topic knowledge. Your task is to present fresh ideas and show how well you know the subject. By doing so, you demonstrate how well you studied the topic and understand what should be added to the existing gaps.
• Structure your content. It works the same as with writing and should flow logically. You should smoothly move from one part to another, showcasing all aspects of your research. Also, ensure your presentation proposal does not contain information that does not belong to the topic.
• Use bulleted lists. It makes the writing readable and makes it easy for the audience to absorb the information. Moreover, writing huge sentences on slides has negative impact, so consider using bulleted lists as an alternative.
• Add visuals. Writing too much text is not good, as it is hard to perceive many words on slides visually. Add graphs, images, and infographics to make the information easier to understand. Nevertheless, keep enough ample space not to overload the slides.

Research proposal PowerPoint format allows you to be more creative using tools to compose and deliver the information. Start working beforehand to select the proper background, fonts, and visuals to ensure your slides look great. Still, if you find it difficult to complete the task, asking someone for assistance is a good decision. Consider getting professional help writing research proposal from our experienced pros.

What Should Research Proposal Presentation Consist Of?

When presenting the concept of your study, you should understand what it consists of and what is the purpose of each part. You will understand how to write a presentation proposal. Stick to this plan. Use it like a template, and make sure you include all the needed information. Another great idea is to use dissertation proposal guidelines provided by your institution. Besides, you can look for samples and check how others handle such a task.

Tips to Effectively Present Research Proposal

The concept you create should be impressive and informative. Everything should be focused on your study, showcasing the topic, highlighting its importance, and saying what you expect to achieve. That’s why you should make your thesis proposal presentation a visual aid that helps the audience to understand you. Below are some tips to help you.

• Limit the amount of text on each slide. Focus on writing key phrases only.
• Create contrast by using different colors for text and background to enhance readability. The best combo is a “light text-black background.”
• Use simple design solutions and avoid flashy transitions because they may distract the audience.
• Don’t create too many slides. Decide how many slides you need in each part of your PhD proposal presentation, and don’t go beyond this number.
• Do not read from slides. The visual content is for the audience, so you should give them additional information.
• Avoid templates. There is no need to fit your original proposal for presentation into already-made structures.

To ensure the final version looks good, show it to someone who hasn’t seen it before. With feedback from an independent viewer, you will understand whether everything looks good or not.

How to Present a Research Proposal and Defense It

Simply switching the slides and repeating all the information is not enough. The purpose of the proposal defense is to convince the audience that your research is significant, fundamental, and worth investing in. Those who will listen to you won’t be very interested in research projects. So, how to present a research proposal in a way that makes them listen?

You have to be confident and stick to your agenda. Make notes about what you will say at each stage of the defense. Left the most significant information on the slides, supplementing it with additional abstracts during the demonstration. Keep the pace and show one slide per minute. Rushing is not what’s needed since you aim to show the research project’s significance.

The ability to answer audience questions is another essential of how to make a proposal presentation. Be ready for this because the committee may want to test how well you know your research topic. An unclear answer or a typical “I don’t know” can negatively impact their decision. Practice before the official demonstration and ensure you are confident enough to defend a presentation without notes.

Get Assisted in Creating a Proposal Presentation

Creating a proposal presentation is a responsible task because you are showcasing your future research, explaining why it’s important and how it will close the existing gaps in the field. It requires a deep analysis, which takes lots of time and effort and may be challenging for some individuals.

However, it’s not a problem for our specialists. As well as providing professional thesis writing services , we assist customers with presentation creation. Our experts carefully investigate the topic, do in-depth research, and find relevant data. Moreover, they can help you select research topics, offering unique niches that match your interests.

Contact us anytime you want to achieve outstanding quality and get the writing task done on time.

Upload Files

Thank you for your request!

We will get in touch with you shortly!

Please, try one more time.

This website uses cookies to ensure the best user experience. Privacy & Cookies Notice Accept Cookies

Manage My Cookies

Manage Cookie Preferences

Confirm My Selections

• Dissertation Areas and Joint PhD Programs
• PhD Career Outcomes

PhD Proposals and Defenses

• PhD Job Market Candidates
• PhD Research Community
• 100 Years of Pioneering Research
• Rising Scholars Conference
• Yiran Fan Memorial Conference
• Frequently Asked Questions

The Stevens Doctoral Program allows scholars to envision and conduct original, cutting-edge research.

Here are some of our PhD students’ recent dissertation topics.

