phd defence tu delft

• X (Twitter)

The Dutch PhD defence is a ceremony, not an examination

In the Netherlands, PhD candidates defend their dissertations during a traditional public ceremony. Although the event’s festive character should be valued, PhD candidates need to be exposed to more public criticism, according to some foreign professors at TU Delft.

/strong>

‘Frightening and thoroughly intimidating,’ is how Professor Marisa Carmona, born and raised in Chili, describes her PhD examination. She vividly remembers her dissertation defence in 1993, as a formal occasion dominated by the traditionally dressed examination committee. Carmona, who works at the faculty of Architecture, found it frustrating to have to explain so many ‘irrelevant’ issues, but believes her dissatisfaction is not unusual: ‘Many of my colleagues refuse to discuss their PhD exams’.

Carmona’s PhD defence took place in Delft and, besides being in English, was very much a typical Dutch ceremony. Family, friends and colleagues had gathered in one of the Aula’s formal halls and saw the pedel (master of ceremony) lead the defence committee into the room. After an hour of questions and answers, chaired by the rector magnificus, the pedel announced ‘hora est’ and the procession % rector, advisor and four other committee members % retreated for private consultation.

Nervously awaiting their return, Carmona certainly looked the part, wearing a beautiful old hat and a robe she’d made especially for the occasion. Approximately fifteen minutes later she was told she had passed and immediately received her certificate. The official ceremony was followed by a cup of coffee and immense relief.

Bill Melody, professor at the Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, believes the Dutch Ph.D. defence is ‘a ceremony, not an examination’ and this ‘demonstration of competence’ does not measure up to the ordeal North American students must endure. In the U.S.A. and his native Canada, a defence is a public event that takes place in a seminar room or lecture hall, where, following a thirty-minute introduction, members of the exam committee, colleagues and friends are invited to ask questions. This ‘public’ defence, however, is followed by a private defence behind closed doors, when examiners air their detailed criticisms of the dissertation during a rigorous examination, which can last anywhere from an hour to a day.

An ‘unblemished’ pass is rare; usually a candidate passes subject to certain revisions. In the worst case, a candidate must schedule a second defence, which is unthinkable in the Netherlands, where candidates probably wouldn’t even fail ‘if they were dumbstruck’. Moreover, the questions that will be asked are sometimes even given to the students in advance.

Melody would be ‘mortally embarrassed’ if one of his North American students needed a second defence, because ‘to be allowed to defend is the most important quality criterion. A bad dissertation reflects very badly on the student’s supervisor’.

Once a student has made the necessary changes and collected the relevant signatures, officially passing a North American PhD exam is, in terms of pomp and ceremony, a non-event. However, the yearly formal graduation ceremony compensates for the lack of festivities surrounding the PhD defence. Thousands of students graduate during this ceremony. Wearing ceremonial gowns, PhD graduates are called up on stage to accept their degrees. Melody: ‘The Dutch ceremony is definitely more personal’ the combination of ceremony and examination is a reflection of the different philosophies.’

Professor Paddy French decided to apply for a PhD course at Southampton University because, as a MSc in Electronics, his best career prospects were in the bomb building industry, which didn’t appeal to him. Half way through his PhD course, he had to defend a mini-thesis, which was given by his supervisor and one internaldepartment examiner. However, this examiner was not supposed to know the candidate too well, but in French’s case, they were well acquainted: ‘Before the defence he said to me, ‘for what I’m about to do’ please don’t take it personally”. The mini-defence lasted one hour and was extremely tough, but his internal examiner was pleased, explaining that the real defence couldn’t possibly be more difficult.

French’s final defence was a private occasion lacking all ceremony and merely involving three examiners, who asked ‘very reasonable’ questions for one hour. French celebrated by buying his friends Guinness at the local pub.

Graduation ceremonies in the UK are similar to those in the United States. French smiles as he recalls wearing a suit and a fancy blue and purple toga, despite the hot June sunshine and his reputation as a ‘scruffy sod’ who loathed pompous display: ‘Like the other PhD graduates, I was invited on the stage to have the vice-chancellor wrap his hands around mine’. His certificate arrived in the post a few days later.

According to Professor Giampiero Berrogi, from Italy, who works at the Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, other European PhD defences are similar, although Dutch examination committees are larger. Swiss and German committees are usually comprised of one promoter and one or two additional readers, and the process isn’t as ceremonious.

Berrogi believes that the best aspects of the European and US systems should be combined: ‘Somewhere in the defence process here, more scholarly challenges are needed’. The PhD candidate should be exposed to more public criticism, but the event shouldn’t lose its festive character. Melody shares this view, but advises students to ‘decide on your subject first, find out who the experts in the field are, and then select a university that links you to the pioneers at the frontier.’ PhD defence systems vary throughout the world, but they should never influence a PhD candidate’s choice of institution.

Do you have a question or comment about this article?

TU Delft number one university on sustainability ranking

New bill on internationalisation: ‘the netherlands relies on knowledge’, ‘drink, rinse, dry and back in the bag’: as of monday, this can be done on campus.

Comments are closed.

• Student life

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

A PhD defense at TU Delft

• January 18, 2011
• evalantsoght_uw8lmy
• Uncategorized
• 11 Comments

Yesterday, I attended a PhD defense for the very first time in Delft. One of my colleagues graduated, and so I was able to see how this goes and works in the Netherlands.

The defense started at 2:30pm with a presentation . That presentation was held for the audience, in a rather light style and directed to the friends and family of the PhD candidate. At that time, the committee was not in the room yet. The presentation itself lasted about 15 to 20 minutes, after which the PhD candidate took aside the laptop and presenting material.

At 3:00 pm sharp, the beadle walked in, followed by the committee. The beadle also asked everyone to stand up before the committee walked in. Professors of the committee were dressed with their cap and gown. After the committee was seated, the beadle tapped the floor with her ceremonial stick, and left the room. The (replacer of the) rector magnificus then opened the defense by ticking with a hammer. She then asked the PhD candidate and her two paranymphs to come up to the front. After this, the first member of the committee is allowed to ask questions. Even though the defense is held in English, the official ways of addressing the PhD candidate (“waarde promovenda”) and the member of the committee are kept in Dutch. When questioning, the committee member wears his cap. Depending on the distance the committee member has traveled, he gets a certain amount of time alloted for asking questions regarding the PhD thesis, the propositions and the background of all this. At yesterday’s defense, the first professor questioning was coming from Germany, and therefore he was allowed to question for 12 minutes. This time was strictly watched by the replacer of the rector magnificus. The last two persons to question the PhD candidate were the copromotor and promotor.

After exactly one hour, at 4:00 pm sharp. The beadle walked in again, and marked the hour with the ceremonial stick and the words “hora est”. After this, the beadle led away the committee, while the audience was asked again to all stand up.

At 4:15pm, the committee members came back, holding a diploma. The replacer of the rector magnificus and the promotor then read out the ceremonial text in which the PhD candidate is given the title of Doctor , with all the rights associated to this title. Right after this, the promotor read out the Laudatio, a speech he prepared to give at the end of the ceremony.

After the official part, a reception at the university was given. During this reception, everyone had the chance to shake hands with the new Doctor (and her husband). The committee was the first to shake hands (and no one is allowed to go and shake hands before them). At 6:00 pm, the entire group of 60 people moved to a restaurant, where a dinner was arranged.

Reverb10 – Day 3: Moment

December 3 – Moment.Pick one moment during which you felt…

PhD Talk for AcademicTransfer: How I manage my papers in progress

This post is part of the series PhD Talk for…

Musical instruments for Ecuador

Dear readers,I usually don't use my blog as a platform…

Wow, that is incredibly formal. Did you ever attend a defense while you were at Georgia Tech? I'm thankful ours are much more casual after reading this!

I had heard it would be formal – I just didn't expect it to be medieval…Unfortunately, I never went to a defense at Georgia Tech. I plan om coming over for Andres' defense though.

It's not just Delft doing it in this style. Utrecht University – my former work place – does as well, and I'm sure most other Dutch uni's make a spectacle of things like this. Tradition, I suppose?

