fail dissertation uwe

Student blog

Uncapped resits: the back-up plan you can’t rely on

You may be aware UWE has an ‘uncapped resits’ policy – amazing, right? This means if you are unwell, injured, or something absolutely unavoidable comes up on the day of your assessment and you are unable to complete it, all is not lost – you may have another opportunity.

This is one of many ways UWE supports you in thriving academically while navigating the unexpected.

You must keep in mind, however, that ‘another opportunity’ is not guaranteed, and does not mean the same opportunity. You can find UWE’s full academic regulations online , but in short, resitting an assessment means:

• You will need to repeat the assessment at a later date – when the knowledge is no longer fresh in your head, and your friends may have all finished and are enjoying their break
• If you end up resitting more than one assessment around the same time, your workload will stack up and may be more demanding than it was before
• Even if you don’t submit work at the first assessment – your non-submission still counts as an attempt
• If you don’t pass your resit, you may not progress to the next year
• If you are in your final year, you may not graduate on time as planned
• If this means extending your studies, you will need to pay for another year of tuition and other associated costs
• If you are an international student, this may have serious implications on your visa or sponsorship
• If there are any updates to the content of the module, you would need to study any new material independently

It’s reassuring to know the possibility of resitting is there if you genuinely need it, but consider it your academic safety net – not a way to procrastinate. ‘Buying time’ will only cost you more later.

If you are in need of support, academic or otherwise, there is a range of different options available to you. Contact your Student Experience Coach , a  Student Support Adviser , speak to your  Academic Personal Tutor  or explore our wider  Wellbeing Support options .

Back to top

Get the Reddit app

Discussion forum for current, past, and future students of any discipline completing post-graduate studies - taught or research.

Has anyone here ever failed a thesis or dissertation?

Or know anyone who has?

I've always wondered what happens when you do, just try again or what? I'd be interested to hear any cases and how it's affected you.

• Career Advice

How to Avoid Failing Your Ph.D. Dissertation

By  Daniel Sokol

You have / 5 articles left. Sign up for a free account or log in.

Istock.com/erhui1979

I am a barrister in London who specializes in helping doctoral students who have failed their Ph.D.s. Few people will have had the dubious privilege of seeing as many unsuccessful Ph.D. dissertations and reading as many scathing reports by examination committees. Here are common reasons why students who submit their Ph.D.s fail, with advice on how to avoid such pitfalls. The lessons apply to the United States and the United Kingdom.

Lack of critical reflection. Probably the most common reason for failing a Ph.D. dissertation is a lack of critical analysis. A typical observation of the examination committee is, “The thesis is generally descriptive and a more analytical approach is required.”

For doctoral work, students must engage critically with the subject matter, not just set out what other scholars have said or done. If not, the thesis will not be original. It will not add anything of substance to the field and will fail.

Doctoral students should adopt a reflexive approach to their work. Why have I chosen this methodology? What are the flaws or limitations of this or that author’s argument? Can I make interesting comparisons between this and something else? Those who struggle with this aspect should ask their supervisors for advice on how to inject some analytic sophistication to their thesis.

Lack of coherence. Other common observations are of the type: “The argument running through the thesis needs to be more coherent” or “The thesis is poorly organized and put together without any apparent logic.”

The thesis should be seen as one coherent whole. It cannot be a series of self-contained chapters stitched together haphazardly. Students should spend considerable time at the outset of their dissertation thinking about structure, both at the macro level of the entire thesis and the micro level of the chapter. It is a good idea to look at other Ph.D. theses and monographs to get a sense of what constitutes a logical structure.

Poor presentation. The majority of failed Ph.D. dissertations are sloppily presented. They contain typos, grammatical mistakes, referencing errors and inconsistencies in presentation. Looking at some committee reports randomly, I note the following comments:

• “The thesis is poorly written.”
• “That previous section is long, badly written and lacks structure.”
• “The author cannot formulate his thoughts or explain his reasons. It is very hard to understand a good part of the thesis.”
• “Ensure that the standard of written English is consistent with the standard expected of a Ph.D. thesis.”
• “The language used is simplistic and does not reflect the standard of writing expected at Ph.D. level.”

For committee members, who are paid a fixed and pitiful sum to examine the work, few things are as off-putting as a poorly written dissertation. Errors of language slow the reading speed and can frustrate or irritate committee members. At worst, they can lead them to miss or misinterpret an argument.