Our PhD Students’ Recent Dissertation Topics

• Graduate School

40 Thesis Defense Questions

Practicing answering thesis defense questions in a mock thesis defense is the best way to get ready for this challenging step in your academic career. Aside from knowing your research project inside and out, you must have solid strategies for tackling different question types and talking about why you chose your research topic. You might have already answered questions related to your research interests in your research interest statement and grad school interview questions , but now after years for in-depth study, it's time to really test what you have accomplished! Check out some of the hardest thesis defense questions below and read our expert responses!

>> Want us to help you get accepted? Schedule a free strategy call here . <<

Article Contents 11 min read

What to expect in a thesis defense.

A thesis defense is your chance to demonstrate your in-depth knowledge and expertise in the topic of your research thesis. While you will be able to take charge of the narrative and present your research to those on your thesis committee, the professors will prod you to test how well you know and understand your topic. The questions are mostly open-ended and give you the chance to showcase your knowledge and understanding, as well as any future plans you may have regarding your research topic.

A thesis defense usually lasts between one and two hours, depending on the area of your research. It starts with you giving a presentation of your interest, findings, and conclusions. After you have finished, the committee members will ask you questions based not only on your presentation, but also on your written thesis as they will have read it before your presentation. Lastly, the committee might approve your thesis or suggest changes to your paper.

Preparing thesis defense questions requires you to start well in advance. While the duration of your thesis defense might vary as per your institution's requirements, the major idea is to defend your research. Thus, you should go about preparing for your thesis defense questions by taking the following steps.

Interested in a quick overview of the section below? Check out this infographic:

Re-read your thesis for clarity

Your thesis defense questions will be based on what you have written in your research paper. Hence, it is a good idea to re-read your paper. You should be clear on the concepts and understand your research well. It might have been some time since you would have submitted your paper, so a revision should be the starting point of your preparation.  

Have an answer strategy and structure

Plan a strategy to answer the panel’s questions. Keep your answers direct, but elaborate on the research details wherever necessary. If you do not know the answer to a question, that is alright. The key is to be able to formulate an answer even if you do not possess enough knowledge to answer at that point in time. For instance, if a question is about the content of your research, you can say something like “I am not certain my research touches on the question you are asking, but my research has led me to Dr. X. Based his evidence, I would have to conclude that…” Having a strategy for answering even the most unexpected questions can be a life saver in these situations!

Most of the thesis defense questions can be easily predicted based on your research. You can prepare a list of possible questions when you are going through your paper. Getting to know the committee can help you in preparing better. Their areas of expertise can help you in determining what they might ask. Once you have a list of questions, you can start brainstorming how you might answer them. 

Prepare your slides in advance

If you require visual aids such as slides, it is a good idea to prepare them beforehand. You can double-check the slides and make sure that your presentation will run smoothly on the day of your thesis defense. Make sure your slides are arranged in the correct order. 

Attend a thesis defense of other candidates if it is an open event

If your institution allows it, you can visit a thesis defense of other candidates. This will give you an excellent idea of what you can expect in your meeting. If it is not possible to attend the event, you can speak to your peers to find out how their meeting went and what questions were asked.

Dress appropriately for your meeting

The thesis defense meeting is a formal event, and hence you should be dressed in formal clothes. While there are no strict dressing rules, you should consider it something equivalent to a job interview. Don’t just wear your T-shirt and appear in front of the committee. Your formal suit is a better option for the occasion.

Practice speaking for your meeting

Take your preparation to the next level by practicing your presentation. This activity will give you the confidence for the actual meeting and presentation. You can request your academic peers to help you out in the practice task. Based on their feedback in the mock session, you can improve for the actual session. Make sure to prepare well for the mock session as if you are preparing for the actual session. You can also practice your speech and body language in the mock session. If you used thesis writing services , these professionals would also be the ideal people to test you in a mock thesis defense – don’t hesitate to reach out to them again!

Sample Thesis Defense Questions and Answers

1.    what is your research study all about.

In your answer, you should summarize your research in a few sentences. The question is simple but requires technical expertise for a better explanation of concepts. For instance, if you completed a thesis in an attempt to explain the constituents of dark matter in the universe and particle accelerators, you could frame your answer like this:

In this research, the different aspects of dark matter and its detection models have been investigated. The cosmic ray positron excess observed by the PAMELA detector has been discussed and explained through the construction of models of decaying dark matter. The cosmic-ray electron and positron spectra were studied assuming a general Dirac structure for the four fermion contact interactions of interest. A supersymmetric leptophilic Higgs model was constructed to explain the possible excess of gamma rays in the galactic center. Finally, by the use of Razor analysis, an improvement on the dark matter collider searches is considered.  

2.    Why did you choose this study?

This question requires you to answer what motivated you to pursue the study in the first place. Your answers could touch on your interests in the area of the study. For example, if you conducted a study called “Media Combat: The Great War and the Transformation of American Culture” then you can shape your answer like this:

The First World War (1914-1918) has always been a topic of fascination for me, and my prime interest lies in exploring the state of society at that time. I wanted to analyze the formation of a nationalized, wartime cultural apparatus during the United States' involvement in the war and how theatre and music transformed the relationship between the government and American citizens. 

3.    Why did you choose this particular title for your research?

The title of your thesis captures the main point of your research, which is why it is so important to use an appropriate title. Your committee will want to know how you came to the final decision of naming your work. For example,

I chose the title “Dark matter in the heavens and at colliders: Models and constraints” for my research thesis because my research attempts to explain the constituency of dark matter as it occurs in the universe. “The heavens” is another word for the universe. Dark matter can also be created in particle accelerators such as the CERN collider. I have attempted to provide an explanation for both of the cases through the use of models, along with describing the constraints which exist in the current times due to certain scientific limitations.

4.    What is the scope of your study?

In your answer, you have to define the boundaries of your project and define exactly what you are studying. There can be several elements involved but you have to define the parameters that you have chosen to study. For example,

My study is on the efficacy of equity stocks in the US market. For my study, I have chosen 50 companies listed on the NASDAQ. You can review the names of these companies on page 5 of my thesis.

5.    What phenomenon were you trying to understand with this research?

Describe the focus concept of your thesis in the answer. For example,

In our study “Motivation to volunteer”, we were looking to study the Theory of Planned Behavior by analyzing the behavioral and normative beliefs that influence attitudes and subjective norms.

Want increase your productivity and mainain a healthy work life balance to help get you through your thesis project? Here are some tips straight from our CEO:

6.    Who will be most interested in your research?

You can talk about who may be affected by your research and the parties who can potentially benefit from the research. Take a look at this example:

My sociology thesis on “Impact of social media on youngsters” can be of interest to sociology academics, social media companies, education experts, and parents of youngsters in general.

7.    Did your research questions evolve during the process? If so, how?

Often, qualitative research questions change over time with respect to the responses that you might get from your focus group. Or you might just change your question as you do lab research or general text research. You can describe the change to the evaluating committee. For example,

We started our study to understand the impact of the new public policy change on recycling of vinyl waste through installation of garbage bins specifically for vinyl products. However, after interviewing some of the respondents in the target community, we found that the rule is actually irrelevant to their behavior and thoughts because the percentage of vinyl waste in that specific locality was very low and it didn’t need the installation of dedicated bins for the purpose. Going by their frustrations with the current economic insecurity, our study evolved into the impact of costs incurred by public policy changes.           

8.    What gaps did you intend to bridge with your research?

Your research thesis must eliminate the present gaps in the concepts related to your subject topic.

The relationship between hard water and its effect on the size of the kidney stone is not clear yet, so we analyzed the mineral composition of hard water to determine its impact on the size of the kidney stone.

9.    Why is your research significant?

The answer to this research question should outline the impact of your research on your field of study. You may talk about the new insights contributed by your research and its impact on society.

Through my study on “The effect of chamomile in reducing stress and promoting better sleep,” patients with insomnia and anxiety will be able to find alternative treatments without the use of medicinal drugs. The medical abilities of chamomile will promote the usage of ingredients in nature and will encourage the community to plant more herbs and trees.

10. What did you find in your research?

You may describe your research in a few sentences in this answer. For instance,

In our study on “Impact of artificial fluoride in water on the human body,” we found that excessive exposure to high quantities of Fluoride can result in tooth discoloration and bone issues in humans since it has neurotoxic qualities. 

11. What research findings surprised you?

When you conduct research, you come across findings that you were not expecting earlier. If you had such an experience, you might describe the same to the evaluation committee when you answer this question. For example,

I was expecting that business promotion through social media would not be a good idea for rural enterprises in developing countries in my comparative analysis of the usage of traditional and contemporary marketing methods. But I was surprised to learn that 68% of rural textile businesses in Nigeria promote their products on Instagram.

12. What is the validity of your findings?

You have to talk about the conditions in which your research findings would be valid.

In my research, I have considered test anxiety to be involving both nervous system activation and negative thoughts. Thus, my measure of test anxiety has included the elements of both nervous feelings and negative thoughts, the conditions in which my findings are valid.

For example,

For studying the differential protein expression, its localization, and distribution at different levels, we used the method of immunostaining in our research.

14. What sources did you use for data collection?

You would have used several sources to search for data for your topic. You may elaborate on those sources. You might have referred to databases, content on the web, or even conducted primary research by interviewing prospects. Thus, you can talk about these sources. Refer to the following answer:

To understand the impact of the current tax regime on skilled workers, we interviewed 150 subjects in 5 months. Additionally, we referred to databases and scholarly works available by authors who had previously conducted such studies for previous tax laws and rates. 

15. How can your research be put into practice?

This question talks about the practical implications of your research. You should talk about how your research is beneficial for society and how it can help in eliminating current issues.

In our research titled “Effectiveness of Meditation on Reducing the Anxiety Levels of College Students in the US,” we discovered that students who practiced meditation at least thrice a week were two times more likely to score better in their exams, owing to the positive impact of meditation. So, this research finding can help in the reduction of mental health issues among students. A suitable course of action would be to hold meditating sessions a couple of times a week. 

16. How will your findings contribute to the related area of knowledge?

Our study on medicinal analysis of herbs conveys information about various medicinal benefits of chamomile in treating depression and contributes to the area of medicinal botany.

17. Did you experience any limitations in your research?

Our research on “Impact of smoking on β-cell function and risk for type 2 diabetes in US citizens” finds that smoking increases the risk of diabetes among smokers. However, smokers might be affected by some genetic conditions which can protect them from diabetes. 

18. What sampling techniques did you use?

When conducting research, it is practically not possible to study the entire number of elements. So, you would be using a method to select a sample population.

In our study “Impact of consumption of soda on the health of teenagers in Corpus Christi”, we used area sampling to divide the city into several areas and then selected some clusters for our sample group.

19. What are the dependent and independent variables in your research?

In research, several variable factors impact your study. You can describe these variables. Independent variables have values which are not affected by other variables in your study. On the other hand, the dependent variables have values that change with changes in the independent variable. For example,

In our study on “Impact of online tutoring on test scores”, the independent variable is the nature of the classes i.e., online and the participants' test score is the dependent variable.

20. What areas do you suggest for further research?

As a researcher, you should be able to describe what further areas are open for research with the addition of your research to the field. This can act as a starting point for future researchers. For example,

In my research on “Effectiveness of Acetaminophen in treating sports induced injuries”, I discovered that administering Acetaminophen is not very effective for treating joint pains such as the knee. This further suggests measures for the regulation of Acetaminophen in the production of painkillers for body pain and the search for alternative compounds.

Practice Questions

After taking a look at the sample answers, now try answering these questions by yourself:

Do you have any closing comments? "}]">

After submitting your research thesis for evaluation, you have to appear before a panel of professors and present your work; afterwards, they will ask you questions about your research.

You have to plan and prepare for your thesis defense. Review your paper and anticipate the questions that the committee can ask. Practice with mock defense sessions using professional servicesand make improvements based on their feedback. Be prepared with a strategy for answering any question asked by the panel.

Your research thesis should be on a topic of your interest. Scan your course syllabus to find something that makes you curious. Or, you can even refer to your grad school career goals statement to review what got you interested in grad school in the first place. Shortlist a few topics and zero down to the one that excites you the most.

The first step in preparing for a master’s thesis defense is to revise your research paper and write down a list of questions that the committee might ask. Find answers to those questions and get ready for your presentation. Practice your presentation beforehand. Try to attend a thesis defense of other candidates to know what you can expect in your session. 

You will get questions related to what you have mentioned in your research paper. The most common starting questions are “what is your research about?" and “what was your motivation behind choosing this topic?” Later on, the committee asks you more detailed questions on research methodology, literature review, study variables, research findings, recommendations, and areas of further research.

You can get help from a grad school essay tutor for your research thesis writing. They can help you in developing writing skills and reviewing your work. They can proofread your work and provide recommendations on areas of improvement.

You can include your research thesis on your grad school CV to show your practical knowledge and skills. You can add the details of the study in a separate section for research experience.

