what happens when you fail a dissertation defense?
September 11, 2013 10:40 PM Subscribe
i got to thinking this question after the recent firing Elizabeth O'Bagy from her think tank gig.
O'Bagy had written a wall street journal op-ed that was cited by both Kerry and McCain in talks about possible intervention in Syria.
Ms. Bagy's employer fired her for falsely representing that she had a Ph.D, but it seems more complicated than that.
from the Politico Article linked above:
"O’Bagy told POLITICO in an interview Monday that she had submitted and defended her dissertation and was waiting for Georgetown University to confer her degree. O’Bagy said she was in a dual master’s and doctorate program at Georgetown.
"O’Bagy started at the institute as an unpaid intern and was pulled into their work on Syria when a researcher needed a fluent Arabic speaker, which transformed her internship into a much longer gig. Kagan hired O’Bagy as an analyst around August or September 2012, and said her understanding was that O’Bagy was working toward her Ph.D. at Georgetown.
"Kagan originally gave May of this year as a rough estimate of when O’Bagy’s biography on the ISW site was updated to state she had obtained her Ph.D. But the internet archive the Wayback Machine captured a version of O’Bagy’s biography page that listed her as in a joint Master’s/Ph.D. program as of June 23. Another organization O’Bagy was affiliated with, the Syrian Emergency Task Force, listed her as Dr. O’Bagy on May 13, however.
"According to Kagan, O’Bagy in May led her to believe she had successfully defended her dissertation when she had actually failed her defense."
It seems to me that Ms. O'Bagy was enrolled in thus dual MA/PhD program, the MA came through but the PhD didn't, and in an extremely unwise move she either falsely represented that she had obtained the PhD, or she let her employer assume that she had, without correcting the mistake.
So back to my question: if you fail to defend your dissertation, are you just booted out of the program? or do you get another go? are these dual MA/PhD programs common, and are they structured in a way that takes into consideration the possibility that you might not obtain the PhD? For instance, would Georgetown have given Ms. O'Bagy more time or another chance to properly defend her dissertation, if the situation warranted it.
from the Politico Article linked above:
"O’Bagy told POLITICO in an interview Monday that she had submitted and defended her dissertation and was waiting for Georgetown University to confer her degree. O’Bagy said she was in a dual master’s and doctorate program at Georgetown.
"O’Bagy started at the institute as an unpaid intern and was pulled into their work on Syria when a researcher needed a fluent Arabic speaker, which transformed her internship into a much longer gig. Kagan hired O’Bagy as an analyst around August or September 2012, and said her understanding was that O’Bagy was working toward her Ph.D. at Georgetown.
"Kagan originally gave May of this year as a rough estimate of when O’Bagy’s biography on the ISW site was updated to state she had obtained her Ph.D. But the internet archive the Wayback Machine captured a version of O’Bagy’s biography page that listed her as in a joint Master’s/Ph.D. program as of June 23. Another organization O’Bagy was affiliated with, the Syrian Emergency Task Force, listed her as Dr. O’Bagy on May 13, however.
"According to Kagan, O’Bagy in May led her to believe she had successfully defended her dissertation when she had actually failed her defense."
It seems to me that Ms. O'Bagy was enrolled in thus dual MA/PhD program, the MA came through but the PhD didn't, and in an extremely unwise move she either falsely represented that she had obtained the PhD, or she let her employer assume that she had, without correcting the mistake.
So back to my question: if you fail to defend your dissertation, are you just booted out of the program? or do you get another go? are these dual MA/PhD programs common, and are they structured in a way that takes into consideration the possibility that you might not obtain the PhD? For instance, would Georgetown have given Ms. O'Bagy more time or another chance to properly defend her dissertation, if the situation warranted it.
Best answer: This is not a direct answer, but from the (many) PhD students I've known, it seems like it's very unusual to fail your defense. Your advisor will usually not let you get to the defense if you're not ready for it, not least because it reflects poorly on them. I've known people who delayed their defenses for this reason.