Students should consider using a professional proofreader to read the thesis, if permitted by the university’s regulations. But that still is no guarantee of an error-free thesis. Even after the proofreader has returned the manuscript, students should read and reread the work in its entirety.

When I was completing my Ph.D., I read my dissertation so often that the mere sight of it made me nauseous. Each time, I would spot a typo or tweak a sentence, removing a superfluous word or clarifying an ambiguous passage. My meticulous approach was rewarded when one committee member said in the oral examination that it was the best-written dissertation he had ever read. This was nothing to do with skill or an innate writing ability but tedious, repetitive revision.

Failure to make required changes. It is rare for students to fail to obtain their Ph.D. outright at the oral examination. Usually, the student is granted an opportunity to resubmit their dissertation after making corrections.

Students often submit their revised thesis together with a document explaining how they implemented the committee’s recommendations. And they often believe, wrongly, that this document is proof that they have incorporated the requisite changes and that they should be awarded a Ph.D.

In fact, the committee may feel that the changes do not go far enough or that they reveal further misunderstandings or deficiencies. Here are some real observations by dissertation committees:

• “The added discussion section is confusing. The only thing that has improved is the attempt to provide a little more analysis of the experimental data.”
• “The author has tried to address the issues identified by the committee, but there is little improvement in the thesis.”

In short, students who fail their Ph.D. dissertations make changes that are superficial or misconceived. Some revised theses end up worse than the original submission.

Students must incorporate changes in the way that the committee members had in mind. If what is required is unclear, students can usually seek clarification through their supervisors.

In the nine years I have spent helping Ph.D. students with their appeals, I have found that whatever the subject matter of the thesis, the above criticisms appear time and time again in committee reports. They are signs of a poor Ph.D.

Wise students should ask themselves these questions prior to submission of the dissertation:

• Is the work sufficiently critical/analytical, or is it mainly descriptive?
• Is it coherent and well structured?
• Does the thesis look good and read well?
• If a resubmission, have I made the changes that the examination committee had in mind?

Once students are satisfied that the answer to each question is yes, they should ask their supervisors the same questions.

Hiring for Humanity

To create an office culture marked by trust, humanity and collaboration, Diana Lawrence poses a rather unexpected que

Share This Article

More from career advice.

In Praise of Lunch

Amid the stress and clutter of our daily lives, and the divisions straining our politics and culture, we need sustain

Bad-Faith Counteroffers

Black and other minoritized faculty don’t receive equitable ones if they receive them at all, which harms both them a

• Become a Member
• Sign up for Newsletters
• Learning & Assessment
• Diversity & Equity
• Career Development
• Labor & Unionization
• Shared Governance
• Academic Freedom
• Books & Publishing
• Financial Aid
• Residential Life
• Free Speech
• Physical & Mental Health
• Race & Ethnicity
• Sex & Gender
• Socioeconomics
• Traditional-Age
• Adult & Post-Traditional
• Teaching & Learning
• Artificial Intelligence
• Digital Publishing
• Data Analytics
• Administrative Tech
• Alternative Credentials
• Financial Health
• Cost-Cutting
• Revenue Strategies
• Academic Programs
• Physical Campuses
• Mergers & Collaboration
• Fundraising
• Research Universities
• Regional Public Universities
• Community Colleges
• Private Nonprofit Colleges
• Minority-Serving Institutions
• Religious Colleges
• Women's Colleges
• Specialized Colleges
• For-Profit Colleges
• Executive Leadership
• Trustees & Regents
• State Oversight
• Accreditation
• Politics & Elections
• Supreme Court
• Student Aid Policy
• Science & Research Policy
• State Policy
• Colleges & Localities
• Employee Satisfaction
• Remote & Flexible Work
• Staff Issues
• Study Abroad
• International Students in U.S.
• U.S. Colleges in the World
• Intellectual Affairs
• Seeking a Faculty Job
• Advancing in the Faculty
• Seeking an Administrative Job
• Advancing as an Administrator
• Beyond Transfer
• Call to Action
• Confessions of a Community College Dean
• Higher Ed Gamma
• Higher Ed Policy
• Just Explain It to Me!
• Just Visiting
• Law, Policy—and IT?
• Leadership & StratEDgy
• Leadership in Higher Education
• Learning Innovation
• Online: Trending Now
• Resident Scholar
• University of Venus
• Student Voice
• Academic Life
• Health & Wellness
• The College Experience
• Life After College
• Academic Minute
• Weekly Wisdom
• Reports & Data
• Quick Takes
• Advertising & Marketing
• Consulting Services
• Data & Insights
• Hiring & Jobs
• Event Partnerships

4 /5 Articles remaining this month.

