ucl phd viva guidelines

Viva examinations: guidance

This guidance explains the viva process, how to prepare, what will happen on the day and what the possible outcomes are.

This information is for postgraduate research students. It covers:

• before your viva
• preparing for your viva
• during your viva
• outcomes of the examination

Before your viva

Entry forms.

You must enter the exam via Portico about four months before you are ready to submit. You may not submit your thesis until you have entered for the examination and your examination may be delayed if you have not done this.  

Find out more about examination entry

Your supervisor is responsible for arranging the appointment of your examiners. This should be done at the same time as you complete your examination entry form, four months before you are due to submit your thesis. Examiners are appointed by UCL for their professional services as examiners with expert subject knowledge. A minimum of two examiners, one from outside UCL and (normally) one from UCL are appointed to co-examine all research degree candidates. The examiner nomination form can be found here .

Submit your thesis

Find out more about formatting, binding and submitting your thesis.

Collaborative research projects

If you are contributing to a collaborative research project you must include this information in the introduction to the thesis. You must clearly identify the demarcation between the research you are submitting for examination as an original contribution to knowledge and the work of your collaborators. 

Viva arrangements

Your supervisor (or nominee) will liaise with you and your examiners to arrange and confirm a mutually convenient time and place to hold the viva examination. The viva must not be arranged before the examiners are formally appointed by UCL. It may take place at UCL, or remotely. Your examiners should have your thesis at least six working weeks before the viva and you will receive an email once the thesis has been sent to the examiners. At this point, you will be able to record the viva via the ‘Research Student Administration’ section in Portico. A user guide is available with step-by-step instructions for submitting this information. Your viva should then take place within three months of the dispatch of the thesis to your examiners.

Download the viva notification user guide

Reasonable adjustments

If you or one of your examiners have a disability which UCL cannot accommodate, other reasonable arrangements can be made for the viva. You must make a request in writing when you complete the examination entry form to allow time for arrangements to be made. 

Preparing for your viva

We recommend that you re-read your thesis. Try to anticipate questions, comments and criticisms, and think how you would respond. Although you may not be able to anticipate actual questions to be asked by the examiners, this approach will encourage you to think actively about your work.   You should also refresh your memory of the relevant literature. Do not attempt to re-read every paper in the bibliography of your thesis; instead, re-read carefully some of the more recent key references. If you have left university after submitting your thesis you may be unaware of very recent work. Ask your supervisor a couple of weeks before the viva whether any work of direct relevance to your thesis has been published since you submitted your thesis.

You must not contact your examiners directly at any point leading up to the viva or afterwards.  All contact should be done by your supervisor or other relevant departmental staff member.  

A good way to prepare for your viva is to practice. Your supervisor should give you a mock viva, or arrange for this to be undertaken by a member of your upgrade panel.  

During your viva

A viva is an academic interview at which your examiners will be looking for an understanding of the subject matter of your thesis, an appreciation of its significance to established knowledge in the field, and an awareness of the breadth of the subject area. 

Your supervisor will be invited to attend your viva examination, unless you request otherwise; you must indicate this on your examination entry form. Your supervisor does not have the right to participate in the viva examination but may contribute if invited to do so by the examiners.  

The examiners will expect you to:

• show a critical analysis of your own work and of that of others
• appreciate the limitations of the methods employed and the results obtained by yourself and others
• understand how the broad conclusions of your thesis support, add to or conflict with previous work
• know the major concepts and recent developments in your subject

There is no formal procedure laid down for the conduct of the viva examination. Some examiners prefer to work through the thesis in the order in which it is written. Other examiners prefer to discuss topics. Very few examiners will perform a page by page criticism. You may be asked to prepare a presentation of your work in a suitable format.  

You are not expected to know your thesis by heart, but to refer to the appropriate page when the examiners wish to discuss a specific point. Please ensure that you bring to the viva examination a copy of your thesis paginated in the same way as the copies you have submitted to the Research Degree Examinations Office.

You should not simply answer 'yes' or 'no' to questions nor give a prepared exposition. Try to answer the question as it is put, remembering that you are engaged in an academic conversation.