Immediately after the thesis defense, the evaluation panel will decide whether to approve your paper as submitted or request some changes, or reject it.

To pass a thesis defense, a majority of the panel members must approve the defense. In case of more than one vote against you, you can fail the thesis.

A thesis defense can last for two hours or longer, depending on your area of research.

Your thesis defense presentation should include the focus concept, findings, recommendation, and conclusion.

The contribution of your thesis towards your degree differs as per institution. You can refer to your course handbook for exact details. In most cases, the committee needs to approve your thesis for you to graduate from your degree.

Want more free tips? Subscribe to our channels for more free and useful content!

Apple Podcasts

Like our blog? Write for us ! >>

Have a question ask our admissions experts below and we'll answer your questions.

why did you choose this place for a research locale

BeMo Academic Consulting

Hi Jeff! Yes, this can also be one of the questions you are asked in a thesis defense!

That is good

Hello Eshetu! Thanks for your comment. Glad you found this helpful!

Very helpful

Thanks, Abel. Glad you found this helpful. 

Helpful thank you.

Hi Lagat! Thanks!

As an 11th-grade student, I don't have any experience in thesis or research defense in general. Me and my groupmates will be conducting our research title defense next week, this is invaluable information for us. Thank you!

You are very welcome, Kate!

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS, I REALLY APPRECIATE.

Hello Stephanie! Thanks for your comment.

EMELDA NAFULA NYONGESA

This is a good guideline to post graduate students (Masters and PhD) CPA:Emelda Nyongesa

Hi Emelda! Thanks!

Get Started Now

Talk to one of our admissions experts

Our site uses cookies. By using our website, you agree with our cookie policy .

FREE Training Webinar:

How to make your grad school application stand out, (and avoid the top 5 mistakes that get most rejected).

Time Sensitive. Limited Spots Available:

We guarantee you'll get into grad school or you don't pay.

Swipe up to see a great offer!

• Study resources
• Calendar - Graduate
• Calendar - Undergraduate
• Class schedules
• Class cancellations
• Course registration
• Important academic dates
• More academic resources
• Campus services
• IT services
• Job opportunities
• Safety & prevention
• Mental health support
• Student Service Centre (Birks)
• All campus services
• Calendar of events
• Latest news
• Media Relations
• Faculties, Schools & Colleges
• Arts and Science
• Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science
• John Molson School of Business
• School of Graduate Studies
• All Schools, Colleges & Departments.
• Directories

Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in Society and Culture

• CISSC Board
• Affiliated faculty
• Post-doctoral fellows & Visiting Scholars
• Call for proposals
• CISSC Year in Review
• Complexe Canal Lachine Studio
• Abolition Worlds
• Advancing Climate Policy
• Clandestine Transactions
• Ecological Emergency and Response/Ability
• Food Studies
• Informal Cities
• Situation: A Transmedial Narrative Concept?
• South-South
• Past working groups
• Artist-in-Residence
• Prospective students
• Current students & advisors
• Research-Creation
• Research currents
• Faculty profiles
• Student profiles
• Alumni profiles
• Message from our Program Director
• Thesis proposal and defence

A doctoral thesis should be based on extensive research in primary sources, make an original contribution to knowledge, and be presented in acceptable scholarly form. Students entering the program with MFA degrees may include studio work as a component of their program of study and thesis project, with the approval of the Humanities Program Director and the student’s advisory committee.

About the thesis proposal

A thesis proposal is submitted and defended in the term following the writing of the comprehensive field examinations. Students are admitted to candidacy for the Ph.D. upon acceptance by their advisory committee of the written thesis proposal and its successful oral defence.

The thesis proposal is approximately 25 pages long (double-spaced), and contains:

• a substantive presentation of the thesis question
• a brief review of the literature
• a bibliography
• an overview of the proposed structure (chapter by chapter) of the thesis. It should be a substantial reworking of the initial research proposal.

See a  sample thesis proposal

Thesis proposal defence

The Thesis Proposal defence is especially important in cases where non-paper thesis components are being considered. The student's supervisory committee, in collaboration with the Humanities Director, must assess and approve the nature of the relationship between the thesis components and the pertinence of the chosen medium. The committee must establish the student's competence to work with the chosen medium.

If a student fails the thesis proposal defence, he or she may request a second (and last) attempt, the repeated defence to take place after a period of at least three months from the date of the original defence, and no later than one year after the date of the original defence.