Sign up for a free account or log in.

• Sign Up, It’s FREE

Learning Object Title

Overview title for the content below

Stanford University

The Center for International Security and Cooperation is a center of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies .

Leaders, Accountability and Foreign Policy in Non-Democracies

• Jessica L. Weeks

Jessica Weeks is a PhD candidate in the Department of Political Science at Stanford University, the 2007-2008 Zukerman Fellow and a pre-doctoral fellow at CISAC, and the Teaching Assistant for the CISAC Honors Program. Her dissertation, "Leaders, Accountability, and Foreign Policy in Non-Democracies" studies how different levels of domestic accountability affect leaders' decisions about international conflict. Additional research investigates the effectiveness of military interventions, and the escalation and resolution of international military crises.

Jessica graduated summa cum laude with a BA in Political Science from The Ohio State University in 2001, and received an MA in International History and Politics from the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, Switzerland.

Marks and feedback

Key information about pass marks, how credits are awarded and receiving feedback.

Pass marks for modules

You can find out more about pass marks for modules in our module information guide.

What is the pass mark for a module?

Receiving your marks

All of your coursework and exam marks are published in MYUWE (login required).

Unconfirmed marks will be released to students via MYUWE as soon as they are available. Please note that unconfirmed marks are subject to moderation by the Examination Board, so they may still go up or down. For this reason, please do not contact your module leader about unconfirmed exam marks that have been individually released in MYUWE.

Your unconfirmed marks should also normally be included on your work when it is returned to you.

The final agreed mark will be confirmed to you on the official publication date once the Examination Board process is complete.

Your marks will be recorded in the Higher Education Achievement Report (HEAR) , which is an electronic report that records your academic achievements.

If you think your mark has been recorded incorrectly, you should immediately draw this to the attention of your Student and Programme Support Team by completing a contact record form and produce the piece of work which you believe shows the correct mark.

If you have concerns about your modules you can speak to your Personal Tutor, a Student Support Adviser , or Student Representative (rep). Normally Student Reps only get involved with issues which affect more than a couple of students, so if you have an individual issue, you should still contact the Students’ Union Advice Centre or a Student Support Adviser.

You can see who your Student Reps are in Blackboard. It will display all the Reps within your programme and it will also place a * next to Reps who you share modules with.

Receiving feedback

All students have a minimum entitlement to assessment feedback on their assessed work. Normally you should get marks and feedback within 20 working days following the deadline for submission of the assessment, or following the end of the 48-hour late submission window  (if this was available for that assessment). This period exclude University closure days and may be shorter or longer for some forms of assessment.

Where the period is greater than 20 working days, you will be informed of the deadline and the reason.

Make sure you find out the specific arrangements for the return of your marked work.

What if I am given an adjusted deadline?

If you are eligible for reasonable adjustments and you have used the 14 day reasonable adjustment period, the period for providing feedback and an outcome will be an additional 14 days to the 20 working days for academic staff to provide your feedback.

If you have chosen to hand in your work during the 48-hour late submission window, the period for providing feedback will be 20 working days following the end of the 48-hour late submission window.

Once ready, your mark will be available in your MYUWE account, but you may see a non-submission (‘NS’) until this time.

How to use your assessment feedback

Find out more about how to make the most of your assessment feedback, including types of feedback and what to do next.

How credits are awarded

Credits are gained when modules are successfully completed. At UWE Bristol, modules are normally given values between five and 60 credits.

The number of credits assigned to a module is based on learning hours, ie the number of hours which it is expected that students will spend, on average, achieving the learning outcomes. One credit usually equals ten notional hours of study.

You become eligible for an award when you achieve sufficient credit in the required modules. Sometimes ‘module credits’ are described as being like a currency which can be accumulated and then ‘cashed in’ or exchanged when you accept an award (for example an honours or a master's degree).

You can find out more about credits and how they work in the degree classification section .

Recognising prior learning

If you have undertaken prior learning which is relevant to your modules or award, you may be able to apply for it to be recognised under the  Accreditation of Prior Learning or Accreditation of Prior Experiential Learning processes .