Writing a dissertation is only the first step in the difficult process of earning a degree. Next, the applicant will have to prepare his scientific work for defense, namely:
- presenting your research to the dissertation council, where a decision is made on the possibility of defending a dissertation;
- writing an abstract for a dissertation accepted for defense;
- collecting feedback on the abstract and dissertation.
Who writes reviews?
A review of the dissertation abstract can be written by any specialist of an organization that is on the mailing list of your scientific work. The only requirement for the authors of the reviews, which is presented by the Higher Attestation Commission, is that the activities of these organizations should be directly related to the topic of research carried out in the dissertation.
How many reviews do you need?
HAC does not limit the number of reviews per abstract, but the usual condition for dissertation councils is the presence of at least 8 reviews. Each council sets its own requirements in this matter,therefore, it is advisable to coordinate the required number of reviews for the abstract with the academic secretary of the council in which the dissertation is supposed to be defended.
How do reviews end up in the dissertation council?
Usually, reviews of the abstract and dissertation are sent to the organization on the basis of which the defense council is located. Then the academic secretary of the university passes them to the secretary of the dissertation council, and only then they get to the author.
However, it often happens that, without prior agreement with the reviewer, feedback is sent late or not sent at all. It should also be noted that reviews may come before the thesis defense itself, in which case the author may not have time to prepare a worthy response to criticisms.
Therefore, it is necessary to constantly monitor the process of collecting reviews from the applicant himself. It is recommended that you contact reviewers directly. It may turn out that a personal meeting with a specialist who will write a review, and a conversation on controversial issues of the abstract can tip the scales in favor of the applicant, and the review, which was originally planned as negative, will be written in a positive way. Often, along with the abstract, they send out the so-called "fish", i.e. a ready-made review layout, which the previously warned reviewer only needs to sign.
How are reviews used to defend a thesis?
During the defense Chairman of the Councilreads the opinions immediately before the start of voting. After that, the applicant is invited to respond to the comments indicated in the reviews. As stated in the “Regulations on the Award of Academic Degrees”, in cases where reviews are mostly positive, then, with the permission of the council, the secretary may not read them out in full, but make a general review, paying attention mainly to the comments noted in them.. Negative reviews must be read in their entirety.
After the defense, if the dissertation council makes a positive decision, the dissertation materials, together with all the reviews, are formed into an attestation file and sent to the Ministry of Science and Education within a month.
Basic review requirements
Requirements for feedback on the dissertation abstract are set out in the "Regulations on the awarding of academic degrees", according to which reviews received on the dissertation abstract must be posted on the website of the organization that is the base of the dissertation council within 10 days from the date of defense.
In the response to the abstract of a candidate's dissertation (as well as a doctoral dissertation) must be marked:
- last name, first name, patronymic (if any) of the reviewer;
- name of the organization whose employee the reviewer is;
- postal and email addresses and phone number of the organization.
The following provisions should be reflected in the review of the abstract:
- relevance of the study;
- connection of the dissertation topic with state and scientificprograms;
- degree of consistency and validity of the conclusions presented in the study;
- scientific novelty of the research results and the possibility of their application;
- conformity of the content of the scientific work to the criteria of the Higher Attestation Commission.
Reviews on the abstract are submitted in two copies with the signature of the author certified by the personnel department and the seal of the organization.
How to write a quality review? Recommendations for reviewers
Before writing a review, you must carefully read the abstract, note its advantages and disadvantages. When writing a negative review, you should stick to constructive criticism. For each remark, it is necessary to provide a quote from the abstract as evidence.
In addition to the structural elements listed above, which should contain a review, it is necessary to assess how logical and scientifically substantiated the chosen research methodology is, how reliable the presented materials are. It is also worth indicating the degree of visibility and structure of the work.
Further, the shortcomings of the abstract should be noted. The most common ones include the incompleteness of the study, insufficient attention to the review of studies by other authors on this topic, errors in the design of the abstract, etc. An important point is to indicate how fundamental the shortcomings are and how they affect the scientific significance of the study.
At the end of the review, a conclusion is placed in which it is necessary to reflect the followingMoments:
- fullness and independence of scientific work;
- complete display of each level of research in the dissertation abstract;
- degree of argumentation of the scientific hypothesis underlying the dissertation research;
- inclusion in the abstract of illustrative material confirming the conclusions of the author (graphs, tables, figures, etc.);
- possibility of practical implementation of the presented developments;
- conformity of the dissertation abstract to the requirements of the Higher Attestation Commission;
- conclusion on the possibility of awarding the applicant a degree.
Examples of writing reviews
Below are samples of reviews for abstracts of dissertations (candidate and doctoral). As mentioned above, each organization has its own templates for writing reviews, so this article contains the texts of reviews directly.
