This page in Swedish

Information for external reviewers, members of the examining committee and chairpersons at the public defence

This page provides general information about the public defence and the duties of the external reviewer, the examining committee and the chairperson.

Introduction

In Sweden, the public defence of a doctoral thesis is an academic event and normally the last port of call for the doctoral student. If successful in this final examination, as well as in the other parts of the programme, the student will be awarded the doctoral degree. The defence takes the form of a public discussion between the external reviewer and the author of the thesis.

The thesis, which is the object of the examination, is the result of a four-year doctoral programme consisting of supervised research and advanced course-based studies. The thesis may be a monograph or a compilation thesis consisting of several constituent papers.

As the defence is a public event, the audience normally consists of colleagues, researchers, students, friends and family of the author.

Participants

External reviewer (Sw. opponent) – the person appointed to review and publicly discuss the doctoral thesis. The task of the external reviewer is to review the research work, not to examine or test the author’s knowledge.

Doctoral student/author of the thesis (Sw. doktorand/respondent) – the doctoral student defending the thesis.

Chair of the defence (Sw. disputationsordförande) – the moderator of the public defence event, responsible for opening and closing the event.

Supervisor (Sw. handledare)

Examining committee (Sw. betygsnämnd) – consists of three to five persons appointed by Örebro University. Their duty is to determine whether the oral presentation and the defence, in addition to the written thesis, are of a satisfactory scholarly standard. The examining committee determines the grade, either pass or fail, by voting.

Chair of the examining committee (Sw. betygsnämndens ordförande) – one of the members of the examining committee is appointed to chair the meeting.

Before the public defence

The thesis is normally sent to the external reviewer, the members of the examining committee (including alternate members) and the chairperson of the defence no later than on the same day as the announcement of the thesis (spikning). The external reviewer may, if they wish, contact the respondent to obtain the thesis in advance (for example as proof copy), and to access any source material or original data on which the thesis is based.

The public defence

The public defence of doctoral theses at Örebro University normally follows a certain procedure, as outlined below. Within some disciplines however, alternative procedures may apply.

The chairperson of the defence opens the event and extends a welcome to those attending. The respondent, the thesis title, the external reviewer and the members of the examining committee are then introduced. The chairperson also accounts for the sequence of events during the defence.
The respondent is given the opportunity to account for, and comment on, any corrections to and misprints in the thesis.
Within the humanities and social sciences disciplines: the floor is normally given to the external reviewer who provides a summary (max. 30 min.) of the content of the thesis. After the respondent has been given the opportunity to respond, a discussion opens between the two in which the external reviewer presents any queries and comments concerning method and findings. The respondent is expected to give clear answers to the external reviewer’s questions.
Within the medical, science and technology disciplines: the respondent normally opens with a presentation of their thesis. Within medicine, the external reviewer normally offers a summarised presentation of the subject field of the thesis before the respondent gives their presentation. Then a discussion follows in which the external reviewer presents any queries and comments concerning method and findings. The respondent is expected to give clear answers to the external reviewer’s questions.
After this, the floor is declared open, at which point the members of the examining committee and the audience may ask questions, in the order determined by the chairperson. The respondent shall be given the opportunity to respond to each contribution to the discussion.
The chairperson thanks all those taking part and declares the public defence closed.

Immediately after the public defence, the examining committee convenes and determines the grade.

Before the public defence

the external reviewer shall critically review the entire thesis and prepare their contributions to the discussion and examination.
the external reviewer is obliged to report any suspicion of research misconduct to the Records Office (Registrator) at Örebro University.
the external examiner is obliged to report any circumstances that may constitute a conflict of interest and that have not already been identified prior to the decision to hold the defence. For information on conflicts of interest, see section 5 in Guidelines for appointing external reviewers, examining committees and chairpersons for the public defence of doctoral theses.

During the public defence

the external reviewer shall, in addition to what is mentioned in the information above, critically discuss the thesis, emphasising core findings and discussing its content with the respondent.

If an alternate member of the examining committee is called in, that person shall be regarded as a regular member of the examining committee. If, on the other hand, the alternate member does not need to step in as a member of the examining committee, the alternate member shall neither take part in any decisions concerning the thesis nor participate in the examining committee’s meeting.

Before the public defence

the members of the examining committee are obliged to report any suspicion of research misconduct to the Records Office (Registrator) at Örebro University.
the members of the examining committee are obliged to report any circumstances that may constitute a conflict of interest and that have not already been identified prior to the decision to hold the defence. For information on conflicts of interest, see section 5 in Guidelines for appointing external reviewers, examining committees and chairpersons for the public defence of doctoral theses.

During the public defence

the members of the examining committee shall, once the floor has been declared open by the chairperson, ask the respondent questions of a critical nature. The questions shall primarily address areas and aspects which were not brought up in the discussion between the external reviewer and the respondent.

After the public defence

the members of the examining committee convene after the defence and appoint a chairperson (please note that this should be one of the three or five committee members).
the examining committee meeting shall be held in two parts. The first part shall involve the gathering of information from the external reviewer and supervisors. The second part shall be reserved for the examining committee’s separate deliberations and decision. The external reviewer and all supervisors have the right to attend and speak at the meeting, however, only during the first part of the meeting.
the examining committee shall determine the grade of the thesis. When determining the grade, the content of the thesis as well as the respondent’s defence thereof shall be considered. Either of the grades Pass or Fail shall be used. If the members hold differing views on the grade, the decision shall be taken by majority vote.
the template for the examining committee meeting shall be completed electronically and emailed to the study and research administration of the school in question. The grade is normally announced directly following the committee meeting.
In connection with the public defence, the members of the examining committee receive information about the rules that apply for the examining committee meeting, along with the template for the minutes to be used by the examining committee. For those wanting to access the template for the minutes before the defence, it is available on the following webpage: Public defence of doctoral thesis (disputation)

In connection with the public defence

the chairperson of the defence is the moderator of the public defence.
the chairperson of the defence shall ensure that the procedures in place for the public defence are complied with. This includes, for instance, deciding whether a member of the examining committee participating by remote means may have their camera turned off for parts of the public defence. The chairperson shall also make sure that everyone is present when the defence begins. In the event that the external reviewer or a member of the examining committee is absent, the chairperson shall postpone the defence to later that same day and shall, if required, initiate any necessary measures. The same applies if there are technical problems, for example in the transmission of audio or video, when the external reviewer or a member of the examining committee participate by remote means.

Absence due to emergencies

If the external examiner or a member of the examining committee is suddenly prevented from attending, the dean may decide that the person may instead participate by remote means. If a member of the examining committee is prevented from attending, the appointed alternate member may instead immediately take their place on the examining committee.

In the event of an urgent need for 1) a decision on participation by remote means, 2) a decision to appoint a new external reviewer, and/or 3) a decision to appoint a new alternate member of the examining committee, the chairperson shall first contact the case officer in charge at the Faculty Office. In cases where the case officer cannot be reached and time is short, the dean or deputy dean shall be contacted directly. An oral decision or an email from the dean or deputy dean shall be documented and subsequently recorded in the case file.

After the public defence

the chairperson shall normally ensure that the examining committee convene to discuss and determine the grade. The chairperson ensures that the examining committee has access to the template for the minutes of the examining committee meeting and the email address to which the completed minutes are to be sent.