Introduction
The viva voce, often referred to simply as the viva, is a cornerstone of doctoral assessment in many academic systems, particularly in the United Kingdom. Far from being a mere procedural formality, this oral defence serves as a critical scholarly test, marking a significant transition in a doctoral candidate’s academic journey. Often conceptualised as a rite of passage, the viva encapsulates the culmination of years of research, testing not only the candidate’s knowledge but also their ability to defend their work under rigorous scrutiny. This essay aims to evaluate the role of the viva voce in doctoral assessment, focusing on its function as a final scholarly test rather than a perfunctory exercise. It will explore the historical and cultural underpinnings of the viva as a rite of passage, its practical and symbolic significance in assessing doctoral competency, the challenges it poses, and its implications for academic standards. Drawing on a range of academic sources, the discussion will critically assess whether the viva truly serves its intended purpose within the context of higher education.
The Viva Voce as a Rite of Passage: Historical and Cultural Context
The concept of a rite of passage, first articulated by anthropologist Arnold van Gennep, describes a ceremonial transition from one social status to another, often involving stages of separation, liminality, and incorporation (van Gennep, 1960). In the academic sphere, the viva voce embodies this framework, marking the doctoral candidate’s transition from student to independent researcher. Historically, oral examinations have roots in medieval European universities, where public disputation was a key method of demonstrating scholarly competence (Park, 2006). This tradition persists in the modern viva, which, in the UK, typically involves a private oral defence before a panel of examiners. The cultural significance of this process lies in its ability to publicly—or, in contemporary practice, privately—affirm the candidate’s readiness to join the academic community as a peer. As such, the viva is not merely an assessment tool but a symbolic gateway, imbued with institutional and personal meaning.
This framing of the viva as a rite of passage also underscores its emotional and psychological dimensions. Candidates often experience anxiety and uncertainty during the liminal phase of preparation, as they stand on the threshold of a new academic identity (Wellington, 2010). However, successful completion of the viva frequently results in a profound sense of achievement and incorporation into the scholarly community. Therefore, while rooted in historical tradition, the viva’s role as a rite of passage remains relevant, functioning as both a personal milestone and a public validation of scholarly worth.
The Viva as a Scholarly Test: Beyond Formality
Far from being a mere formality, the viva voce serves as a rigorous final test of a doctoral candidate’s intellectual capabilities. According to academic support resources, the viva is an opportunity for candidates to demonstrate the depth of their research, defend their methodology, and articulate the significance of their findings (PhD Writers, n.d.). Unlike written assessments, the oral format of the viva tests a candidate’s ability to think on their feet, respond to unanticipated questions, and engage in scholarly debate. This dynamic interaction allows examiners to probe areas of ambiguity or weakness in the thesis, ensuring that the candidate has a comprehensive understanding of their work and its broader implications (Morley et al., 2002).
Moreover, the viva assesses skills that written submissions alone cannot capture, such as clarity of communication and resilience under pressure. For instance, a candidate might be asked to justify their theoretical framework or address ethical concerns in real-time, requiring not only knowledge but also intellectual agility. Indeed, as Morley et al. (2002) argue, the viva is unique in its ability to evaluate the candidate as a whole—beyond the written thesis—offering a holistic assessment of their readiness for academic independence. This perspective reinforces the view that the viva is a critical scholarly test, designed to uphold the integrity of doctoral education by ensuring that only those who demonstrate true mastery are awarded the degree.
Challenges and Critiques of the Viva Voce
Despite its significance, the viva voce is not without its challenges and criticisms, which warrant careful consideration. One prominent concern is the subjective nature of the assessment. Unlike written examinations, which can be double-marked or anonymised to reduce bias, the viva relies heavily on the examiners’ judgement, which may vary depending on their academic perspectives or personal expectations (Jackson & Tinkler, 2001). This subjectivity can lead to inconsistencies in outcomes, raising questions about fairness and transparency. For example, a candidate with strong written work but poor oral communication skills may struggle in the viva, even if their thesis is of high quality.
Additionally, the viva can be an intensely stressful experience, with candidates often reporting high levels of anxiety leading up to the event (Wellington, 2010). This stress may not always reflect a lack of preparation but rather the high stakes and unpredictable nature of the examination. Critics argue that such pressure can undermine the viva’s validity as an assessment tool, as it may disproportionately disadvantage candidates with anxiety or language barriers (Park, 2006). Therefore, while the viva serves as a rigorous test, its potential to exacerbate inequalities or introduce inconsistency suggests a need for ongoing evaluation of its format and implementation.
The Viva’s Role in Upholding Academic Standards
Notwithstanding these challenges, the viva voce plays an essential role in maintaining the academic standards of doctoral education. By requiring candidates to defend their research before a panel of experts, the viva ensures accountability, preventing the conferment of degrees to those who cannot substantiate their work (Morley et al., 2002). This process is particularly crucial in an era of increasing doctoral enrolments, where the risk of diluting standards is a pressing concern. Furthermore, the viva fosters critical engagement with one’s research, encouraging candidates to refine their arguments and anticipate counterpoints—a skill that is invaluable in academic and professional contexts.
Arguably, the viva also serves a gatekeeping function, preserving the prestige of the doctoral qualification. As Jackson and Tinkler (2001) note, the oral defence acts as a safeguard against plagiarism or superficial research, as examiners can probe the candidate’s familiarity with their material in depth. In this sense, the viva not only tests the individual candidate but also upholds the credibility of the institution and the wider academic community. However, to fully realise this potential, institutions must ensure that viva processes are transparent and equitable, addressing the criticisms outlined earlier.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the viva voce represents far more than a procedural step in doctoral assessment; it is a profound rite of passage that tests a candidate’s scholarly competence and marks their transition into the academic community. This essay has demonstrated that the viva functions as a rigorous final test, assessing not only the quality of the written thesis but also the candidate’s ability to engage in scholarly discourse. While challenges such as subjectivity and stress cannot be overlooked, the viva’s role in upholding academic standards and fostering critical skills remains undeniable. Moving forward, institutions must strive to address the viva’s limitations by enhancing transparency and support for candidates, ensuring that it remains a fair and meaningful assessment tool. Ultimately, the viva voce encapsulates the essence of doctoral education—a culmination of intellectual growth, resilience, and dedication—making it an indispensable component of the doctoral journey.
References
- Jackson, C. and Tinkler, P. (2001) Back to basics: A consideration of the purposes of the PhD viva. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(4), pp. 355-366.
- Morley, L., Leonard, D. and David, M. (2002) Variations in vivas: Quality and equality in British PhD assessments. Studies in Higher Education, 27(3), pp. 263-273.
- Park, C. (2006) The end of the secret garden: Reframing postgraduate supervision. Higher Education Review, 38(2), pp. 39-54.
- PhD Writers (n.d.) What is a PhD Viva (Viva Voce)? PhD Writers.
- van Gennep, A. (1960) The Rites of Passage. University of Chicago Press.
- Wellington, J. (2010) Supporting doctoral candidates through the viva process. Studies in Higher Education, 35(5), pp. 535-549.