An example of a response to a PhD dissertation abstract
The dissertation research is relevant, as it is devoted to the problem of ensuring the environmental safety of the population of a modern city, namely, reducing the negative impact of road transport on the air environment of urban areas.
The abstract of the dissertation clearly defines the object, subject, purpose and objectives of scientific research, as well as the logic of solving problems, which is reflected in the structure of the dissertation. The content of the abstract fully reveals the stated topic. In the first chapter of the dissertation, an analysis was maderegulatory and legal mechanisms for managing atmospheric air quality, as well as methods and tools for analytical control and forecasting of air pollution by motor vehicles.
The second chapter presents the results of the assessment of the technogenic impact of the traffic flow on the air basin of the city near the studied section of the road network. The third chapter presents a project of measures to reduce the technogenic load on the environment caused by vehicle emissions. In the fourth chapter, an assessment of the environmental and economic damage to the natural environment is carried out before and after the implementation of the proposed measures, i.e. their economic efficiency was analyzed.
The advantages of the dissertation research include an original approach to determining the volumetric flow rate of exhaust gases, depending on the characteristics of the fuel, and the environmental and economic damage to the natural environment of a particular area before and after the implementation of the proposed measures.
Disadvantages of work: increasing the accuracy of calculating the volumetric flow of exhaust gases by introducing fuel characteristics is most likely leveled by the approximate empirical dependences of the concentration of pollutants in exhaust gases on the relative excess air coefficient and effective engine power; it is hardly necessary to talk at all about increasing the accuracy of calculating the masses of pollutant emissions by a traffic flow, based on a number of data that are difficult to account for (the composition of the flow, determined according to the information from the traffic police, the rated power of motor vehicles,located on the section of the road transport network at the moment, not clearly defined angle of inclination of the roadway to the horizontal plane, etc.).
Nevertheless, the results of the dissertation research are of high practical importance and can be used in environmental protection activities carried out by the city administration. The proposed program to reduce emissions of pollutants from motor vehicles is sufficiently justified and effective both from an environmental and economic point of view.
PhD dissertation was completed at a high level in accordance with the requirements of the Higher Attestation Commission. The author of the study deserves to be awarded the degree of candidate of technical sciences in the speci alty 03.02.08 "Ecology".
Feedback on the abstract of a doctoral dissertation
The abstract submitted for review on the topic "Development of the methodology for processing gold-bearing raw materials" contains information on the results of research and development to improve technology and equipment for the enrichment of gold-bearing raw materials. The topic of the dissertation seems to be relevant, since it is connected with the monetary and economic potential of the country and the expansion of the raw material base of the gold mining industry. The development of new technologies and equipment for the extraction of gold in the face of deteriorating quality of gold ore and placers is of particular importance and relevance.
The author has developed a new method for calculating the magnetic field and particle velocity inliquid media, new mathematical models of particle separation, the influence of vibration on the separation of minerals in a ferrofluid, the laws of separation of minerals in two-layer media, the interaction of phases in a turbulent upward flow, a probabilistic model of jigging has been studied. This made it possible to develop new equipment designs: a hydraulic separator, several types of magnetic and MF separators, drum and centrifugal separators with a two-layer separating medium, mobile separation complexes for finishing concentrates and primary processing of gold sands.
The practical significance of the dissertation lies in the fact that the problems of beneficiation of gold ore raw materials from the primary deposits "Olimpiada", "Norilsk-1", etc. equipment.
The most important provisions of the dissertation have been sufficiently tested, and 63 papers have been published, including 2 monographs and 7 patents.
Notes on the abstract. “Effective operation of a centrifugal MF separator is possible only when using ferrocolloids of a relatively high concentration, and, consequently, a relatively high cost. Therefore, in order to assess the possibility of industrial application of a centrifugal MF separator, data on the consumption of ferrofluid, its cost and economic calculation of operating costs for this operation are required.” The abstract does not provide information on these issues, which probably requires additionalresearch and correct justification.
However, in general, the dissertation work seems to be a significant contribution to the theory and practice of beneficiation of gold ores and concentrates. The results of the research are presented clearly and consistently, the tasks are formulated specifically, the conclusions are reliable, the recommendations are justified. The work uses modern methods of theoretical and experimental research and analysis.
The presented research is a completed scientific qualification work that meets the requirements of the Higher Attestation Commission for dissertations for the degree of Doctor of Technical Sciences. The dissertation is written at a high level and is of scientific and practical interest. The author of the dissertation deserves to be awarded the degree of Doctor of Technical Sciences in the speci alty 25.00.13 Mineral Processing.
Negative feedback. What to do?
Getting negative feedback on your scientific work is always unpleasant. However, in no case should you despair and give up. First of all, criticism points to the weaknesses of your research, and if there is enough time before the defense, you can always have time to make the necessary improvements. In addition, truth is born in a dispute, and a constructive discussion with opponents and reviewers can shed light on many points.