Thanks, Eva for posting what a defense of a dissertation looks like in Europe. It was interesting to read. As an American, I admit to being ignorant about what other doctoral programs are doing around the world. I also need to read peer-review journals from your part of the world as well. As always, I appreciate the gems you post.

It's even different between all the dutch universities and sometimes even between faculties, as far as I've witnessed defenses. At the University of Twente you get 12 minutes max. for the so called \”lekenpraatje\” or as I'd say in english \”a presention for the laymen\”, after which the candidate and his (optional) paranymphs take a seat with the audience. The same procedure with the beadle and the committee then takes places.The actual defense then lasts 45 minutes (which is long enough I guess!), and it's not at all common that the promotor or co-promotor (if there is one) get time to ask questions. There's neither a strict amount of time for visitors to ask their questions. The language can be either english or dutch, but if you use english, it's also \”Highly learned opponent….\” When the beadle returns, he doesn't use \”Hora est\” in Twente. Which I think is a shame.

Thanks for your addition!

It was a nice read Eva. I have a question though;what if the committee member is not satisfied with the discussion in such short time? How can one \”defend\” in just one hour: isn't it too short? Or is the actual defense already finished and what you described is only a formal conclusion?

It is indeed more the conclusion of a longer process. By the time you defend your dissertation in the Netherlands, you will already have your dissertation finished, approved by your committee and published. The hard part is thus more in the writing up.

That was certainly a different scene from what the traditional PhD thesis defense that you see and hear from other people. And it quite amazing to hear how they did it. Well, I think the most amazing time then was that when the promoter and the replacer of the rector magnificus read out the ceremonial text to the candidate.

Thanks for this post. It helps very much in terms of explaining to my family abroad what my defense will be like here.

Good luck – and remember, it's your day, and your party so enjoy it!

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.

• previous post: A few thoughts on the video “Mindfulness with Jon Kabat-Zinn”
• next post: The silent creativity killer: lack of sleep
• Research and Publications
• Guest Posts

Free Templates for your Research

Sign up here to get access to worksheets for your research that help you have more efficient meetings, reflect on your work, and plan your month. Suitable for anyone from Master’s thesis students to full professors!

PhD defence Roman Barth (CD Lab)

"Exploring SMC motor proteins and how to stop them"

Genetic information encoded in the DNA sequences is maintained, replicated, and transcribed across the tree of life. Organisms evolved multiple hierarchical layers of chromosome organization which ensure that DNA can be contained but also processed within individual cells. This thesis focuses on SMC (Structural Maintenance of Chromosomes) protein complexes, an evolutionarily conserved family of motor proteins that hold sister chromatids together and fold genomes throughout the cell cycle by DNA loop extrusion. These complexes play a key role in a variety of functions in the packaging and regulation of chromosomes, and they have been intensely studied in recent years. Despite their importance, the detailed molecular mechanism for DNA loop extrusion by SMC complexes remains unresolved. In this thesis, we utilized single-molecule fluorescence and magnetic tweezers to study the intricacies of DNA loop extrusion by SMC complexes in a controlled in vitro environment. We observed, described, and analyzed the behaviour of SMCs which yielded detailed yet important contributions to the resolution of the DNA loop extrusion mechanism as well as to the physiological impact on genome structure. In particular, we observed that large DNA-tethered roadblocks cannot stall loop extrusion efficiently and concluded that DNA loop extrusion can occur in a non-topological manner. In contrast, we found that a small DNA-binding protein, CCCTC-binding factor (CTCF) stalls cohesin through direct protein-protein interactions with cohesin’s N-terminal region. Furthermore, we could reconcile previous results that suggested different loop extrusion mechanisms for different members of the SMC protein family. We demonstrated that all eukaryotic SMCs extrude DNA asymmetrically, i.e. only from one side at a time, and that frequent direction switches yield the previously observed ‘symmetric’ loop extrusion. Furthermore, we showed that DNA supercoiling is intimately linked to loop extrusion for all eukaryotic SMC complexes, postulating a common DNA loop extrusion mechanism.

(Preceding the defence Roman will give a short presentation at 12.00)

Promotor : Cees Dekker

Deel deze pagina: