THE DEFENSE OF THESIS: A CRITICAL JUNCTURE IN THE FACULTY-STUDENT RELATIONSHIP *
Lynne Goodstein, Associate Dean, Graduate School;
Howard Sachs, Associate Dean, Graduate Studies and Research, Penn State
Harrisburg;
Richard Yahner, Associate Dean, Graduate School
The Graduate School workshop Faculty-Student Relationships: Promoting Mutual Accountability stimulated us to consider the defense of thesis as a critical juncture in the faculty-student relationship.
The presentation of the thesis to the academic community is a rite of passage. It is, in many respects, the penultimate point of graduate education and is more significant than the ceremonial presentation of the academic hood to the new graduate at commencement. Graduation is as much for the family of the graduate as for the graduate, while the defense is for the academic colleagues, students and faculty.
As graduate faculty, we bear considerable responsibility for the quality of the thesis and the presentation of that thesis to the academic community. Certainly the work of the thesis is the work of the student, but it is completed under the supervision and direction of an academic mentor. It should never be the case that a thesis is presented for defense before its time. Just as a vintner would be loath to affix the label of a finished wine to a bottle of grape juice, faculty should take pride and responsibility for the quality of the written work and the public declaration of the research findings. The defense of a thesis prepared under our tutelage should be regarded as a time of intense pride that the rich traditions of the academy have been upheld.
Our responsibility as faculty mentors essentially changes when we have accepted the tangible evidence of attainment of the quality product of graduate education. We symbolically accept the student as a professional worthy of the title doctor. We should not do so lightly.
But our responsibility in the relationship culminating in the defense begins well in advance of the event. We need to adequately subscribe to the mentorship duties and provide early and constant feedback to the students as they are conducting their research and writing the thesis. We need to be fair and honest in our relationship with the student, balancing encouragement with appropriate criticism. The thesis should ripen under the guidance of faculty; it should not be a document of questionable maturity at the time of defense. The thesis should not have problems with experimental design, analyses, or synthesis of the findings.
Graduate faculty who agree to serve on a thesis committee must do so with full knowledge of the significant commitment to the task. It requires that we work with the advisor and the student throughout the process of thesis research and writing. If problems arise in the progress of the project, the committee members have an obligation to identify those concerns at a point in time where correction and redirection do not rise to the level of crisis. A student and his/her committee should meet regularly through all phases of the research to assess the quality of the research progress and to discuss programmatic issues. Failure to perform these vital functions of graduate education leads to ill will, distrust, disappointment, or even confrontation. Faculty who feel that they have been coerced into compromise on academic standards or the rules and procedures of the Graduate School or the department/program will not likely agree to serve on subsequent graduate committees. This hurts the reputation of the graduate program and does not advance the goals of graduate education at Penn State.
The tradition of holding at least a portion of the defense open to the faculty and students has a long history, serving as public performance by an emerging academic or professional. It is also an intellectual event for colleagues of the defender, including both faculty and fellow graduate students. We owe the audience our best efforts in mentoring the defending student.
The graduate program should ensure that all parties in the thesis process are well informed-the student, the major advisor, and the other faculty members serving on the committee. Graduate program handbooks are a vital resource for all. Where such handbooks fail to clearly address program rules, Graduate School thesis policies, and responsibilities of the parties, then revision is needed immediately. As important as written policies are, perhaps even more crucial is adherence to such policies. When policies are followed in the breach more often than as rule, legal difficulties rapidly arise.
We as graduate faculty need to reexamine our roles as thesis mentors and rededicate ourselves to the task. To not do so is to abrogate our responsibilities and invite problems.