Be prepared to justify your ideas and conclusions. If the examiners challenge your interpretation but you feel that your case is a good one, muster your arguments and be willing to present your case firmly but courteously. However, if the examiners have identified a genuine weakness, concede the point gracefully. Even if you feel the examiners are unreasonably critical do not become argumentative or allow the discussion to become heated. You can agree to differ and to reconsider the point. All participants in the viva must abide by UCL's Bullying and Harassment Policy . If you make any comments to your examiners which put them under moral pressure, for example alluding to what will happen if they fail you, or if you offer any incentive to your examiners to pass you, they must terminate the examination and report to the Chair of the Research Degrees Committee via Research Degrees in Student and Registry Services.

Outcome of the examination

The following are the three most often received results and the subsequent procedures.

We will email you with reports from your examiners, copied to your supervisor, instructing you to submit the following documents:

• the electronic copy of your thesis 
• thesis deposit agreement form (uploaded with the e-thesis)

We will award your degree once you have met the academic conditions, the Library have confirmed receipt of your e-thesis and the Deposit Agreement form, and you have cleared any outstanding fees. 

The electronic copy of your thesis and thesis deposit agreement form should be deposited to the Library via UCL's Research Publications Service. Please make sure that you remove, or blank out, all personal identifiers such as signatures, addresses and telephone numbers from the e-thesis. Any photographs that you have taken should not show identifiable individuals without their permission and any you have taken of children should mask their faces. If you have any queries regarding this aspect of the process, please contact the Library directly.

UCL no longer requires a printed copy of your final thesis. If you do wish to deposit a hard copy you can do so by sending it directly to the Cataloguing & Metadata department of Library Services by post, or in person at the Main Library help desk.  You will find more information about the process on the existing webpage for e-thesis submission. 

Find out more about depositing an electronic and printed copy of your thesis

Once you have submitted these, we will send an email containing the confirmation of award and your reports to your email address you have recorded on Portico. The degree certificate will follow approximately four months after the official award date.

In the case of an examination for specialist doctorates (including the EngD, EdD and MPhilStud), the award of the degree is also conditional upon students passing all taught elements of their programme of study. The modules should be entered on to Portico by the Department and confirmation these elements have been completed will be passed from the Examinations Department to Research Degrees.

Minor corrections

This is by far the most common result received from the examiners. 

We will email you with reports from your examiners, copied to your supervisor and Faculty Graduate Tutor. The deadline to submit your corrections officially starts from the date of this email, which will also indicate the name of the person designated to check your corrections. This deadline is for you to submit the corrections to the designated checker, and not to submit the final copy of your thesis.

Your examiners may have returned an annotated copy of your thesis to you and therefore you may already be aware of the work required. The designated checker should inform you of the format he/she expects to receive the corrections, although normally this will be in electronic format.

The designated checker should confirm the outcome of the examination within one month of receipt of the minor corrections to the thesis. This is usually done by sending an email directly to Research Degrees.

Once this has been received we will follow the procedure for a pass result.

Resubmission in a revised form

We will email you with reports from your examiners, copied to your supervisor, Departmental Graduate Tutor and Faculty Graduate Tutor. The 12 or 18 month deadline officially starts from the date of this email.

Unlike the outcome for minor corrections, where one person checks the amendments, the resubmission requires you to re-enter for the examination and submit two copies of your thesis for forwarding to the examiners. 

Your examiners may have returned an annotated copy of your thesis to you and therefore you may already be aware of the work required. 

Once you have completed the corrections, you will need to:

• submit a new exam entry form to Research Degrees at least two weeks prior to the expected submission of the thesis
• submit an electronic copy of your thesis to Research Degrees via the UCL Dropbox.  

Find out more about formatting, binding and submitting your thesis. Your supervisor will be emailed to confirm that the examiners are still willing to act and provide their current contact details. This is to avoid the thesis from being sent out incorrectly. We will then send an email to your supervisor and examiners reconfirming their appointment and send the thesis to them via the UCL Dropbox.

If the examiners have requested a second viva, your supervisor will arrange this. In these circumstances, the procedure will follow that of a typical research degree examination.

