defending phd viva

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Personal tools

• Log in/Register Register

https://www.vitae.ac.uk/doing-research/doing-a-doctorate/completing-your-doctorate/your-viva/your-phd-viva

This page has been reproduced from the Vitae website (www.vitae.ac.uk). Vitae is dedicated to realising the potential of researchers through transforming their professional and career development.

• Vitae members' area

Defending your doctoral thesis: the PhD viva

Format for defending a doctoral thesis.

Every institution will have specific regulations for the thesis defence. In some countries or institutions, the convention is for thesis defences to be public events where you will give a lecture explaining your research, followed by a discussion with a panel of examiners (opponents). Both your examiners and the audience are able to ask questions.

In other countries, including the UK, the oral examination is usually conducted behind closed doors by at least two examiners, usually with at least one being from another institution (external examiner) and an expert in your topic of research. In the UK the supervisor does not participate in the viva, but may be allowed to observe. Sometimes someone from your own institution is appointed as an independent chair. Although it is now becoming more common for the candidate to have an opportunity to give a public lecture in UK institutions, this does not form part of the examination and may or may not be attended by the examiners.

Viva preparation

Take the preparation for your viva seriously and devote a substantial amount of time to it. The viva preparation checklist may be useful to help you prepare.

Your institution may offer courses on viva preparation and there may be opportunities to organise a practice viva. Take advantage of these opportunities: they can be extremely valuable experiences.

Things you may wish to take with you

• your thesis – mildly annotated if you wish
• a list of questions that you might be asked and your planned responses
• any questions that you want to ask your examiners
• additional notes which you have made during your revision
• list of minor corrections that you have come across during your revision.

During the viva

Your study will have strengths and weaknesses: it is essential that you are prepared to discuss both. You could think of any weaknesses as an opportunity to demonstrate your skill at critical appraisal. Examiners will seek to find and discuss weaknesses in all theses. Do not interpret criticism as indication of a possible negative outcome.

Examiners have different personalities, styles and levels of experience. Sometimes a candidate may feel that a challenge is made in a confrontational way. Experienced, effective examiners will not be inappropriately confrontational, but some will. Do not take offence. A relaxed, thoughtful, and non-confrontational response from you will help re-balance the discussion. Having an independent chair can help maintain a constructive environment.

Useful tips for during your viva:

• Ask for clarification of ambiguous questions or ask for the question to be repeated if necessary
• Take time to think before answering
• Be prepared to ask questions and enter into a dialogue with your examiners
• Be prepared to discuss your research in context of other work done in your field
• Be ready to admit if you don't know the answer to a question
• Be prepared to express opinions of your own

You are not expected to have perfect recall of your thesis and everything that you have read and done. If you get flustered, or need to refer to notes your examiners will understand. They have been in your situation themselves!

After your viva

There are several possible outcomes   of a thesis defence. Most commonly, your examiners will recommend to your institution that you are awarded your degree subject to minor corrections, although in some instances they might ask for more substantial work.

Bookmark & Share

• PhD Viva Voces – A Complete Guide
• Doing a PhD
• A PhD viva involves defending your thesis in an oral examination with at least two examiners.
• The aim of a PhD viva is to confirm that the work is your own , that you have a deep understanding of your project and, overall, that you are a competent researcher .
• There are no standard durations, but they usually range from one to three hours, with most lasting approximately two hours .
• There are six outcomes of a PhD viva: (1) pass without corrections (2) pass subject to minor corrections, (3) pass subject to major corrections, (4) downgrade to MPhil with no amendments, (5) downgrade to MPhil subject to amendments, (6) immediate fail.
• Almost all students who sit their viva pass it, with the most common outcome being ‘(2) – pass subject to minor corrections’.

What Is a PhD Viva?

A viva voce , more commonly referred to as ‘viva’, is an oral examination conducted at the end of your PhD and is essentially the final hurdle on the path to a doctorate. It is the period in which a student’s knowledge and work are evaluated by independent examiners.

In order to assess the student and their work around their research question, a viva sets out to determine:

• you understand the ideas and theories that you have put forward,
• you can answer questions about elements of your work that the examiners have questions about,
• you understand the broader research in your field and how your work contributes to this,
• you are aware of the limitations of your work and understand how it can be developed further,
• your work makes an original contribution, is your own and has not been plagiarised.

Note: A viva is a compulsory procedure for all PhD students, with the only exception being when a PhD is obtained through publication as opposed to the conventional route of study.

Who Will Attend a Viva?

In the UK, at least two examiners must take part in all vivas. Although you could have more than two examiners, most will not in an attempt to facilitate a smoother questioning process.

One of the two examiners will be internal, i.e. from your university, and the other will be external, i.e. from another university. Regardless, both will be knowledgeable in your research field and have read your thesis beforehand.

In addition to your two examiners, two other people may be present. The first is a chairperson. This is an individual who will be responsible for monitoring the interview and for ensuring proper conduct is followed at all times. The need for an external chairperson will vary between universities, as one of the examiners can also take on this role. The second is your supervisor, whose attendance is decided upon by you in agreement with your examiners. If your supervisor attends, they are prohibited from asking questions or from influencing the outcome of the viva.

To avoid any misunderstandings, we have summarised the above in a table:

Note: In some countries, such as in the United States, a viva is known as a ‘PhD defense’ and is performed publicly in front of a panel or board of examiners and an open audience. In these situations, the student presents their work in the form of a lecture and then faces questions from the examiners and audience which almost acts as a critical appraisal.

How Long Does a Viva Last?

Since all universities have different guidelines , and since all PhDs are unique, there are no standard durations. Typically, however, the duration ranges from one to three hours, with most lasting approximately two hours.

Your examiners will also influence the duration of your viva as some will favour a lengthy discussion, while others may not. Usually, your university will consult your examiners in advance and notify you of the likely duration closer to the day of your viva.

What Happens During a Viva?

Regardless of the subject area, all PhD vivas follow the same examination process format as below.

Introductions

You will introduce yourselves to each other, with the internal examiner normally introducing the external examiner. If an external chairperson is present, they too are introduced; otherwise, this role will be assumed by one of the examiners.

Procedure Explained

After the introductions, the appointed chair will explain the viva process. Although it should already be known to everyone, it will be repeated to ensure the viva remains on track during the forthcoming discussion.

Warm-Up Questions

The examiners will then begin the questioning process. This usually starts with a few simple opening questions, such as asking you to summarise your PhD thesis and what motivated you to carry out the research project.

In-Depth Questions

The viva questions will then naturally increase in difficulty as the examiners go further into the details of your thesis. These may include questions such as “What was the most critical decision you made when determining your research methodology ?”, “Do your findings agree with the current published work?” and “How do your findings impact existing theories or literature? ”. In addition to asking open-ended questions, they will also ask specific questions about the methodology, results and analysis on which your thesis is based.

Closing the Viva

Once the examiners are satisfied that they have thoroughly evaluated your knowledge and thesis, they will invite you to ask any questions you may have, and then bring the oral examination to a close.

What Happens After the Viva?

Once your viva has officially ended, your examiners will ask you to leave the room so that they can discuss your performance. Once a mutual agreement has been reached, which can take anywhere from 10 minutes to an hour, you will be invited back inside and informed of your outcome.

PhD Viva Outcomes

There are six possible outcomes to a viva:

• Immediate award of degree: A rare recommendation – congratulations, you are one of the few people who completely satisfied your examiners the first time around. You do not have to do anything further at this point.
• Minor amendments required: The most common recommendation – you obtain a pass on the condition that you make a number of minor amendments to your thesis, such as clarifying certain points and correcting grammatical errors. The time you have to make these changes depends on the number of them, but is usually one to six months.
• Major amendments required: A somewhat uncommon recommendation – you are requested to make major amendments to your thesis, ranging from further research to collecting more data or rewriting entire sections. Again, the time you have to complete this will depend on the number of changes required, but will usually be six months to one year. You will be awarded your degree once your amended thesis has been reviewed and accepted.
• Immediate award of MPhil: An uncommon recommendation – your examiners believe your thesis does not meet the standard for a doctoral degree but meets the standard for an MPhil (Master of Philosophy), a lower Master’s degree.
• Amendments required for MPhil: A rare recommendation – your examiners believe your thesis does not meet the standard for a doctoral degree, but with several amendments will meet the standard for an MPhil.
• Immediate fail: A very rare recommendation – you are given an immediate fail without the ability to resubmit and without entitlement to an MPhil.

Finding a PhD has never been this easy – search for a PhD by keyword, location or academic area of interest.

What Is the Pass Rate for Vivas?

Based on an  analysis of 26,076 PhD students  who took their viva exam between 2006 and 2017, the PhD viva pass rate in the UK is 96%; of those who passed, about 80% were required to make minor amendments to their thesis. The reason for this high pass rate is that supervisors will only put their students forward for a viva once they confidently believe they are ready for it. As a result, most candidates who sit a viva are already well-versed in their PhD topic before they even start preparing for the exam.

How Do I Arrange a Viva?

Your viva will be arranged either by the examiners or by the chairperson. The viva will be arranged at least one to two months after you have submitted your thesis and will arrange a viva date and venue that is suitable for all participants.

Can I Choose My Examiners?

At most universities, you and your supervisor will choose the internal and external examiners yourselves. This is because the examiners must have extensive knowledge of the thesis topic in order to be able to examine you and, as the author of the thesis in question, who else could better determine who they might be than you and your supervisor. The internal examiner is usually quite easy to find given they will be from your institution, but the external examiner may end up being your second or third preference depending on availability.

Can I Take Notes Into a Viva?

A viva is about testing your competence, not your memory. As such, you are allowed to take notes and other supporting material in with you. However, keep in mind that your examiners will not be overly impressed if you constantly have to refer to your notes to answer each question. Because of this, many students prefer to take an annotated copy of their thesis, with important points already highlighted and key chapters marked with post-it notes.

In addition to an annotated copy of a thesis, some students also take:

• a list of questions they would like to ask the examiners,
• notes that were created during their preparation,
• a list of minor corrections they have already identified from their viva prep work.

How Do I Prepare for a PhD Viva?

There are several ways to prepare for a PhD viva, one of the most effective being a mock viva voce examination . This allows you to familiarise yourself with the type of viva questions you will be asked and identify any weak areas you need to improve. They also give you the opportunity to practise without the pressure, giving you more time to think about your answers which will help to make sure that you know your thesis inside out. However, a mock viva exam is just one of many methods available to you – some of the other viva preparation methods can be found on our “ How to Prepare for a PhD Viva ” page.

Browse PhDs Now

Join thousands of students.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Preparing For Your Dissertation Defense

13 Key Questions To Expect In The Viva Voce

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) & David Phair (PhD) . Reviewed By: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | June 2021

Preparing for your dissertation or thesis defense (also called a “viva voce”) is a formidable task . All your hard work over the years leads you to this one point, and you’ll need to defend yourself against some of the most experienced researchers you’ve encountered so far.

It’s natural to feel a little nervous.

In this post, we’ll cover some of the most important questions you should be able to answer in your viva voce, whether it’s for a Masters or PhD degree. Naturally, they might not arise in exactly the same form (some may not come up at all), but if you can answer these questions well, it means you’re in a good position to tackle your oral defense.

Viva Voce Prep: 13 Essential Questions

• What is your study about and why did you choose to research this in particular?
• How did your research questions evolve during the research process?
• How did you decide on which sources to include in your literature review?
• How did you design your study and why did you take this approach?
• How generalisable and valid are the findings?
• What were the main shortcomings and limitations created by your research design?
• How did your findings relate to the existing literature?
• What were your key findings in relation to the research questions?
• Were there any findings that surprised you?
• What biases may exist in your research?
• How can your findings be put into practice?
• How has your research contributed to current thinking in the field?
• If you could redo your research, how would you alter your approach?

#1: What is your study about and why did you choose to research this in particular?

This question, a classic party starter, is pretty straightforward.

What the dissertation or thesis committee is assessing here is your ability to clearly articulate your research aims, objectives and research questions in a concise manner. Concise is the keyword here – you need to clearly explain your research topic without rambling on for a half-hour. Don’t feel the need to go into the weeds here – you’ll have many opportunities to unpack the details later on.

In the second half of the question, they’re looking for a brief explanation of the justification of your research. In other words, why was this particular set of research aims, objectives and questions worth addressing? To address this question well in your oral defense, you need to make it clear what gap existed within the research and why that gap was worth filling.

#2: How did your research questions evolve during the research process?

Good research generally follows a long and winding path . It’s seldom a straight line (unless you got really lucky). What they’re assessing here is your ability to follow that path and let the research process unfold.

Specifically, they’ll want to hear about the impact that the literature review process had on you in terms of shaping the research aims, objectives and research questions . For example, you may have started with a certain set of aims, but then as you immersed yourself in the literature, you may have changed direction. Similarly, your initial fieldwork findings may have turned out some unexpected data that drove you to adjust or expand on your initial research questions.

Long story short – a good defense involves clearly describing your research journey , including all the twists and turns. Adjusting your direction based on findings in the literature or the fieldwork shows that you’re responsive , which is essential for high-quality research.

#3: How did you decide on which sources to include in your literature review?

A comprehensive literature review is the foundation of any high-quality piece of research. With this question, your dissertation or thesis committee are trying to assess which quality criteria and approach you used to select the sources for your literature review.

Typically, good research draws on both the seminal work in the respective field and more recent sources . In other words, a combination of the older landmark studies and pivotal work, along with up-to-date sources that build on to those older studies. This combination ensures that the study has a rock-solid foundation but is not out of date.

So, make sure that your study draws on a mix of both the “classics” and new kids on the block, and take note of any major evolutions in the literature that you can use as an example when asked this question in your viva voce.

#4: How did you design your study and why did you take this approach?

This is a classic methodological question that you can almost certainly expect in some or other shape.

What they’re looking for here is a clear articulation of the research design and methodology, as well as a strong justification of each choice . So, you need to be able to walk through each methodological choice and clearly explain both what you did and why you did it. The why is particularly important – you need to be able to justify each choice you made by clearly linking your design back to your research aims, objectives and research questions, while also taking into account practical constraints.

To ensure you cover every base, check out our research methodology vlog post , as well as our post covering the Research Onion .

#5: How generalizable and valid are the findings?

This question is aimed at specifically digging into your understanding of the sample and how that relates to the population, as well as potential validity issues in your methodology.

To answer question this well, you’ll need to critically assess your sample and findings and consider if they truly apply to the entire population, as well as whether they assessed what they set out to. Note that there are two components here – generalizability and validity . Generalizability is about how well the sample represents the population. Validity is about how accurately you’ve measured what you intended to measure .

To ace this part of your dissertation defense, make sure that you’re very familiar with the concepts of generalizability , validity and reliability , and how these apply to your research. Remember, you don’t need to achieve perfection – you just need to be aware of the strengths and weaknesses of your research (and how the weaknesses could be improved upon).

Need a helping hand?

#6: What were the main shortcomings and limitations created by your research design?

This question picks up where the last one left off.

As I mentioned, it’s perfectly natural that your research will have shortcomings and limitations as a result of your chosen design and methodology. No piece of research is flawless. Therefore, a good dissertation defense is not about arguing that your work is perfect, but rather it’s about clearly articulating the strengths and weaknesses of your approach.

To address this question well, you need to think critically about all of the potential weaknesses your design may have, as well as potential responses to these (which could be adopted in future research) to ensure you’re well prepared for this question. For a list of common methodological limitations, check out our video about research limitations here .

#7: How did your findings relate to the existing literature?

This common dissertation defense question links directly to your discussion chapter , where you would have presented and discussed the findings in relation to your literature review.

What your dissertation or thesis committee is assessing here is your ability to compare your study’s findings to the findings of existing research . Specifically, you need to discuss which findings aligned with existing research and which findings did not. For those findings that contrasted against existing research, you should also explain what you believe to be the reasons for this.

As with many questions in a viva voce, it’s both the what and the why that matter here. So, you need to think deeply about what the underlying reasons may be for both the similarities and differences between your findings and those of similar studies.

#8: What were your key findings in relation to the research questions?

This question is similar to the last one in that it too focuses on your research findings. However, here the focus is specifically on the findings that directly relate to your research questions (as opposed to findings in general).

So, a good way to prepare for this question is to step back and revisit your research questions . Ask yourself the following:

• What exactly were you asking in those questions, and what did your research uncover concerning them?
• Which questions were well answered by your study and which ones were lacking?
• Why were they lacking and what more could be done to address this in future research?

Conquering this part dissertation defense requires that you focus squarely on the research questions. Your study will have provided many findings (hopefully!), and not all of these will link directly to the research questions. Therefore, you need to clear your mind of all of the fascinating side paths your study may have lead you down and regain a clear focus on the research questions .

#9: Were there any findings that surprised you?

This question is two-pronged.

First, you should discuss the surprising findings that were directly related to the original research questions . Going into your research, you likely had some expectations in terms of what you would find, so this is your opportunity to discuss the outcomes that emerged as contrary to what you initially expected. You’ll also want to think about what the reasons for these contrasts may be.

Second, you should discuss the findings that weren’t directly related to the research questions, but that emerged from the data set . You may have a few or you may have none – although generally there are a handful of interesting musings that you can glean from the data set. Again, make sure you can articulate why you find these interesting and what it means for future research in the area.

What the committee is looking for in this type of question is your ability to interpret the findings holistically and comprehensively , and to respond to unexpected data. So, take the time to zoom out and reflect on your findings thoroughly.

#10: What biases may exist in your research?

Biases… we all have them.

For this question, you’ll need to think about potential biases in your research , in the data itself but also in your interpretation of the data. With this question, your committee is assessing whether you have considered your own potential biases and the biases inherent in your analysis approach (i.e. your methodology). So, think carefully about these research biases and be ready to explain how these may exist in your study.

In an oral defense, this question is often followed up with a question on how the biases were mitigated or could be mitigated in future research. So, give some thought not just to what biases may exist, but also the mitigation measures (in your own study and for future research).

#11: How can your findings be put into practice?

Another classic question in the typical viva voce.

With this question, your committee is assessing your ability to bring your findings back down to earth and demonstrate their practical value and application. Importantly, this question is not about the contribution to academia or the overall field of research (we’ll get to that next) – it is specifically asking about how this newly created knowledge can be used in the real world.

Naturally, the actionability of your findings will vary depending on the nature of your research topic. Some studies will produce many action points and some won’t. If you’re researching marketing strategies within an industry, for example, you should be able to make some very specific recommendations for marketing practitioners in that industry.

To help you flesh out points for this question, look back at your original justification for the research (i.e. in your introduction and literature review chapters). What were the driving forces that led you to research your specific topic? That justification should help you identify ways in which your findings can be put into practice.

#12: How has your research contributed to current thinking in the field?

While the previous question was aimed at practical contribution, this question is aimed at theoretical contribution . In other words, what is the significance of your study within the current body of research? How does it fit into the existing research and what does it add to it?

This question is often asked by a field specialist and is used to assess whether you’re able to place your findings into the research field to critically convey what your research contributed. This argument needs to be well justified – in other words, you can’t just discuss what your research contributed, you need to also back each proposition up with a strong why .

To answer this question well, you need to humbly consider the quality and impact of your work and to be realistic in your response. You don’t want to come across as arrogant (“my work is groundbreaking”), nor do you want to undersell the impact of your work. So, it’s important to strike the right balance between realistic and pessimistic .

This question also opens the door to questions about potential future research . So, think about what future research opportunities your study has created and which of these you feel are of the highest priority.

#13: If you could redo your research, how would you alter your approach?

This question is often used to wrap up a viva voce as it brings the discussion full circle.

Here, your committee is again assessing your ability to clearly identify and articulate the limitations and shortcomings of your research, both in terms of research design and topic focus . Perhaps, in hindsight, it would have been better to use a different analysis method or data set. Perhaps the research questions should have leaned in a slightly different direction. And so on.

This question intends to assess whether you’re able to look at your work critically , assess where the weaknesses are and make recommendations for the future. This question often sets apart those who did the research purely because it was required, from those that genuinely engaged with their research. So, don’t hold back here – reflect on your entire research journey ask yourself how you’d do things differently if you were starting with a  blank canvas today.

Recap: The 13 Key Dissertation Defense Questions

To recap, here are the 13 questions you need to be ready for to ace your dissertation or thesis oral defense:

As I mentioned, this list of dissertation defense questions is certainly not exhaustive – don’t assume that we’ve covered every possible question here. However, these questions are quite likely to come up in some shape or form in a typical dissertation or thesis defense, whether it’s for a Master’s degree, PhD or any other research degree. So, you should take the time to make sure you can answer them well.

If you need assistance preparing for your dissertation defense or viva voce, get in touch with us to discuss 1-on-1 coaching. We can critically review your research and identify potential issues and responses, as well as undertake a mock oral defense to prepare you for the pressures and stresses on the day.

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

You Might Also Like:

12 Comments

Very interesting

Interesting. I appreciate!

Really appreciating

My field is International Trade

Interesting

This is a full course on defence. I was fabulously enlightened and I gained enough confidence for my upcoming Masters Defence.

There are many lessons to learn and the simplicity in presentationmakes thee reader say “YesI can”

This is so helping… it has Enlightened me on how to answer specific questions. I pray to make it through for my upcoming defense

Lovely to hear that 🙂

Really educative and beneficial

Interesting. On-point and elaborate. And comforting too! Thanks.

Thank you very much for the enlightening me, be blessed

Thankyou so much. I am planning to defend my thesis soon and I found this very useful

Very interesting and useful to all masters and PhD students

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

What is a viva? PhD viva, viva voce, viva process and more

If you are a PhD candidate and preparing to take the biggest step in your academic journey, you might be overwhelmed by the thought of your impending viva voce or the oral defense of your thesis.

Worry not, we are here to demystify the process and provide you with actionable tips to successfully navigate this crucial academic milestone.

Here, we will guide you through the viva process, shed light on the perspective of your examiners, and help you understand how to prepare for this pivotal examination. 

