Faculty/Staff Search

OR

Department/Unit Search

  1. Home
  2. Academics
  3. Thesis
  4. The Examination

The Examination

Preparation, Etiquette, and the Thesis Examination

Once your thesis successfully clears the preliminary examination, you are ready to take the final major step in your graduate journey: the examination. This page outlines everything you need to know to navigate the process smoothly, from preparing your research and coordinating your presentation to understanding room etiquette, the structured phases of the examination meeting, and potential committee outcomes.


Important to know

How Your Exam Date is Confirmed

Before your proposed examination can be officially scheduled, your thesis must successfully pass the Preliminary Examination. Once your examiners submit their confidential reports and a majority of the board deems your thesis acceptable, your Examination date will be confirmed in Veritas.

Preparing for Your Examination

The Examination is your opportunity to showcase the depth of your research and engage in a scholarly discussion with your examining committee. Here is how you can set yourself up for success.

Lean on Your Supervisory Team

Your supervisor and supervisory committee are your primary resources for defense preparation. Lean on them in the weeks leading up to your exam to:

  • Ensure you fully understand the expectations, format, and flow of the defense.

  • Coordinate mock oral examinations or practice rounds to build comfort responding to real-time critique.

  • Anticipate the specific avenues of questioning your examiners are likely to pursue based on your methodology and findings.

Scholarly Readiness & Best Practices

  • Contextualize Your Work: Use the time between preliminary examination and your examination to review your source material and keep up with recent publications. The board is evaluating your ability to ground your findings within the broader scholarly context of your discipline.

  • Defend Your Choices: Be ready to clearly summarize your core arguments, justify your research methodology, and articulate the underlying assumptions of your work.

  • Strict Device Etiquette: Policy dictates that students, examiners, and supervisors refrain from using personal electronic devices (cell phones, smartwatches) during the examination, except in cases of emergency or authorized medical use.

Remember: Your examination is ultimately a celebration of the years of hard work, deep research, and intellectual growth you have poured into your graduate journey. Trust in your expertise, lean on your preparation, and enjoy the opportunity to discuss your discoveries with your committee as a peer.

 

Thesis Examination Guide

This hands-on playbook guides all participants through the thesis examination process at Western. Managing the exam sequence, reviewing evaluations, and submitting final verdicts occurs across two platform streams depending on when the examination was originally scheduled. Please Note: This page serves strictly as a summary of the official institutional guidelines. For the complete, detailed regulations governing the thesis examination, please visit the Senate Academic Policies & Procedures document: Procedure for Thesis Examinations and Final Submission.

Graduate Program Coordinator / Assistant:

  • Coordinates scheduling details, locks the defense format (in-person, remote, or hybrid) into the system, and distributes the unified Zoom invitation link containing backup telephone connection data.
  • Monitors the Stage 1 Preliminary Evaluation deadline (5 working days before the defense) and acts as the primary contact for emergency board substitutions or cancellations.

Thesis Examination Chair:

  • Presides over the entire examination process, ensuring strict adherence to School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies (SGPS) regulations.
  • Maintains full authority to suspend proceedings if technical disruptions or behavioral issues compromise the academic integrity of the defense.
  • Manages the strict time boundaries for questioning, coordinates the secret voting, and compiles the official final report.

Examiners (Program, University, and External):

  • Independently review the thesis manuscript and submit their preliminary reports.
  • Actively participate in the oral defense by delivering expert scholarly criticism and casting their final, confidential votes.

Supervisor(s):

  • Attend the examination to witness the defense but must remain entirely silent during the questioning and examiner deliberation phases. They do not cross-examine the candidate or vote on the final outcome.
  • Policy Constraint: If a thesis was submitted without the supervisor’s approval, the Graduate Chair (or designate) takes on the supervisor’s role and attends the examination instead.

Candidate:

  • Delivers the required research presentation and orally defends their methodology, findings, and conclusions under direct questioning to prove authentic authorship.
  • Closed vs. Open Status: The thesis examination is a closed event by default. It can only be opened to the university community if the student and program mutually request it in writing prior to the exam date. Members of SGPS may attend as visitors only if their written request is approved in advance by the Vice-Provost (SGPS). The Chair will refuse entry to all unapproved attendees.

  • Open Defense Constraints: Once an open examination begins, late entries are strictly prohibited. Open attendees are not permitted to leave and return; if a visitor leaves the room during questioning, they forfeit their re-entry.

