![]() Given that there is so little advice around on how to deal with ‘minor’ corrections, perhaps I’m unusual in having experienced this response. In the end, I wrote three additional paragraphs at various points in the thesis and expanded my illustrations of an argument at another. Once that barrier had been broken, the corrections that involved re-thinking and re-writing followed. It was only painfully slowly that my energy and brainpower returned and I felt able to tackle the typos, the easiest of the corrections. For the first few days, all I could do was stare at my thesis. “Do the minimum necessary,” my supervisors advised. To my examiners and supervisors, those corrections were indeed ‘minor’, but to me they seemed bewildering and daunting. My brain felt completely drained, yet I knew that I somehow had to address those corrections before I could pass the finishing post. While my supervisors cracked open a bottle of bubbly after the viva and people started gathering to congratulate me, I found it hard to celebrate. The problem, I think, was that after six years of researching and writing, and (for reasons beyond my control) a long and anxious wait for the viva, I had simply burned out. So why, when my examiners reeled off their list, did making those corrections seem like another huge mountain to climb? After all, it was the most likely outcome of the viva, so it wasn’t a surprise. This means that ‘minor’ corrections are entirely legitimate, and indeed should be welcomed as contributing to the quality of your final thesis. After all, you and your supervisors have become so close to your work that you may not realise that a particular point is not entirely clear to somebody reading it for the first time. Your work is definitely of the required standard, but there are still tweaks to be made, perhaps to make connections clearer or to fine-tune an explanation. Let’s be clear: getting through your viva ‘with minor corrections’ is a great achievement. That, for me, turned into a struggle for which I was completely unprepared. Nobody warns you that you’ll need to re-gather your energy and brainpower to tackle them. Much more problematic, in my experience, are corrections that, although still considered ‘minor’, involve re-thinking and re-writing. But corrections of that kind are only a small part of the story. Corrections of that nature can legitimately be considered ‘minor’. Any thesis will inevitably contain some of those, and you’d definitely want to correct them before submitting the final version. If you’re lucky, corrections are simply typos, formatting issues etc. ![]() ![]() ![]() Your examiners present you with a list of corrections, you go away and implement them. In the UK system, the majority of PhD students pass their viva ‘with minor corrections’. Her research interests are literary translation, the translation of literature from the GDR and prismatic translation (multiple translations of one text). Her practice-based research investigated the interplay of translation theory and translation practice and led to three different translations of collection of satirical stories written in the German Democratic Republic in the 1960s. This post is by Dr Mary Frank, who holds a PhD in Translation Studies from the University of Bristol, England. It sounds simple, but in reality, making changes to a complete piece of work can be tricky. It is your job to make changes based on this feedback, in consultation with your supervisors. The viva is becoming more common in Australia, but most people will still get a written report from the examiners. Have you ever wondered what happens after the examiners give you feedback on your dissertation? In the UK and many other countries, this feedback is given in an oral presentation called the Viva. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |