Abstract
The supervision of doctoral theses remains one of the few areas of academic activity in which there is little regulation. While opposing an extension of bureaucratic rigidity to the process, this article, based upon findings from various conferences and discussions, indicates that ‘ad hocery’ is not always beneficial to the supervisor or doctoral student. The absence of guidance to the student means that the climax of the PhD process – the oral examination – is often shrouded in unnecessary mystery.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