OTOH, it's fairly common for people who are not going to get a PhD for whatever reason to leave with a Master instead. Sometimes they've already gotten it before entering the ABD (all but dissertation) phase, and sometimes they have to do some extra work to get it.
posted by lunasol at 10:54 PM on September 11, 2013 [11 favorites]
OTOH, it's fairly common for people who are not going to get a PhD for whatever reason to leave with a Master instead. Sometimes they've already gotten it before entering the ABD (all but dissertation) phase, and sometimes they have to do some extra work to get it.
posted by lunasol at 10:54 PM on September 11, 2013 [11 favorites]
Best answer: At some universities, getting an MA is exactly what happens when you fail your PhD defence. It's like the consolation prize. (Well, also because the dissertation itself is what differentiates an MA from a PhD so the MA is like a certification for all the coursework and shorter pieces of writing you successfully completed already.)
But it is really uncommon to outright fail a defence. Usually your advisor would just pressure you not to defend, or to delay until you are ready.
A friend of mine who got a PhD in the US system (our Australian system is quite different) took three years longer than expected to get her PhD. She was about ready to defend three years ago, and was given a postdoc under that assumption, but there were some problems with her thesis and she and her advisor kept deciding they needed to keep delaying the defence and have her rewrite stuff. She ended up completing the postdoc and the PhD simultaneously (which really should never happen). I can imagine many similar circumstances where part way through the new job there would suddenly be a shitstorm because she got the job under the incorrect assumption that the PhD was in the bag, yet she still wasn't credentialed appropriately several years in.
posted by lollusc at 10:59 PM on September 11, 2013
But it is really uncommon to outright fail a defence. Usually your advisor would just pressure you not to defend, or to delay until you are ready.
A friend of mine who got a PhD in the US system (our Australian system is quite different) took three years longer than expected to get her PhD. She was about ready to defend three years ago, and was given a postdoc under that assumption, but there were some problems with her thesis and she and her advisor kept deciding they needed to keep delaying the defence and have her rewrite stuff. She ended up completing the postdoc and the PhD simultaneously (which really should never happen). I can imagine many similar circumstances where part way through the new job there would suddenly be a shitstorm because she got the job under the incorrect assumption that the PhD was in the bag, yet she still wasn't credentialed appropriately several years in.
posted by lollusc at 10:59 PM on September 11, 2013
Best answer: Oh, and with the diss defense... For the most part, an advisor won't let you go to the defense if it isn't passable.
You go in, the committee critiques it and almost always revisions
Are given rather than a hard fail.
At the end of defense the committee signs a paper that you passed (this paper is in everyone's printed diss). Sometimes if there are a lot of revisions a committee member won't sign until revisions are made.
Then you cheer for yourself and submit a digital and a paper copy to the graduate school who goes through a process of submitting it to proquest and stuff.
At my u it took a few months to process. If you had a job that required proof of a PhD, the registrar or dean would write a letter on your behalf.
So it is possible that she was waiting for Georgetown to confer her degree, but for all practical purposes once you have those signatures you're ethically okay to call yourself Doctor.
So that part sounds Iffy too.
posted by k8t at 10:59 PM on September 11, 2013 [2 favorites]
You go in, the committee critiques it and almost always revisions
Are given rather than a hard fail.
At the end of defense the committee signs a paper that you passed (this paper is in everyone's printed diss). Sometimes if there are a lot of revisions a committee member won't sign until revisions are made.
Then you cheer for yourself and submit a digital and a paper copy to the graduate school who goes through a process of submitting it to proquest and stuff.
At my u it took a few months to process. If you had a job that required proof of a PhD, the registrar or dean would write a letter on your behalf.
So it is possible that she was waiting for Georgetown to confer her degree, but for all practical purposes once you have those signatures you're ethically okay to call yourself Doctor.
So that part sounds Iffy too.
posted by k8t at 10:59 PM on September 11, 2013 [2 favorites]
She also graduated undergrad in 2009. If she went right into the program she could have only done 3 years of work toward her PhD. Not very possible for her to be done with her dissertation after 3 years, especially assuming there was fieldwork involved. Also her topic of female militants - getting ethics board approval would be tough in such a short period of time.
posted by k8t at 11:08 PM on September 11, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by k8t at 11:08 PM on September 11, 2013 [2 favorites]
It might have been that she sort of forced her advisor's hand by accepting a job way too early. Usually there's a process of negotiating the timeline leading up to the defense, and while you can speed it up somewhat by having some kind of "I have a job and need to be leaving on XX/XX" meeting, that can also backfire if you're not already very close to a completed, approved dissertation. The distinction is really between "incomplete" and "finished" more than it is between "approved" and "not approved," unless the scholarship is really questionable and it's clear the student is not doing work at the level s/he needs to. The precise rules vary by department, though.