Steps to complete your thesis proposal

• The student develops the proposal in consultation with the Major field supervisor, with input from the Minor field advisors.
• The student submits the thesis proposal to the three members of his or her advisory committee, and if they are satisfied that the thesis proposal is ready to proceed to defence, the supervisors completes and submits our online form for Scheduling a Thesis Proposal Defence , together with the proposal and possible dates and times for a defence.
• Upon the Director’s approval, a time and date is set for the thesis proposal defence. All three member of the student’s advisory committee participate in the thesis proposal defence, which is chaired by the Humanities Director. It is best if the supervisor can arrange a room for the defence, our space is limited and we do not have a projector or other other such equipment.
• The student gives a brief oral summary of the proposal;
• Committee members engage the student in a discussion of aspects of the proposal and beyond that of the projected doctoral dissertation, touching on such issues as the theoretical framework and methodology to be used, structure of the dissertation, schedule for its completion, etc.;
• During the discussion, committee members may also ask questions about the comprehensive fields exams, especially as the exam topics relate to the student’s dissertation project.
• It is also important at this point in the PhD to ensure that plans are in place for ethics approvals, if needed and for satisfaction of the language requiremen (which is needed prior to submission of the dissertation for defence).
• Following the formal defence, the advisory committee with the Humanities Director assess the student’s performance in camera, and decide on a pass or fail grade.
• A thesis proposal grade sheet for the Thesis Proposal with Defence will be provided to the student's major field advisor who will complete, sign, and submit it to the department. The committee may also indicate on a separate paper whether there are concerns that the student should keep in mind as they proceed towards work on their doctoral dissertation and attach it to the grade form.

Please note the Humanities PhD program changed some sections of its curriculum in 2017. Students in the pre-2017 curriclum stream have their  Thesis Proposal with Defence coded as HUMA 886 (3 credits) , while after 2017 it is coded as  Thesis Proposal with Defence HUMA 894 (6 credits) .

• How to apply
• Additional admission requirements
• Finding your advisors
• Frequently asked questions
• Comprehensive examinations
• Research ethics
• Humanities PhD Graduate Student Association
• Humanities thesis database
• Responsibilities of Field Advisors

© Concordia University

Doctor of Philosophy in Chemistry

Get your phd in chemistry.

Thank you for your interest in the graduate program at the University of Iowa Department of Chemistry. The Department has had a chemistry PhD program for over 75 years and currently consists of over 25 research faculty, over 130 graduate students, and over 20 postdoctoral associates, research scientists and visiting scholars. Our graduates and postdocs have accepted positions at leading academic and industrial institutions and national laboratories.

State-of-the-art research labs, support facilities, and classrooms are located in the Chemistry Building and the Iowa Advanced Technology Laboratory. Extensive resources are readily accessible such as NMR, mass spectrometry, and X-ray analysis facilities, advanced computational resources, and complete machine, electronics, and glass shops. In addition to strong programs in the core areas of analytical, inorganic, organic, and physical chemistry, we offer unique research opportunities in emerging interdisciplinary areas such as biocatalysis, natural products, materials, surface science, bioinorganic, chemical sensors, chemical education research, and environmental and atmospheric chemistry.

The Department of Chemistry funds the tuition for all of our graduate students in good standing. In addition, we offer teaching and research assistantships that pay an annual stipend and provide employee benefits such as health insurance. Additional funding from a variety of sources is also available. 

For more information, contact the graduate program by e-mail at [email protected] . 

Student resources

• First year student guide
• Annual review resources
• Teaching assistant resources
• Postdoctoral scholar resources
• Thesis and dissertation
• General catalog
• Current courses

Degree requirements

Competency requirement.

Students must demonstrate basic competency in three chosen sub-disciplines of chemistry (analytical, biochemistry, inorganic, organic, physical). Competency is established in one of the following ways: Scoring at the 50th percentile level (national norm) on the proficiency exam, completing a one-semester review course with a grade of C or better (courses specified below), or completing a one-semester graduate-level/advanced course in that sub-discipline of chemistry with a grade of B or better. The competency requirement must be fulfilled before the beginning of the student's third semester in the graduate program.