If a further viva is not required, your examiners are only required to submit a joint report. They cannot award another 18 month resubmission, but can allow minor corrections.

Once the reports are received we will follow the procedure for either the pass or minor corrections result.

Other results

If the result falls outside the above descriptions, we will email you detailing the procedure you will need to follow.

Related content

• Research degrees: examination entry
• Format, bind and submit your thesis
• Doctoral school

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

How to survive a PhD viva: 17 top tips

Just handed in your PhD thesis? Now it’s time to plan for the next hurdle: a viva. Academics offer their advice on how to best prepare

• Finishing your PhD thesis: tips from those in the know
• The key to a successful PhD thesis? Write in your own voice
• PhD: so what does it really stand for?

H anding in your PhD thesis is a massive achievement – but it’s not the end of the journey for doctoral students. Once you’ve submitted, you’ll need to prepare for the next intellectually-gruelling hurdle: a viva.

This oral examination is a chance for students to discuss their work with experts. Its formal purpose is to ensure that there’s no plagiarism involved, and that the student understands and can explain their thesis. It involves lots of penetrating questions, conceptually complex debates and is infamously terrifying.

How can PhD students best prepare? We asked a number of academics and recent survivors for their tips.

Preparing for the viva

1) Check your institution’s policies and practices

Institutional policies and practices vary. Find out who will attend your viva (eg will a supervisor attend, will there be an independent chair?) and what their roles are. Penny Tinkler and Carolyn Jackson, authors of The Doctoral Examination process: A Handbook for Students, Examiners and Supervisors

2) Re-read your thesis – and keep up-to-date with research

Don’t underestimate the amount of time the examiners will have spent reading and thinking about your thesis – however, you should remember that you are still likely to be the “expert in the room” on this particular topic. Check to see if any relevant recent papers have emerged since submitting the thesis and, if so, read these. Dianne Berry, dean of postgraduate research studies, University of Reading

3) As an examiner, you tend to stick to things you’re an expert in when driving the questioning

Your viva panel will consist of an external expertise in your subject area and an internal which may be in a subject field associated or directly related to yours. The external examiner is the one who mainly calls and fires all the shots and so it’s pretty important to have a knowledge of their published contributions, especially those that are related to your thesis in any way. Dr Bhavik Anil Patel, senior lecturer in physical and analytical chemistry

4) Think about what you will or won’t defend

Consider carefully what you will defend to the hilt in the viva, and what you are prepared to concede. It’s important to defend your claims about the originality of the thesis and its contribution to knowledge. However, no research is perfect, and showing that you have considered what could have been done differently, or even better, is not a bad thing. Penny Tinkler and Carolyn Jackson, authors of The Doctoral Examination process: A Handbook for Students, Examiners and Supervisors

5) Draw up lists of possible questions – especially ones you dread

I collected questions from a bunch of different places ( listed here ) which I then tailored to my PhD. Somebody I worked with also recommended that I put together my 10 nightmare questions. I found this really useful, by writing down and thinking about my dreaded questions, they were no longer so bad – it was almost as if I’d faced the beast.

Generally speaking, I was able to predict the questions that I was asked. There were a couple that were unexpected but they were either conceptual points or based on literature that I just didn’t know. Richard Budd, research assistant, University of Bristol who sat his viva in summer 2014 and has blogged about the experience

6) It’s not like sitting at a laptop where you can edit a sentence as you go along

By the time you finish your PhD you’ll know your thesis inside out. One of the things you won’t be as practised at is talking about it. When I was preparing for my viva, I practised vocalising answers. It’s not a case of needing to learn to answers verbatim – this would only work as a technique if you could guarantee the exact way your examiner will ask a question – but it is about thinking about how you will articulate certain things. A viva isn’t like sitting at a laptop where you can edit a sentence as you go along. Richard Budd, research assistant, University of Bristol who sat his viva in summer 2014 and has blogged about the experience

7) Bring a printed copy that is exactly the same as that of your examiners

Ensure you and your supervisor have a printed copy that is exactly the same as that of your examiners (specifically the same pagination). Mark with tabs the key sections and highlight for reference important quotes and points you might want to refer to. If you have some key diagrams it may help to have these printed larger on A4 sheets that can be used in a discussion.

There is a chance, albeit slim, that an examiner will wish to see some piece of experimental data, software, or other supporting evidence. Have this all neatly archived and accessible. You can do this after submission. Anthony Finkelstein, dean of the UCL faculty of engineering sciences who has blogged about surviving vivas

During the viva

8) Get off to a good start

Give a few detailed answers in the opening 15 minutes, demonstrating knowledge, describing your thinking and working - then the examiners are likely to relax into the viva. If the first few answers are short and non-specific, not demonstrating knowledge, this can begin to raise concerns, and that can set the tone for the whole viva. This is avoidable. Rowena Murray, author of How to Survive Your Viva: Defending a Thesis in an Oral Examination

9) Prepare for the icebreaker

Every viva opens with that dreaded icebreaker that is supposed to break you in gently but often seems to be the thing that gets students into a pickle. It’s so basic, students almost forget about it. Most often this would be to give a five to 10 minute introduction to your work and your key findings. This is such a common question that not preparing for it would be silly. Dr Bhavik Anil Patel, senior lecturer in physical and analytical chemistry

10) Silence doesn’t mean bad news

Don’t assume that you will be given any indication of the outcome at the start of the viva. The examiners may or may not offer comments on the thesis at this stage and candidates should not interpret a lack of comments at this point as a negative sign. In some cases institutional policy prohibits it. Penny Tinkler and Carolyn Jackson, authors of The Doctoral Examination process: A Handbook for Students, Examiners and Supervisors

11) Don’t point out your own weaknesses

Avoid shooting yourself in the foot by highlighting the weaknesses in the thesis by being overly humble (eg “I didn’t think this would be an acceptable piece of research given the way I handled x or y”) or by saying what you “failed to achieve” or “did not manage to carry out in a robust manner” etc. Leave that to the examiners to pick up in their reading, they don’t need help. Dr Mariana Bogdanova, lecturer in management, Queen’s University Belfast

12) Don’t talk like a politician There’s a danger of trying to over-prepare. Don’t learn answers off by heart – it removes the spontaneity and is obvious to examiners. If a student has pre-prepared answers they become a bit like politicians, answering questions they weren’t asked rather than the ones they were. I have come across mixed views on mock vivas. Some people really like them – and they can settle nerves – but other times it can remove spontaneity and steal your thunder. Jerry Wellington, head of research degrees at University of Sheffield and author of Succeeding with Your Doctorate

13) You may need to move from friendly questions to complex debates

Vivas can appear friendly and then suddenly go very conceptually complex. The language used is an alternation between accessible normal language and really specialised arguments. The student needs to be able to move orally between the two. Gina Wisker, professor of higher education and contemporary literature at Brighton University

14) If things get on top of you, use the excuse of having a look at the thesis

Make sure that before the viva you get plenty of sleep, eat properly and de-stress. If things get too much when you’re in there, use the excuse of having to look something up in your thesis. You could also pause and say “Can I write that down for a moment?” Stall for time until you get yourself back together again. Gina Wisker, professor of higher education and contemporary literature at Brighton University

15) Focus on your contribution

One of the most important things that the examiners will be looking for in your thesis, is the “contribution to knowledge”. It is the contribution which makes your work doctoral level. Be sure that you understand exactly what your contribution is, and that you are able to express and explain it clearly and concisely.

Write it down in a paragraph. Discuss it with you supervisor and fellow students. Make sure that you can relate your contribution to other work in your field and that you are able to explain how your work is different. Peter Smith, author of The PhD Viva

16) Expect your viva to last between one and three hours

Students frequently ask how long the viva is likely to be. Obviously they vary. Discipline differences are important. Our research suggests that most natural and applied sciences vivas were completed in one to three hours, whereas arts, humanities and social science vivas were typically less than two hours long. In the natural and applied sciences 43% of vivas lasted two hours or less, compared to 83% in arts, humanities and social sciences. Penny Tinkler and Carolyn Jackson, authors of The Doctoral Examination Process: A Handbook for S tudents, Examiners and Supervisors

17) Enjoy it

The best advice I ever got was “Try to enjoy it”. It seemed ludicrous at the time, but I actually found myself really getting into the discussion as the viva went on. It’s one of the earliest chances you get to talk to someone who not only informed your research (ideally) but is also conversant with your own. It’s a great chance to explore the contours of your research – treat it as such, and it doesn’t seem quite so daunting. Michael James Heron, school of computing science and digital media, Robert Gordon University

• Share any advice you have in the comments below.

Enter the Guardian university awards 2015 and join the higher education network for more comment, analysis and job opportunities, direct to your inbox. Follow us on Twitter @gdnhighered .

• Impact of research
• Universities
• Higher education

Comments (…)

Most viewed.

Have you ever wondered what it's like to be a PhD student in the UCL Knowledge Lab?

Upgrade done.

Since enrolling as an MPhil/PhD full-time, distance learning, research student at University College London (UCL) way back (?) in June 2019, every day has been in service for this moment…the Mini Viva or Upgrade to full PhD status.

I have been brilliantly guided by my tutors, lecturers, administrators, colleagues, lab-mates, family and of course supervisors along this path and I feel well prepared for the moment at hand. Too, I feel relatively calm and eager to share my progress to date; however, I am more interested in learning and receiving guidance from my illustrious panel with regard to modifications, corrective measures and recommendations going forward.

In many respects, my primary supervisor, Prof Kaśka Porayksa-Pomsta, has all but telegraphed the primary concerns related to my proposed research from the very beginning; that is:

• My metamorphosis from entrepreneur to academic (researcher) is something that must be contended with, as the two camps are both decidedly different and must be respected.
• My desire to develop prototypes in favor of harvesting theoretical and computational underpinnings in support of an assistive technology must be well-tempered.
• The scope of my research is enough to fill multiple doctoral thesis and thus must be narrowed, and then narrowed again (and again, and perhaps again a few more times).

As such, both Kaśka and I fully expect the Upgrade Panel to quickly discover these point, hone in on them, and help me “tease out” those important concepts of my last year in hopes to convey my understanding, appreciation and preparation to complete my thesis within these boundaries and within the ascribed timeframe.

Over-engineering my responses

From the onset of my presentation, which Kaśka later reported was the most concise, comfortable and compelling she has heard me convey, I felt a level of authenticity from my panel. They too indicated that the slides well-attended to my rationale, methods and data collection and that my training, preparation and desire to contribute to academic knowledge was noteworthy.

The panels questions and comments were incredibly thought-provoking, so much so, that I had to ask for clarification on two separate occasions due, not to an error in listening-skills, but to a confusion about how to best address the answers to meet the query.

In one particular example, and largely because I had spent so much time preparing my defense relating to ontological, epistemological and theoretical positioning and frameworks, I almost over-engineered my response when a considerably more simple answer would have sufficed. I fear I may have tripped over my delivery in this section only (!), as I could feel my brain shifting from a considerably higher gear at tremendous RPM, into a considerably more comfortable transmission mode that allowed me to relax into the matter at hand.

I told you so…

And as we neared the apex of the defense, both panel members gently guided me to my state my resolve around the scope of the project. From the onset, I stated my appreciation for shifting from entrepreneurial to academic positioning, toward eschewing a randomized control trial of a prototype to a more theoretical/computational approach and to continually narrow the breadth of modalities to half a handful of study.

And this was the primary lesson…my understanding of the narrowing and how I would go about this was still, perhaps, not direct and concise enough (yet)! In addition to several poignant examples of how my design methods could be further simplified (e.g. considerations of Wizard of Oz methodology were brought to light), the permission for me to select one modality (borne perhaps of my currently concluded data gathering/research/PPI) might enable me to effectuate study of one type of stimuli (e.g. sonic, optic or interoceptive GSR)…but only one!

And with that, I nodded again to my supervisor who was (up until this point) silently taking notes, camera and microphone off, and–no doubt–wagging her finger at the camera knowing all the time that she had “told me so”.