Whether you’re just beginning to wrap your head around what a viva entails or are already deep in the trenches of preparation, this blog is designed to offer you comprehensive, step-by-step guidance.

By understanding the process, expectations, and preparing effectively, you can walk into your viva with confidence, ready to defend your thesis and demonstrate your deep understanding of your research area.

What is a PhD viva or viva voce?

A PhD viva or viva voce is an oral examination where you defend your thesis in front of internal examiner(s) from your institution and/or external examiner(s) from another institution specializing in your subject area.

There may be up to 5 people on your viva panel. 

They are testing your knowledge and thought processed to be admitted into the degree.

Typically lasting for an hour and a half to two hours, the viva is a conversation between experts, giving you the chance to elaborate and clarify your research.

Preparation for the viva can involve ongoing conversations, with supervisors and focused development after thesis submission.

As the viva voce derives from the Latin for ‘living voice,’ let your passion for your research come alive in your defense.

As nerve-wracking as it might be, remember to relax and use this opportunity to share your contribution to your field. 

Supervisors will (or at least should) conduct mock vivas to help you prepare for questions and build confidence. Ask for a mock viva if one is not offered by your supervisor. 

During the viva, your supervisor may be present as a silent observer, ensuring examination conduct.

Outcomes of a viva range from:

• passing without corrections,
• passing with minor or major corrections,
• or not passing at all.

Examiners won’t necessarily spot all mistakes, but they read your work thoroughly, engage in a comprehensive discussion, and submit independent reports before the viva.

Understand what’s expected of you in your viva (Examiner point of view)

From an examiner’s point of view, in your viva, you are expected to confidently explain and defend your thesis.

You should be well-prepared, recognizing that examiners will carefully read your work and may identify minor mistakes.

Keep in mind that examiners may not know your thesis as well as you, so be prepared to clarify and elaborate on your research. 

They may ask some really simple and basic questions of you – particularly early on in your thesis defense.

It is essential to demonstrate your understanding of the topic and address any questions posed by the examiners.

You may have the option to include your supervisor or other supportive figures from your institution during the viva for moral support and to witness the examination’s conduct.

Understand that examiners typically work independently and exchange reports just before the viva, so be ready to engage in a comprehensive discussion about your work.

Focus on showcasing your:

• research abilities, and
• significance of your thesis

during the viva.

How to prepare for your viva exam

To prepare for a PhD viva, follow these actionable steps:

1. Familiarize yourself with your examiner’s and supervisor’s work (4-5 days): Know their research interests, potential biases, and recent publications, and consider how they might relate to your thesis.

2. Understand your thesis deeply (5-6 days): Be able to explain your research question/hypothesis, aims, theoretical framework, methods, and key results concisely. Review all the papers you discussed or mentioned in your thesis, noting their relevance to your work. Address any weaknesses in your analysis, and justify your study’s merit to earn a PhD.

3. Practice summarizing your thesis: Prepare a 200-word summary of each chapter and a 2-minute explanation of your whole thesis. Be ready to clarify your work in one or two sentences.

4. Anticipate general questions : Examples include summarizing your thesis, stating your research question or hypothesis, and discussing your main results. Prepare answers for potential questions from both a general and discipline-specific context.

5. Conduct mock vivas with your supervisor: Simulate the viva experience to get comfortable with the format, build confidence, and receive feedback on your performance.

6. Review general questions and answers (last 1-2 days): Brush up on your prepared responses and make any necessary final adjustments.

Remember, most PhD students pass their viva, so focus on preparing and confidently discussing your research.

Things to keep in mind during your viva – top tips

Here are the top tips to keep in mind during your viva:

1. Ask for clarifications if a question is unclear. Be polite and ensure you understand the question before attempting to answer it.   2. Don’t interrupt the examiner while they are asking a question. Give them time to finish, as it shows respect and allows you to fully comprehend the inquiry.

3. Be honest if you don’t know the answer to a question. Prepare a polite response for unexpected questions you cannot answer.

4. Maintain confidence without arrogance. Display a level of nervousness that reflects your dedication to the process, but avoid overconfidence or disrespect.

5. Keep your answers concise and structured. Use a clear format when providing your response, such as breaking it down into key points.

6. Speak at a moderate pace. Avoid talking too fast or too slow, as it can be distracting for the listeners. Practice controlling your speech rate during your preparations.

7. Give yourself plenty of time before the defense to prepare and relax. You should be in the right state of mind for your viva.

8. Be familiar with the protocols, format, and panel of your viva. Attend other thesis defenses, read your institution’s guidelines, and research the background of the examiners on your panel.

By following these tips, you can enter your viva well-prepared and have a successful defense. Enjoy the experience and demonstrate the hard work you have put into your research.

Wrapping up – thesis viva

Concluding our comprehensive guide on the viva process for PhD students, the final thought we leave you with is this: your PhD viva, or viva voce, is an opportunity to defend your research, a unique chance to demonstrate your motivation, strengths, and even your limitations as a researcher.

It’s important to understand the viva definition in its entirety: a viva voce is an oral test undertaken in front of a panel of examiners.

This panel usually includes one internal examiner from your institution and one external examiner from another. It may also include other experts depending on policies and practices.

Preparation is key when you get to the viva stage.

To that end, arranging a mock viva with your supervisor could help you anticipate the types of questions you’ll be asked. This practice could enable you to put your best foot forward during the real deal.

Don’t be surprised if the viva examination lasts anywhere between one and four hours.

You may be asked to elaborate on your PhD thesis, defend your field of study’s claims, discuss its strengths and weaknesses, and suggest future research opportunities. Your response to the assessment task should be in-depth and thoughtful.

