Portfolio Defense

Posted on by

I attended a PhD Joint program comprehensive portfolio defense today. The individual who defended her portfolio, let’s call her Mary, was successful, with a few minor edits required. Right before the presentation was set to start, the internet access in both Lakehead campuses went down. As a backup plan, the cell phone of the local committee member was used to call in to the polycom system. The slides for the presentation were going to be shifted based on directions from Mary. Since there were 2 participants logged in from their own locations in the St. Catherine’s area, two from a location in Thunder Bay, and the room system in Orillia, it was a bit to manage each location. In the end, the alternative plan was not required, since the internet came back on line just at the last minute, and the tech support person was ready to ensure all was working as it should. Crisis averted, and Mary began her 20 minute presentation.

Mary had created a Prezi for this session, with speaker notes printed out on paper. I think I’d need the same, but I would print my notes in point form, larger font, with larg-ish spaces between sections. There were a few times when she looked down to see her notes, so finding where she was in the sequence on the page would be important. She appeared relaxed through the presentation and followed an agenda that was printed out and provided to the committee members. This agenda included

  • agenda and introductions
  • a deep understanding of concepts, theories, and issues in the field of study
  • knowledge of current literature and research methods
  • ability to analyze, synthesize, and critique research literature and related research paradigms
  • review of scholarly tasks – successful OGS statements, extended literature review, peer reviewed publications, conferences (poster and presenatations), culminating project, additional relevant certifications and roles. ( I could include ones I’ve acquired like the Ontario Extend badge(s) and the CC Certification)

The final pieces to the presentation were the relevance of the research and scholarly tasks to the proposed dissertation. At the end of this presentation, Mary concluded with a quote “My life as a scholar is an open book.”

Then two rounds of questions began. Each committee member, including her supervisor, are given two opportunities to ask Mary any specific question about her presentation or about elements found in the comprehensive portfolio, since this had been sent and reviewed by each member already. Some of the questions were applicable to the specific topic of Mary’s research, but others were about the proposed research and the presentation. Some general topics are shared here, but the full questions were extensive. I noticed Mary had a note pad and pen in front of her, but did not use this to help focus her responses to the specific question being asked.

  • relevant tensions in your thinking?
  • gaps in the research that your research may address or not address?
  • is it evidence based or measurable?
  • if the model isn’t definable, how do you know it’s working?
  • what is theory vs research evidence based elements of your portfolio
  • what is the difference between a theory and a framework model
  • what foundational research shaped your work early in your learning
  • what about your publication experience – what have you learned about yourself as a writer, what skills did you gain as an academic writer
  • what was most challenging, requiring the most change in your study

At the end of this question period, the guests and Mary were invited to leave the room, at which time the committee members discussed the portfolio as a whole. After about 20 minutes, Mary was invited back in for the results. We were then invited to enter to offer congratulations. While waiting, it was nice, I believe, to have others to share the experience and keep Mary’s mind from sinking into how she could have or should have answered any questions. In the end, I was present for the ‘graduation’ from PhD student to PhD candidate and wished Mary continued success in her quest for knowledge into the topic of her upcoming research.

Implications for my PhD portfolio defence.

I learned several points about the process, and resolve to attend a few more of these in the coming years, in order to better prepare myself for my ‘end point’ of my coursework. Knowing that I plan to incorporate media elements into the required presentation, I’ll need to moderate those carefully, in order to suit the committee members. Selecting the right committee will be key!It’ll be about knowing the audience to whom I will speak, and building their understanding of the topics, journey, story, and highlights of my scholarly, academic journey.

One point I need to remember is to position myself in the field – explain why I am where I am, my positionality embodied in the research. I’ll need to outline the plot sequence of how I got to this point in time, sharing key points and changes in direction where they happened. I’ll need to follow the familiar, but break the box that this process is wrapped in, since media and digital, open education, and the focus of my research will be different than others the committee may have had. I’ll need to have a great handle on all the research elements and build a mental map of their interconnectedness, ready to speak about any one in particular, while ensuring a balance of supportive research and critique of the work done.

There is lots to develop before this portfolio defence will occur, but at least I now know, I can accomplish this! This too, I can do – taking it one step at a time.