Thesis: the final PhD hurdle

My mate Entrepreneur submitted his PhD thesis a few months ago and is waiting to hear from his reviewers, I'm sure it'll get passed without too much fuss, good luck mate! When most people see the title Doctor, they immediately think of medical doctors (commonly called MDs in the States), dentists or veterninary doctors, and not PhD's. For some reason "MD" makes me think of the 80's sitcom Doogie Howser MD. Incidentally, Neil Patrick Harris who played the young doctor came out of the closet not too long ago.

PhD stands for Doctor of Philosophy, but it doesn't mean that someone with a PhD studied Philosophy. The origins of the PhD can be found here in Wikipedia but basically in medical research, having a PhD is necessary for a scientist who wants to eventually direct their own research group, whether it's in academia (university positions) or industry (e.g. pharmaceutical companies).

For my PhD, I spent 3 and 1/2 years 'on the bench' doing labwork and 6 months writing up what I had discovered in a thesis. The thesis was subsequently marked by 3 reviewers (from the US, Canada and England), who were scientists with expertise in my field of research.

It's actually rare that a thesis will be passed outright. Typically, a good thesis will get passed subject to minor revisions that are recommended by the reviewers. These revisions range from typo corrections, to suggestions about additional points that should be discussed or that need further clarification. But basically, if the reviewers suggest a 'pass with minor revisions' the PhD will be awarded, provided you complete the revisions of course.

What I got back from my reviewers were 2-4 pages of corrections and critique of each chapter (6 chapters in total) of the thesis. Thankfully, my thesis fell into the 'minor revisions' category. The format of the review is usually a brief summary of the markers interpretation of the chapter content, with some general comments, followed by a list of specific comments.

For example, this is a snippet of one reviewers general comments on my introduction "This is an extensive summary, covering all pertinent points and critically addressing discrepancies in the literature. Furthermore, the candidate identifies gaps in the literature....[and] the introduction demonstrates that the candidate is capable of critical thinking and the project addresses an important new problem." Sweet!

An example of a specific comment is "Page 77, Figure 3.8: How long were cells stimulated for in these experiments?"

So after correcting and addressing the reviewers concerns, I reprinted 4 copies of my 184 page thesis (even though I added some sentences to the revised version, somehow my corrected thesis was 10 pages shorter than the submitted version...?) got it properly bound in hard cover and dropped it off to the postgraduate coordinator, who assessed the changes and gave a recommendation to the postgraduate committee that I should be allowed to graduate. That was it. Four years of postgraduate study, on the back of 4 years undergraduate study, including an Honours year (with a shorter Honours thesis) had come to an end.

So was it worth slaving away in the lab, long hours, working a shit load of weekends and public holidays, stressing over the possibility of running out of funding/time, fearing yearly presentations to the entire Institute where I worked, living off a crappy PhD scholarship (while my mates are buying cars and houses) for almost 4 years?

I'd like to say yes, and don't get me wrong, I was bloody overjoyed to finally get my PhD, but ultimately, when I think about how painful an experience it was, all I have to say is that I really like the colour of my thesis. It's bound in an awesome shade of blue.