Under the current COVID-19 conditions, many students are having their viva over Zoom or Skype.

In these cases, it’s important to arrange your setting to minimise distractions. Feel free to ask for clarification if the audio cuts out or you miss a question.

In preparation for your viva, review the academic profiles of your panel members, anticipate questions they might ask, and keep a copy of your thesis at hand.

Also, remember that while it’s important to provide an in-depth response, a concise explanation is ideal to avoid going on a tangent. If you’re asked about any weaknesses or limitations in your work, be honest and thoughtful in your response, highlighting your problem-solving skills as a researcher.

You’ve worked hard to reach this stage; now it’s your chance to shine! Best of luck!

Dr Andrew Stapleton has a Masters and PhD in Chemistry from the UK and Australia. He has many years of research experience and has worked as a Postdoctoral Fellow and Associate at a number of Universities. Although having secured funding for his own research, he left academia to help others with his YouTube channel all about the inner workings of academia and how to make it work for you.

Thank you for visiting Academia Insider.

We are here to help you navigate Academia as painlessly as possible. We are supported by our readers and by visiting you are helping us earn a small amount through ads and affiliate revenue - Thank you!

2024 © Academia Insider

• Log in
• Site search

5 tips for passing your PhD viva

Every Doctoral researcher is expected to defend their thesis through an oral test - so discover how to prepare for your PhD viva and ensure you make a good impression on the examiners

What is a PhD viva?

A viva voce is an oral test, which literally translated means 'with the living voice'. It's a focused discussion giving you the opportunity to present your PhD thesis and then defend it in front of a panel of academic experts.

1. Understand what's expected of you

Traditionally, your thesis would always be discussed in person, with the interview style viva exam overseen by at least two (internal and external) examiners. Afterwards, they would provide you with a joint written report detailing any corrections that need to be made.

However, following the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, the online PhD viva has become more commonplace with this examination more likely to take place via Microsoft Teams, Skype or Zoom.

The virtual experience will still typically follow the same format, but you'll be briefed in advance about the arrangements and any technical aspects to bear in mind. You can prepare for an online PhD viva by reading our video interview tips .

The chair of the viva is usually the internal examiner, although it can be an independent person. If you and the examiners agree, your PhD supervisor can also be present.

The examiners' main objective is to ascertain that you've written your own thesis, so if you have and are ready to talk through how you completed it, there's no need to panic. You may even enjoy the viva voce test.

In addition to assessing your thesis, the examiners are also there to assist you in deciding how and where this research might be published.

There are various results between a 'pass' and 'fail' but it's very rare to slip up at this point of a PhD. Most Doctorate awards will be made upon the condition that a number of minor corrections are made, with re-submission requests far less common.

However, while the pass rate is high, the viva exam itself can still be intellectually demanding. This is because you'll be debating issues that are conceptually complex, so preparation is crucial to your success.

At the end of it, whatever the outcome, be prepared to take on board any advice, as the examiners are there to help you improve your argument or the presentation of your thesis.

2. Know your thesis inside out

While you can be sure this isn't a memory test - as you're fine bringing notes and a copy of your thesis with you to the PhD viva - it's still important to gain a good understanding of what you've written and be knowledge about your field of study.

You'll need to think carefully about where this original piece of work would be placed in the context of the wider body of research carried out in this field. Questions will surely be asked about this, as well as whether the project could possibly be developed further through any future research.

As you'll be explaining parts of the document to the examiners (who'll also have a digital or physical copy), make sure the pagination is the same in your version as the one they're looking at to avoid any issues regarding everybody being on the same page.

If you get stuck at any point during the viva exam, you can use looking at the thesis as an excuse to re-focus and gather your thoughts.

3. Anticipate the viva questions

The examiners will have prepared a series of questions for you to answer at the viva voce, but this is nothing to get too concerned about. The questions will all be based on your thesis - what it's about, what you did and what you found out - and why this matters, in relation to your field of study.

So when getting ready for the viva, consider the types of questions you're likely to be asked, including:

• What original contribution has your thesis made to this field of study?
• Explain the main research questions you were hoping to address.
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of your thesis?
• If you had to start the thesis again, what would you do differently?
• If funding was no object, describe how you'd follow on from this project.
• What are your plans for the future?

It can be helpful to practise your answers beforehand, ideally vocalising them by arranging a mock mini viva - although, as you aren't restricted in terms of referring to notes in the exam, you can leave room for spontaneity, and you don't need to learn it all off by heart. If your viva is being held online, you can ensure any technical issues are identified before the day by having a run through with your supervisor or a friend.

While it may sound simple, stick to answering the questions posed. It's really easy to go off on a tangent and this can open up other lines of enquiry from the examiners - possibly in areas you hadn't expected to be quizzed about.

On the other hand, it's completely fine to bring personality to your reasoning and use stories as a means of describing the learning process you've gone through and the techniques mastered over the last three or four years that have brought you to this point.

4. Learn about your examiners' own work

The senior and well-respected academics who'll be reading your thesis will have their own ideas on conducting PhD standard research. Therefore, it's worth taking a look online at their academic profiles to discover if there's any correlation with the research they've had published and your own work.

From this, you should be able to gain a better idea of their motivations, their possible views on your thesis and the kinds of questions they might wish to discuss after having read through it.

You should research up-to-date theories, read any recent papers on the subject and speak to others who've recently had their own viva exam. Think about how your work differentiates from the research carried out by others in your chosen field.

Prepare to provide any supporting evidence asked of you by the examiners - for example, they may request to see experimental data you mention once the exam is over.

It's also necessary to check the policies and practices in place at your university and be sure of what the roles of the examiners are and how the viva panel will be structured. In many cases, Doctoral students can choose the examiners conducting the PhD viva.

5. Plan towards the viva exam

From the moment you know the date of your viva voce, work backwards and plan the steps you'll need to take before the day itself. Allow enough time to assess and review your work so that as the day approaches, you can focus on the practicalities.

This encompasses everything from making sure you relax, eat and sleep well the day before to arranging transport so you get to the viva on time - if you're attending in person.

An online PhD viva will present its own challenges, so ensure your working space is presentable and you still make an effort in terms of what you'll be wearing.

It's always advisable to adhere to interview etiquette and go with something that's both smart and comfortable. By looking the part, this should get you in the right frame of mind to communicate in a professional manner.

In the build-up, avoid any situations that might make you feel stressed and instead try to adopt a positive attitude, one that results in a genuine eagerness to engage in a debate about the work you've been toiling over for a substantial period of time.

If you're travelling to the examination, be sure to check that you have everything you wish to take with you, including the thesis, plus any notes or other materials that will help support your claims.

The PhD viva can last between one and four hours - usually two - so it's necessary to pace yourself to get off to the best possible start.

Remember, the examiners aren't trying to trip you up - they want you to pass and are primarily there to hear you talk about your project. So, after the polite introductions they'll typically start with an icebreaker to put you at ease and help calm the nerves.

It's meant to be an open and honest conversation about your work, so feel free to politely disagree with the examiners, especially on areas you feel strongly about. Don't forget to use examples from your thesis to back up what you're saying, remembering to be clear and concise.

If you know your way around your thesis and can explain your thinking and way of working, this test shouldn't be a problem. And if you don't know the answer to a specific question - admit it, as it's better to concede your limitations in an area than ramble on and hope they don't notice you're struggling to come up with an explanation. No research is perfect, so it's important to appreciate this during the discussion - but don't be too overcritical about your work either, as that's not your job.

Finally, as the PhD viva can quickly move from a series of friendly questions to those that are more in-depth, take some time to think before answering. Don't worry about any periods of silence from the examiners, as this certainly isn't an indication that you're doing badly.

Find out more

• Explore possible careers at your PhD, what next?
• Consider getting an academic job .

How would you rate this page?

On a scale where 1 is dislike and 5 is like

• Dislike 1 unhappy-very
• Like 5 happy-very

Thank you for rating the page

The Savvy Scientist

Experiences of a London PhD student and beyond

What is a PhD Viva Like? Sharing Graduates’ Experiences

When you’re trying to prepare for a PhD viva it can be really difficult to know what to expect. Unlike pretty much every other exam you’ll have experienced, the viva isn’t a standardised exam so you won’t find any past papers to practice on!

In this post I’ll be sharing the inside scoop on what a PhD viva is like. Both from my own experiences plus those of a few other PhD graduates.

Preparing for your viva? You may also want to take a look at some of the other PhD viva content I’ve written:

How to Defend a Thesis: An Introduction to the PhD Viva

Common phd viva questions.

Note: Every viva is different, in this post I’m focussing on my viva which took place in the UK. Two PhD graduates in Spain and the US also share their experiences.

What is a PhD viva?

For those who aren’t already familiar with what a PhD viva is, I’d highly recommend reading my full post on How to Defend a Thesis: An Introduction to the PhD Viva . This delves into how a PhD viva is assessed, who is present, the potential outcomes and what follows after.

As a quick recap, a PhD viva (also called a defense in some countries) is the final assessment a PhD student undertakes in order to pass their PhD. The format the viva can take varies from country to country and even institution to institution, but it typically involves discussing and defending your PhD thesis with experts in your field.

In this post you’ll hear about the viva experiences of three PhD graduates, each with a slightly different format.

To get the best understanding of how PhD vivas take place at your university I’d recommend:

• Checking out any webpages your university have which formally outline the viva process
• Speaking to your PhD supervisor
• Chatting to colleagues such as postdocs who’ve been through it

Viva Experiences from PhD Grads

Prof elizabeth bondi-kelly , phd from harvard university, usa. assistant professor in computer science at university of michigan.

What was your PhD viva like? At my (virtual) defense, I had my committee, adviser, labmates, and family/friends. I was fortunate to give my job talk presentation again for my defense, so I had already had a lot of practice with presenting it and being asked questions about it.

How do you suggest people prepare for their PhD viva? For anyone who hasn’t had that opportunity, I highly recommend practicing to get a polished talk and practice answering questions about it.

Prof Raúl Santos-Rodríguez , PhD from Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain. Full Professor in AI at University of Bristol.

What are PhD vivas like in Spain? The viva process in Spain varies from university to university. In most cases there are a few previous filters (internal/external reports) that make it such that, once you are through those, most of the pressure is off for the actual defence. The viva consists of a public presentation (usually with colleagues, friends and family in the audience) followed by questions from a panel, with each member asking their questions in turns. Both presentation and Q&A tend to be time limited (around 45 minutes each). 

What was your PhD viva like? My viva experience was nerve-wracking but rewarding too. I remember how the exercise of putting together the presentation with the panel in mind actually gave me quite a different perspective on how to tell the story of my thesis. The event took place in a rather formal lecture room in our faculty. The panel consisted of five examiners (three externals including one from abroad, and two internals), all of whom were experts in my field of study. The panel asked me a wide range of questions, covering both very specific details and very high level matters. Once I answered their questions to their satisfaction, and after a short deliberation, I was given the good news. Overall, I found the viva to be a challenging but stimulating experience — and a good memory.

