Review of the official opponent refers to regulatory documents and information materials on the examination of dissertations.
The dissertation defense procedure provides for the appointment by the specialized academic council of a number of officials who give an unbiased assessment of the research. The opponent is a competent scientist in a particular field of science who is able to conduct an exhaustive and objective assessment of the dissertation in accordance with certain principles and requirements. He should summarize the content of the work with an evaluation characteristic and critical remarks.
An obligatory element of the debate during the defense is the opinion of the opponent, read out during his speech at a meeting of the special council. The scientist prepares his opinion on the research submitted for examination on the basis of a detailed preliminary acquaintance with it.
Traditionally, two experts are required to defend a PhD thesis. One official opponent is a candidate of sciences, the other is a doctor. To defend a doctoral thesis, three reviews are required, provided exclusively by doctors of science. The document must be sent to the council inin the proper form and with comments no later than 10 days before the day of the defense, so that the dissertation student has the opportunity to familiarize himself with it and prepare comments.
The main components that the opponent should display in the review are as follows:
- relevance of the chosen topic;
- degree of argumentation of the provisions of scientific novelty;
- level of presented conclusions and recommendations for the application of the results;
- complete display of research data in scientific publications and informativeness of all sections of the dissertation.
Arguing the relevance of the work, it is necessary to identify links with state scientific programs, promising areas for the development of science and technology.
Provisions of scientific novelty is a very important aspect in any dissertation. The opponent accurately and objectively reflects its strengths and weaknesses, without exaggerating or downplaying the researcher's contribution.
The feedback must necessarily list the key problems that are being investigated, as well as briefly present their own opinion about their solution: are the methods chosen correctly, how high is the degree of importance of these problems, are the results correct.
If any statements raise doubts, encourage discussion, the opponent must indicate and proclaim this.
One of the main tasks in preparing a review is to determine the significance of the work for science and practice and indicate the scope of the results obtained.
As a result, the opponent points tocompliance or non-compliance of the content with the passport of speci alties, makes a proposal for the award of a scientific degree.
In the feedback, it is required to note the completeness of the results obtained and the description of the course of the study, as well as point out inaccuracies in the design. Incorrect use of other people's scientific works, lack of references to authorities is unacceptable. In addition, the opponent can comment on the entire scientific activity of the dissertation in the review. These are articles in specialized publications, activity at various conferences, practical developments and acts of their implementation.
If the review notes a low level of work, this must be argued in accordance with all requirements.
An opponent is a participant in a degree award event. Accordingly, he is responsible for objective and truthful information provided by documents.