Review courses

Courses currently designated as review courses are:

• CHEM:4171 (formerly 4:171): Advanced Analytical Chemistry
• BIOC:3120 (formerly 99:120): Biochemistry and Molecular Biology I
• CHEM:4270 (formerly 4:170): Advanced Inorganic Chemistry
• CHEM:4372 (formerly 4:172): Advanced Organic Chemistry
• CHEM:4431 (formerly 4:131): Physical Chemistry I

Advanced course requirement

Beyond the competency requirements, a minimum of four additional courses that total at least 11 semester hours of graduate credit must be completed by the end of the fourth semester in residence. Grades of "B" or higher must be attained in all of these advanced courses. A grade of "B-" does not meet this requirement. Research, seminar, and pedagogy credits, courses that are doubly listed with sub-100 level numbers, courses taken with the S/U grade option, and courses with grades of "B-" or lower cannot be used to fulfill this requirement. The student is strongly encouraged to develop a detailed course plan that is reviewed and approved by the research advisor.

Comprehensive examination

The oral comprehensive examination is designed to assess the student's overall progress, knowledge of fundamental chemical principles and chosen area of specialization, and general competency for PhD research.

Before the beginning of the second semester after a permanent advisor has been appointed, a Graduate Academic Committee (GAC) of five faculty, at least four from Chemistry, will be formed for each student with a PhD degree objective. The committee will consist of the research advisor and four additional members invited by the student subject to the advisor’s approval.

The five member committee for the comprehensive examination is the same as the student's Graduate Academic Committee (GAC). Additional faculty members may be invited to attend the oral comprehensive examination and may be consulted in judging the presentation when it bears upon their areas of expertise.

To be eligible to take the Comprehensive Examination, the student must have a cumulative average of 3.00 or greater on appropriate graduate coursework at The University of Iowa. Appropriate graduate coursework includes review courses (Section II.B.), graded seminar presentations (Section III.F.), courses that satisfy the advanced course requirement (Section III.A.), and additional courses in chemistry or related disciplines that are judged appropriate by the student’s GAC. Graduate Chemistry Orientation (CHEM:5091, formerly 4:191), Ethics in Chemical Sciences (CHEM:5092, formerly 4;192), Research in Chemistry (CHEM:7999, formerly 4:290) and Research Seminar (CHEM:6990, formerly 4:291) shall be graded on an S/U basis and therefore are not included in the computation of the cumulative average.

The general comprehensive examination requirements set by the Graduate College must be completed by the end of the fourth semester in residence, unless written consent is received from the GAC and is approved by the Departmental Graduate Review Committee (DGRC). A student who fails to meet this requirement may be dropped from the PhD program. A student on academic probation is not eligible to take the comprehensive exam. Students entering with a Master's degree and those exempted from review courses are strongly encouraged to take the comprehensive examination during the second or third semester in residence.

The comprehensive examination is a two-part oral examination. The first part consists of an oral defense of the student's research problem and progress, and will be based upon a written Research Report submitted by the student. The second part consists of an oral defense of an original Research Proposal submitted by the student. The Research Report and the Research Proposal must be submitted (together) prior to five weeks before the last day of classes in the semester during which the examination is to be taken (or, for a spring semester examination, by the last Friday prior to Spring Break, whichever is earlier). It is strongly recommended that the examination be held at the earliest possible date in the semester to facilitate scheduling.

If the GAC approves both the Research Report and the Research Proposal, the oral examination may be scheduled. The student should then complete a Formal Plan of Study and a Request to the Graduate College for the PhD Comprehensive Examination. At the examination, the student will be asked to present a short (20 minute) summary of their research project. During or following this presentation, the committee will ask questions designed to probe the student's understanding of the research topic and important background material, the experimental methods and techniques which are important in the particular area, and the goals and significance of the research. The committee next will examine the candidate's understanding of areas related to the Research Proposal. The student will be asked to give a short (30 minute) presentation of the Research Proposal. The committee will ask questions designed to probe the quality and the student's understanding of the proposal. Typically, however, this discussion will evolve into a wide-ranging examination of the student's general competency in the chemical sciences.

Seminar requirements

Each student is expected to give a minimum of two acceptable seminars. One seminar must cover the student's research. The other may also deal with the student's research, or can be an extensive literature report. The student may register for the appropriate divisional seminar course and receive letter grade credit during those semesters in which the seminars are presented. The final PhD defense cannot be used to meet this requirement.

The research conference/three-month seminar

At least three months before the anticipated final defense, the PhD candidate must meet with their graduate academic committee. If scheduling permits, the research work can be reported as a research seminar during a regularly scheduled divisional seminar, with a subsequent committee meeting for questions and advice.