  • Device Etiquette: To preserve academic focus, all participants—including the student, supervisor, and examiners—must refrain from using personal electronic devices (such as cell phones and smartwatches) during the examination, except in cases of emergency or authorized medical use.

The Examination Chair must execute the defense according to the following highly structured sequence, keeping in mind that the entire block may take up to 3 hours:

Phase 1: The Call to Order & Pre-Exam Meeting

  1. The Chair opens the session, introduces the candidate, examiners, and themselves, and presents Western’s official Land Acknowledgement.
  2. The Chair explicitly warns all participants of the potential for suspending the exam if technical problems interfere with the integrity of the defense.
  3. The Chair excuses the candidate to a physical waiting area or a secure digital Zoom waiting room.
  4. In the candidate’s absence, the examiners formalize the sequence of questioners and lock in time limits (typically 15–20 minutes per examiner for the first round, and 5–10 minutes for the second round).
  5. The Chair reminds those present to minimize outside distractions and ensures that all remote participants have active video/audio fields to see and hear each other perfectly.
  6. The Chair recalls the candidate from the waiting room (and admits approved visitors if the exam is designated as an open session).

Phase 2: The Questioning

  1. If the candidate's program does not mandate a separate public lecture (or if it was waived), the candidate may speak briefly for 10–15 minutes to introduce their research.
  2. The examiners question the candidate in the agreed-upon order. The Chair tracks time limits strictly. If the External Examiner is not physically or digitally present, the Chair ensures that the questions raised in the External Examiner's Report are explicitly read aloud and put to the candidate.
  3. Once questioning finishes, the Chair excuses the candidate and any open-session visitors. Visitors do not return for the remainder of the event. The supervisor remains in the room for the first part of deliberations.

Phase 3: Deliberations and Voting

  1. The Chair invites the supervisor to speak on the candidate’s history, the project timeline, and aspects of the oral defense. If the thesis was submitted without supervisor approval, the Chair reads the supervisor’s written objections before inviting the Graduate Chair designate to speak.
  2. The supervisor is then asked to remain silent while the examiners alone discuss the academic merits of the written manuscript and oral performance. If an absent External Examiner issued a negative preliminary grade, the Chair provides copies of their report to the board to aid the discussion.
  3. The Chair outlines the official voting paths and ensures examiners can access their electronic forms (either via Veritas or the legacy Track A Qualtrics link).
  4. Examiners submit their confidential forms. The Chair tallies the results to determine the official verdict.
  5. The Chair recalls the candidate and supervisor to the room and formally pronounces the final decision of the Thesis Examination Board.

The final assessment divides evaluations into the written thesis artifact (Pass, Pass Conditional, Unacceptable) and the oral defense (Acceptable, Unacceptable):

Pass

  • Definition: The thesis artifact is acceptable as it stands and the oral defense is acceptable.
  • Action: No formal revisions are mandated for graduation. Examiners may suggest minor grammatical, typographical, or formatting adjustments on the report. The student is encouraged to apply these improvements within 1 to 2 weeks before their final submission.

Pass Conditional Upon Revisions

  • Definition: The oral defense is acceptable, but the written manuscript contains technical flaws, errors in calculations, unclear sections, or insufficient data discussions that must be remedied to meet Western's scholarly standards.
  • Action: A clear majority of examiners must agree on the revisions. The committee must select a single member of the board to act as the Designated Examiner to review and approve the final modifications. Crucial Policy Rule: The Supervisor cannot serve as the Designated Examiner. Revisions must normally be completed within 6 weeks of the defense.

Unacceptable

  • Definition: The written work contains profound conceptual deficits, inappropriate methodology, systematic misuse of data, a failure to engage the scholarly context, or severely flawed presentation. Alternatively, the oral defense failed to verify authentic authorship or satisfactory knowledge.
  • Action: The thesis is blocked from graduation. The Chair must document the exact scientific and structural reasons for the failure on the report, and the Vice-Provost (SGPS) will automatically refer the case to a formal Re-Submission Hearing Committee.

Voting Math and Deadlocks:

  • A candidate fully passes the examination if a majority of the board marks the thesis content a pass and the oral defense acceptable.
  • If the board splits evenly (such as a 2/2 tie on a four-member panel) on either the written manuscript or the oral defense quality, the vote is automatically weighted in favor of the External Examiner's decision to break the tie.
  • Once the Chair submits the final report, an automated system email transmits the structural results to SGPS, the supervisor, and the Chair. Successful students will receive detailed automated instructions regarding publication parameters and repository uploads.