next »

[lgreco]

A completed dissertation came recently to my desk for approval.  The student had successfully defended and the dissertation committee signed of on the dissertation.  All it needed was my signature as dean.  In browsing the dissertation I found that there were parts that were missing.  The student, for example, promised to deliver X (a major part of the dissertation).  In the conclusions the student affirmed the delivery of X.  However, nowhere in the dissertation could I find where and how X was introduced and delivered.

I contacted the dissertation cmte members asking about the missing X -- maybe I missed something myself since the dissertation was not directly in my field.  The cmte members reacted pretty badly to my inquiry, considering it an intrusion upon academic freedom.

Still, in good conscience I cannot see how you can promise X, affirm X, but never deliver it.  I was hoping that it was just a typographical oversight, i.e., the student forgot a chapter or something.  It would seem that the student never introduced X and that the dissertation committee seems to be ok with it.

As long as the promised X is missing I cannot in good conscience approve the dissertation, even though the process seems to have been followed at least on a pro forma basis.

Have you ever dealt with a situation as chair or dean in which you had to question the collective wisdom of a dissertation committee and where you felt (very strongly) that there was a serious lack of academic/discipline integrity which you could not endorse?

[embitteredhistorian]

Bookmarking...

[zharkov]

Although a "dean's review" is, perhaps, common practice, I get the sense that it can involve anything from a cursory glance to a thorough review.  I recall a conversation I had 15 years ago with a former dean, who new in the job, had a more serious notion of what a "dean's review" should entail, and got some push back when he sent the first dissertation back for revision.

That said, OP, does your school have a set of guidelines for what a dean's review should entail?

[larryc]

I think that if there is a place for your signature, you have a right to make them rewrite.

However--institutional culture is a huge issue, and you will not win any friends here by doing the right thing. I would have coffee with some people you trust and talk this over. You have to pick your battles.

[fraude]

It sounds as though you are disappointed with the committee's handling of things.

Have you figured out whether the student was also unhappy with the "pro forma process"? 

Who do you see as most responsible for the mystery of the missing X?

And who would most suffer being denied a diploma during jobsearch season?

I'm surprised that the future of the student seems of less concern than chumminess on campus for the OP.

It is a sad situation. One I can empathize with.

[systeme_d_]

Fraude (change that name, my friend!) makes a good point.

I suggest that the OP sit back and think for a minute about possible reasons for the missing X.   

Could it be that a hostile (read: crazy) committee member objected to the chapter on X and would not sign off until it was removed?

Could it be that the advisor just told the student to submit the MS without that chapter, get the signature from Crazy Guy, and move the heck on?

Just a thought.

[lgreco]

Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

After I posted my concerns here, I decided to write directly to the student whose dissertation was in question.  I had refrain contacting the student in the past few days, in deference to my colleagues in the dissertation committee.

In my email to the student I explained my concerns and suggested a few remedial steps (exactly the same email basically I had sent to the student's committee).  A few hours later I received an email from the dissertation chair agreeing to the changes and promising to deliver them this week.  These are the changes that last week had infuriated the dissertation chair so much that the chair send a memo to the president of the university protesting the dean's (yours truly) infringement upon academic freedom.

All along, my objective was to ensure that our student graduates with a credible dissertation and we are back on track.  If I could only fathom my colleague's flip-flop now.

[embitteredhistorian]

Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

After I posted my concerns here, I decided to write directly to the student whose dissertation was in question.  I had refrain contacting the student in the past few days, in deference to my colleagues in the dissertation committee.

In my email to the student I explained my concerns and suggested a few remedial steps (exactly the same email basically I had sent to the student's committee).  A few hours later I received an email from the dissertation chair agreeing to the changes and promising to deliver them this week.  These are the changes that last week had infuriated the dissertation chair so much that the chair send a memo to the president of the university protesting the dean's (yours truly) infringement upon academic freedom.

All along, my objective was to ensure that our student graduates with a credible dissertation and we are back on track.  If I could only fathom my colleague's flip-flop now.

That's probably the most nervous person on Earth right now.

[zharkov]

All along, my objective was to ensure that our student graduates with a credible dissertation and we are back on track.  If I could only fathom my colleague's flip-flop now.

"Cause as you know, sir, in the heat of action men are likely to forget where their best interests lie and let their emotions carry them away."  (Gutman, Maltese Falcon, 1941)

[daniel_von_flanagan]

If I could only fathom my colleague's flip-flop now.

If you're a dean at a PhD-granting University you can't be this naive; you've been around too long.  The committee (justifiably even if not correctly) interpreted your initial query as interference with faculty/department prerogatives, and a display of power.    They had to make a display of power in response.  You in turn did not flinch from this show of power, and (fortunately) did not escalate.  That meant that the colleague could step back without losing face and embrace the final, reasonable, solution. - DvF

[gennimom]

Just a comment: My committee passed my diss pending changes. I made the changes, they signed off, all was good. Pass it to the Dean. Well, the Asst Dean actually. He read it, and said he wanted a couple of things fixed. He wasn't having the Dean signing off until I did. I fixed them. They weren't major, but he was going to get his way or else!

So, in some places at least, the Dean's word has weight.

[msparticularity]

I think this is potentially terribly messy, though: having an individual come in at the very end, who took no part in the prospectus approval, the reading, or the defense, but who after all of that can disqualify the diss?! As a former grad student myself, and now a doctoral advisor, I would like to very strongly suggest that any individual who chooses to intervene in this process needs to do so much, much earlier. First, any absolute imperatives must be laid out in writing for all to see in advance. Probably this would also suggest that the prospectus should be approved, as well as the final version of the dissertation. Finally, and most importantly, this individual really, really must attend the defense. The defense is where the kinds of issues that you point to, OP, should be raised so the committee can direct revisions accordingly. 

[gennimom]

MsP, I don't think our dean or asst dean would go for that. They have quite a few they'd have to attend and they aren't going to want to take the time. The college isn't exactly small. My asst. dean does read them when he gets them, but I don't think he would want to attend all of the defenses.

I'm just wondering why the problem wasn't caught by the committee in the first place? I mean, really?

[msparticularity]

MsP, I don't think our dean or asst dean would go for that. They have quite a few they'd have to attend and they aren't going to want to take the time. The college isn't exactly small. My asst. dean does read them when he gets them, but I don't think he would want to attend all of the defenses.

I'm just wondering why the problem wasn't caught by the committee in the first place? I mean, really?

But there's a bigger issue here--the integrity of the doctoral process. "Dean's review" historically and in the vast majority of programs means that the Dean has signed off that all of the proper procedures were followed, and that the submitted dissertation meets the requirements for a dissertation at the institution. It does NOT mean that the Dean approves of the content. If an administrator is going to take on oversight of the content, then s/he must take part in the process far earlier--really. To do otherwise is to damage the integrity of the process and/or to open one's institution to complaints/lawsuits from individuals who have had their dissertation approved by the committee but then--post-hoc--disapproved by an administrator. As Systeme_d_ pointed out, there are multitudes of reasons why something might be "missing" from the perspective of an outside reader, but where the decision that the dissertation has been completed in a satisfactory manner is the result of negotiations among the various committee members. Overturning a committee decision that a dissertation is approved is a Very, Very VERY BIG DEAL.

[tee_bee]

I'm just wondering why the problem wasn't caught by the committee in the first place? I mean, really?

Yes. The dean isn't a member of the committee, but the dean can and maybe should fulfill an important quality control function. I wish my old dean had rejected several of the "dissertations" produced in a former department of mine; as a junior faculty member, I couldn't raise much of a fuss.