Once I had finished acknowledging that I had been advised of this, Kaśka gently (magically!) appeared on camera with the widest of smile and stated the same. It was actually a very lovely and touching moment…one that I shall not forget…as it placed a cherry atop of the whipped cream of my now fully assembled and soon to be complete upgrade.

The next best thing…

And while I had been longing two carry this process out face-to-face in Bloomsbury, this would not be the case owing to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the end, and despite some of the technical glitches I had heard transpired from other friends and colleagues with their upgrades and presentations, I was grateful to have had this unique, online mini-viva. My panel was generous with their time, effort and genuine interest and I was pleased with the outcome.

That is: I passed!

Funny how in the entrepreneurial world, the words “passed” connote a pejorative meaning. I much rather prefer the academic version and am pleased to be jumping into the deep end now of scholarly work.

As Kaśka mentioned whilst we were awaiting the panel’s decision: “We will make a researcher out of you yet. I am quite proud of you!”

And that was, of course, music to my ears.

Leave a Reply 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.

• Copyright © 2018 UCL
• Freedom of Information
• Accessibility
• Privacy and Cookies
• Slavery statement
• Reflect policy

Please check your email to activate your account.

« Go back Accept

What Is the Viva?

• First Online: 16 September 2022

Cite this chapter

• Isabelle Butcher 3  

233 Accesses

An explanation as to what the viva exam is, what it is not, its purpose, a general overview of what it might involve, why it is an oral exam, the importance of conversation in the viva and the opportunities that can arise from your viva.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Isabelle Butcher

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Butcher, I. (2022). What Is the Viva?. In: How to Excel in Your Doctoral Viva. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10172-4_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10172-4_2

Published : 16 September 2022

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-10171-7

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-10172-4

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

UCLIC - UCL Interaction Centre

• Publications

UCL Interaction Centre

Drawing on the best scientific traditions in computer science and human sciences

Discover our MSc in Human-Computer Interaction

Photo by Elliott Reyna on Unsplash

Our students are an integral part of our research team

PhD Research Programme

UCLIC Research Seminar Series

Keeping up to date with current HCI thinking

Photo by Antenna on Unsplash

Our newsletter has just been published! Check it out

Photo by Giovanna Ceroni

Interaction Design, 6th edition

New edition now out!

UCLIC is directed by Professor Yvonne Rogers and is housed jointly between the Department of Computer Science and the Division of Psychology and Language Sciences. During the last two years it has grown to over 150 interdisciplinary researchers (including faculty staff, post docs and PhD students), working in a diversity of areas including ubiquitous computing, digital health, behavioural change, disability interactions, ageing and technology,  future and educational technologies, affect and emotion, in-the-wild studies and multisensory devices.

Funnelback feed: https://cms-feed.ucl.ac.uk/s/search.json?collection=drupal-brain-science... Double click the feed URL above to edit

Connect with us

London Review of Education

• 1 Editorial
• 3 Foreword: Assessment Literacy
• 5 Developing the foundations for dialogic feedback in order to better understand the 'learning gap' from a pupil's perspective
• 21 Examining the assessment literacy of external examiners
• 34 Supporting the development of assessment literacy of staff through institutional process change
• 42 Reflections on academics' assessment literacy
• 49 Streamlining verbal feedback: Reflection on a feedback research project in secondary schools
• 56 Ipsative Assessment: Motivation through marking progress , by Gwyneth Hughes
• 59 Excellence in University Assessment: Learning from award-winning practice , by David Carless
• 62 Portal Pedagogy: From interdisciplinarity and internationalization to transdisciplinarity and transnationalization
• 79 Education in Thailand: When economic growth is no longer enough
• 92 Examining the doctoral viva: Perspectives from a sample of UK academics
• 106 The Colour of Class: The educational strategies of the Black middle classes , by Nicola Rollock, David Gillborn, Carol Vincent, and Stephen J. Ball
• Record : found
• Abstract : found
• Article : found

Examining the doctoral viva: Perspectives from a sample of UK academics

• Download PDF
• Review article
• Invite someone to review

Abstract

Author and article information , comment on this article.