I've heard of situations similar to the one lollusc describes in cases where people did their Ph.D. in the UK or Australia, which have very strict and very short timetables. But like she said, it's very rare and has the potential to explode into a BFD if people are not on the same page about what's going on. In America you usually don't have those hard limits on length, which makes the situation described in the post particularly weird.
posted by en forme de poire at 1:06 AM on September 12, 2013
I've heard of situations similar to the one lollusc describes in cases where people did their Ph.D. in the UK or Australia, which have very strict and very short timetables. But like she said, it's very rare and has the potential to explode into a BFD if people are not on the same page about what's going on. In America you usually don't have those hard limits on length, which makes the situation described in the post particularly weird.
posted by en forme de poire at 1:06 AM on September 12, 2013
There may be some weird wording going on here with "failed" meaning "you did not pass (but with major revisions you probably would)." There are also a lot of grad students who are technically "not enrolled" because they are not full time anymore or because they have exhausted the maximum period of time the University allows, but who are still working on their theses.
Without talking to her advisor it's sort of hard to get a sense of what exactly happened. It does sound fishy, though, I'm trying to be charitable here.
posted by en forme de poire at 1:09 AM on September 12, 2013
Without talking to her advisor it's sort of hard to get a sense of what exactly happened. It does sound fishy, though, I'm trying to be charitable here.
posted by en forme de poire at 1:09 AM on September 12, 2013
Best answer: No competent PhD adviser allows a defense to go forward if there is any reason to doubt success. I've advised 16 PhD dissertations and been on dozens of defense committees. I've never seen a fail, although I've seen it come close.
posted by spitbull at 1:25 AM on September 12, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by spitbull at 1:25 AM on September 12, 2013 [2 favorites]
I saw some people asked to revise in the light of the defense. In fact, it was common. But nearly everyone eventually passed.
posted by professor plum with a rope at 2:03 AM on September 12, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by professor plum with a rope at 2:03 AM on September 12, 2013 [2 favorites]
Here in Sweden (humanities) the various stages of writing your PhD are not usually as closely controlled as in US universities (usually you take a few courses, attend to some literature seminars, have one or two supervisors for the writing, and you present your stuff a few times in seminars; otherwise you just try to get your research done and written up. So, for instance, there is no commission throughout the process to watch your progress and quality, etc.).
This custom could be risky, if toward the end of the period it transpires that your work isn't good enough. Nevertheless, the actual fail rate on PhDs is low over here: it's not in the institution's interest to let people fail, and the programs usually are meant to help people revise as much as necessary to pass. One of the novelties in my old institution a few years back was a semi-official "pre defense" at which obvious weaknesses were to be caught and corrected.
That being said, I did ask my supervisor at a certain point, and he said that he had seen people fail.
So what happens if you fail a PhD defense? You go home without a PhD.
posted by Namlit at 3:28 AM on September 12, 2013
This custom could be risky, if toward the end of the period it transpires that your work isn't good enough. Nevertheless, the actual fail rate on PhDs is low over here: it's not in the institution's interest to let people fail, and the programs usually are meant to help people revise as much as necessary to pass. One of the novelties in my old institution a few years back was a semi-official "pre defense" at which obvious weaknesses were to be caught and corrected.
That being said, I did ask my supervisor at a certain point, and he said that he had seen people fail.
So what happens if you fail a PhD defense? You go home without a PhD.
posted by Namlit at 3:28 AM on September 12, 2013
Best answer: I was on a committee where the student did not pass. (Yes, the comments about the competence of the advisor above are fair; I wish I could post this comment anonymously.) We (the committee) have given the student a few more months to get his work and understanding above the bar. That said, this was done on an ad hoc basis since failed defenses are so rare that we didn't have a policy for it.
posted by JMOZ at 4:01 AM on September 12, 2013
posted by JMOZ at 4:01 AM on September 12, 2013
Best answer: After my defense, my committee was unsatisfied asked me to do another semester worth of experiments before they would sign off on it. The point where they would refuse to allow you to continue your program and ease you out with a Master's degree is the Qualifying Exams. Once you make it past that point, generally the only thing stopping you from finishing your PhD is your own personal motivation and the availability of funding.
posted by deanc at 4:07 AM on September 12, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by deanc at 4:07 AM on September 12, 2013 [2 favorites]
There is also an unofficial designation of "ABD," which means, "All But Dissertation," and what that means is the student has, up until that point, done everything but write or complete the dissertation part of the PhD program.
It's completely unofficial, and it usually implies that the dissertation will be completed and will be completed soon.
People will also put down under education on a resume something like:
PH.D, area of study, such and such university, dissertation information, exp. 2014 --- meaning that they are on track to complete their PhD within the 2014 year. This is very common for the academic marketplace.
She very well may have listed one of these on her resumes, too, and she very well may not have completed her PhD while once having listed it in an appropriate manner for the stage she was in.
I would think, however, that someone at a think tank would have spotted this or would have followed up on her PhD completion if necessary. Either way, one of these wouldn't have been a misrepresentation at the time she submitted her resume. But if she didn't eventually complete the Ph.D, that could very well have been a problem.
posted by zizzle at 4:42 AM on September 12, 2013
It's completely unofficial, and it usually implies that the dissertation will be completed and will be completed soon.
People will also put down under education on a resume something like:
PH.D, area of study, such and such university, dissertation information, exp. 2014 --- meaning that they are on track to complete their PhD within the 2014 year. This is very common for the academic marketplace.
She very well may have listed one of these on her resumes, too, and she very well may not have completed her PhD while once having listed it in an appropriate manner for the stage she was in.
I would think, however, that someone at a think tank would have spotted this or would have followed up on her PhD completion if necessary. Either way, one of these wouldn't have been a misrepresentation at the time she submitted her resume. But if she didn't eventually complete the Ph.D, that could very well have been a problem.
posted by zizzle at 4:42 AM on September 12, 2013
I was in an MS/PhD program at an Ivy. I did three years worth of coursework, passed some written and oral exams, whereupon the gave me the MS. After that it was pretty much all dissertation, and one more course one of my committee members thought I needed. Nobody made it through the MS/PhD program in fewer than five years. And nobody that I knew was allowed to reach the point of defending their dissertation unless it was clear they were ready to defend it adequately. If this woman was enrolled in such a program she probably didn't make it that far, she didn't fail her defense, she never produced a dissertation to defend.
posted by mareli at 7:19 AM on September 12, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by mareli at 7:19 AM on September 12, 2013 [2 favorites]
Best answer: Since I work with a graduate student society, I could not resist looking up the Georgetown rules for this.
1. Before the defense the committee must all sign off on a defense review where each states whether they believe the dissertation was ready to defend. Depending on the field of study you need a majority, or higher number, or even unanimous to proceed to defend.
2. After your defense, committee members sign off on a form at the defense, OR, if off campus and attending remotely send notice to the university via email, stating the defense was successful. The examiners have the option of Fail, Pass, or Distinction.
The specifics at governed by the department. For example,
The graduate student handbook for Physics at Georgetown states:
"Immediately following the defense, the thesis committee holds a closed meeting to decide whether the defense was successful. Passing the dissertation defense requires the approval of all or all but one of the committee members. A student who does not pass the defense on the first try is allowed a second attempt, which must be made within three months of the first attempt. Students failing the dissertation defense for the second time will be dismissed from the Ph.D. program."
The student would know immediately after the defense that they had passed, but the university would not acknowledge it until all the forms are finished, and then probably not until after it is ratified for convocation, when the degrees are conferred.
This is somewhat different from my university, where you can pass, pass with minor revisions, pass with major revisions, or fail. If passing with revisions you must resubmit with revisions until the committee is satisfied... so a pass, but not a completion, which could lead to the result where you report you have successfully defended, but then don't graduate for a few more terms as you are working full time while doing final revisions.
And at Georgetown, you could pass, but then not have your degree officially until the next convocation.
Certainly if she was wronged this is a problem that could be resolve with a letter from a dissertation committee to the employer, I would think.
posted by chapps at 8:07 AM on September 12, 2013 [1 favorite]
1. Before the defense the committee must all sign off on a defense review where each states whether they believe the dissertation was ready to defend. Depending on the field of study you need a majority, or higher number, or even unanimous to proceed to defend.
2. After your defense, committee members sign off on a form at the defense, OR, if off campus and attending remotely send notice to the university via email, stating the defense was successful. The examiners have the option of Fail, Pass, or Distinction.
The specifics at governed by the department. For example,
The graduate student handbook for Physics at Georgetown states:
"Immediately following the defense, the thesis committee holds a closed meeting to decide whether the defense was successful. Passing the dissertation defense requires the approval of all or all but one of the committee members. A student who does not pass the defense on the first try is allowed a second attempt, which must be made within three months of the first attempt. Students failing the dissertation defense for the second time will be dismissed from the Ph.D. program."
The student would know immediately after the defense that they had passed, but the university would not acknowledge it until all the forms are finished, and then probably not until after it is ratified for convocation, when the degrees are conferred.
This is somewhat different from my university, where you can pass, pass with minor revisions, pass with major revisions, or fail. If passing with revisions you must resubmit with revisions until the committee is satisfied... so a pass, but not a completion, which could lead to the result where you report you have successfully defended, but then don't graduate for a few more terms as you are working full time while doing final revisions.
And at Georgetown, you could pass, but then not have your degree officially until the next convocation.
Certainly if she was wronged this is a problem that could be resolve with a letter from a dissertation committee to the employer, I would think.
posted by chapps at 8:07 AM on September 12, 2013 [1 favorite]
It is relevant to several answers here and the original question that Ms. O'Bagy appears to have made up her enrollment in the PhD program entirely. So she was not ABD or awaiting a defense. The premise is incorrect.
posted by spitbull at 4:34 PM on September 12, 2013
posted by spitbull at 4:34 PM on September 12, 2013
Response by poster: ok, so it's likely a matter of false representation, or perhaps rushing the dissertation date as she already had the job. good to know the nuances, it seems fair that your adviser won't let you go forward if you're not truly ready, as opposed to being in a situation where you thought things were going smoothly then the rug gets pulled out. still an extremely unfortunate situation to be in, whatever its cause.
posted by camdan at 6:21 PM on September 12, 2013
posted by camdan at 6:21 PM on September 12, 2013
Best answer: she was never even in a phd program
O’Bagy’s latest admission, that she was never a Ph.D. student in any way, comes after a series of articles in which O’Bagy claimed, falsely, that she was enrolled in the joint MA/Ph.D. program. Kim Kagan, the president of ISW, told The Daily Beast that when she made the decision to fire O’Bagy, she was still under the impression O’Bagy’s deception was solely about defending her Ph.D. dissertation. Only after dismissing her did Kagan learn from Georgetown that O’Bagy had never been enrolled in the joint MA/Ph.D. program in the first place.posted by wildflower at 2:44 AM on September 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
This thread is closed to new comments.
1.5ish years of courses
Write MA thesis proposal, defend proposal, write MA thesis, defend thesis
(In my grad school you then immediately move to PhD courses but it is also common to reapply)
Take 2ish more years of courses
Take some sort of qualifying or comprehensive exam (in some programs many fail at this stage...)
If pass, ABD or candidate status
Then write dissertation proposal, defend proposal, write dissertation, defend dissertation, PhD!
At all these stages there is a possibility of failing or being encouraged to leave.
But having read the think progress piece, it looks like she merely did an MA and was passing it off as a PhD. Her think tank hired her after her first year of her MA. And the timeline doesn't add up.
No one in the department and specifically her supposed advisor didn't know her.
Disclaimer : I am a PhD, I taught at Georgetown but not in that department.
And of course one can be a smart analyst without a PhD. She was dumb to try to pull this off.
posted by k8t at 10:54 PM on September 11, 2013 [1 favorite]