Final defense of the PhD dissertation

The Dean of the Graduate College will make a public announcement of a candidate’s final defense three weeks prior to the exam date. This final oral examination is open to the public. Dissertation copies must be made available to all members of the examining committee not later than two weeks before the examination date.

Milestones toward the PhD

The milestones on the path toward earning your PhD in chemistry at the University of Iowa are described below. These are illustrative of a typical student; most students follow this path, but some variations are possible.

Typical timelines for PhD completion

Create your academic path.

You'll find degree overviews, requirements, course lists, academic plans, and more to help you plan your education and explore your possibilities.

Current course list

The MyUI Schedule displays registered courses for a particular session and is available to enrolled students. The list view includes course instructors, time and location, and features to drop courses or change sections.

• Request Information
• Find Faculty & Staff
• Industry Partnerships
• Current Students
• Faculty & Staff
• Talent Recruiters
• Search Open Search Close Search
• Message from Dean
• College Leadership
• Quick Facts
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Accreditation
• Faculty & Staff Directory
• Academic Programs
• Academic Departments
• Undergraduate Studies
• Graduate School of Engineering
• Business, Entrepreneurship and Leadership
• Co-op & Experiential Learning
• Clubs & Organizations
• Research Centers & Institutes
• Research Facilities
• Publications & Patents
• Industry Partnership
• Student Research
• Honors & Distinctions
• Annual Reports
• Faculty Hiring
• In the Media
• Spotlight Stories

« All Events

• This event has passed.

Gerald LaMountain PhD Proposal Review

April 11, 2024 @ 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm.

Name: Gerald LaMountain

Title: On the Performance of Classical Estimation Under Adverse Conditions

Date: 4/11/2024

Time: 12:00:00 PM

Location: EXP 459

Committee Members: Prof. Pau Closas (Advisor) Prof. Deniz Erdogmus Prof. Aanjhan Ranganathan

Abstract: System designers across all disciplines of technology face the need to develop machines capable of independently processing and analyzing data and, in many cases, subsequently predicting future data. Over the past century, numerous approaches have been developed to perform this task, including those that fall under the umbrella of “classical statistics;” that is, those that employ probabilistic analyses to isolate relationships between variables and, in particular, “statistical estimation” wherein those variables are used to make inferences about real-world quantities. To fully leverage the bevy of established estimation algorithms, it is necessary to be able to evaluate the performance of a given estimator and, where possible, make changes to the methodology to improve its performance according to pertinent metrics. In the presence of ground-truth information, the accuracy of estimations can be evaluated a posteriori for a specific set of data. But what of future data which may not be associated with the same set of ground-truth information? In these cases, we require statistical generalizations about estimator behavior based on models of observed reality. In reality, these models are rarely fully representative of the reality of the observed and latent variables of interest. In such cases, there exists a “model misspecification,” and estimators which are designed based on such an imprecise model will produce results which differ from both properly specified estimators and the truth.

The overall objective of this thesis is to evaluate and expand upon state-of-the-art approaches to estimation and estimator analysis under various types of misspecification, including modeling errors that naturally occur as a result of the sensory environment, for example, unknown or variable observation noise. We contribute a method of Bayesian covariance estimation which, when embedded within the Kalman filter architecture, may be used to adapt to real-time changes in sensor performance while maintaining the recursive structure that allows the Kalman filter to be implemented in so many different applications. Furthermore, we investigated the efficacy of signal subspace algorithms (e.g. MUSIC) for performing multi-antenna radio direction finding, again in the presence of modelling errors. Although these algorithms are considered suboptimal (in the sense of the minimum mean squared error—MMSE) in finite time, their computational efficiency motivates their use in many different applications. Our analysis shows that under certain classes of model misspecification, the candidate algorithm for misspecified multiple signal classification (MMUSIC) performs asymptotically as well as the “gold standard” maximum likelihood estimator (MMLE) under the same misspecification. The final objective of this thesis is to combine the estimation bounds analysis we have applied to static estimation and extend it to dynamical systems. Although there exist established methods for evaluating and bounding the performance of estimators on misspecified models and dynamic models, there has been limited progress in establishing a standard for performing misspecified estimator analysis under dynamic conditions. Although this work is still ongoing, preliminary results are encouraging, suggesting that there are likely multiple approaches to this bounded analysis based around different objectives. Further results will be included in the final version of our work.

Autumn Quarter 2024 Time Schedule