How do you suggest people prepare for their PhD viva? In terms of advice, I would suggest to:

• Expect to be surprised by unexpected questions about your research
• Be clear and concise, allowing examiners to ask for more details if needed
• Practice your presentation without being constrained to say the same things every time
• Not be afraid to ask for clarification if you don’t understand and take your time to respond
• Enjoy the interaction with the examiners as they are experts that have a lot to add to your work

Me! PhD from Imperial College London, UK. Research Fellow in AI at Bristol.

What was your PhD viva like? My viva, which took place over Microsoft Teams, included just an internal examiner, external examiner and myself. I gave a short presentation giving a summary of my PhD then about five hours were spent giving suggestions to improve content I was preparing to submit to journals. It was much less intimidating than I was expecting.

How do you suggest people prepare for their PhD viva? I mainly suggest to not over prepare! Sure, reread your thesis and swot up on any content you don’t feel comfortable describing (for instance certain techniques you’ve used), but I would caution against rehearsing too much: come to terms with the fact that you won’t be able to predict all the questions you’ll get asked.

I’ll be sharing more details on my viva experience in the rest of the post.

How To Prepare For a PhD Viva: The Advice I Was Given

Ahead of my own viva I typically got told to:

Relax and take your time in replying . This is somewhat sensible advice but a bit like telling someone to calm down: it doesn’t always work. Furthermore, relaxing can be hard to do when you also get told to…

Be prepared to answer questions about every part of your work . At face value this can seem reasonable: if you did the work, and deserve a PhD, you should be able to explain your work. Like many of us I heard the horror stories of examiners asking students to provide an explanation of fundamental techniques from first principles such as: “derive energy”!

However, I don’t think any rational examiner can expect a student to be able to answer every possible question about their PhD work. Not least because many students aren’t relaxed during the viva and instead are filled with nerves.

Thankfully, the reality is that examiners simply need to check that you’ve done the work and understand it. Therefore, yes you should be able to give a broad explanation of the techniques you’ve used but you can’t be expected to know everything about every technique.

Once it strays from your work to underlying principles I suggest that you explain as much as you feel comfortable then push back – the internal examiner (who acts as a moderator) should also step in if unreasonable questions are being asked. For more details on what PhD examiners are looking for, read this section of another post I’ve written .

How I Prepared for My PhD Viva

The time between submitting my thesis (14th February) and viva (25th March) was shorter than for most people. On top of that I didn’t spend long writing my thesis, meaning that the time between finishing my actual research and my viva was pretty short (around two months). Therefore I didn’t feel the need to “revise” for my viva. As in, sometimes you’ll hear of people reminding themselves of how certain experimental or analytic techniques work, but it was pretty fresh in my memory.

Instead, about 48 hours before my viva I started to read through my thesis. This is going to sound really bad but this was actually my first (and only) time properly reading through my thesis. No, I didn’t outsource or use ChatGPT to write my thesis!

When I submitted my thesis I had of course assembled all the chapters but had never given it a proper cohesive read all the way through. I read through the thesis over the course of 4-5 sittings. Reading fiction is definitely more fun .

I personally didn’t prepare by trying to come up with answers for lots of potential questions. But if you’re keen to have those to hand, read my Common PhD Viva Questions .

Preparing for your own viva? I’ve created a set of viva preparation worksheets which are available for free in the resource library. Click the image below for access!

Why didn’t I prepare more?

I felt pretty relaxed about my viva. This isn’t because I am crazy clever or knowledgable. In fact, like many of us I’ve felt imposter syndrome, waiting for the moment that my lack of knowledge gets discovered: and if there ever a moment you’d expect this to happen it would be at your viva.

These three things relaxed me for the viva:

• The external examiner seemed nice from the time I’d met him in the past at a conference. Certainly not a sure-fire sign that he wouldn’t turn into a scary beast during a viva but it seemed like a good starting point.
• It was virtual. My viva took place right at the start of COVID and as such took place over Teams. For some reason this felt reassuring, as if I could get away with just unplugging my internet connection if they asked anything particularly scary. Thankfully I didn’t ever feel the need to try this out!
• I had published PhD work in a well-ranked respected peer-reviewed journal. This was far and away the most reassuring thing. As mentioned in another post, examiners have to be confident in all of the following things to let you pass your PhD viva. If you have published some of your work somewhere respectable you tick many of the boxes immediately:

Oh, and I also didn’t prepare much because I was preoccupied with moving from London the week before my viva because of COVID and the start of lockdowns. Unexpectedly I ended up moving in with my girlfriend’s parents. It was rather chaotic but probably a useful distraction too.

My PhD Viva Experience

Who was at my viva.

Unlike vivas in other countries, such as the two international experiences shared above, a viva in the UK usually only involves:

• PhD student – me in this case!
• Internal examiner – an academic working in the same research area from the host university. They’re there to moderate the discussion and check that the university’s viva regulations are followed.
• External examiner – another academic working in the research area from a different university. In my case this was someone who was a leader in the field who came from another UK university.

Optionally the PhD student may ask their supervisor to attend. I’ve known of a few people who’ve had their supervisor there too, though it’s pretty rare and unnecessary in my opinion.

How long did my PhD viva last?

All in all it was about five and a half hours.

This was much longer than I anticipated. When we scheduled the viva to start at 10am I naively expected us to be finished by lunch. Admittedly the examiners did suggest stopping for a break at lunch time but again I naively thought we’d be done shortly afterwards, so declined the opportunity for more than a 5 minute comfort break. In the end we finished up around 3:30pm.

How was my PhD viva structured?

• Introductions (2 minutes) . I’d actually never met my internal examiner (who should act as a moderator) so introductions were necessary.
• Presentation (10 minutes) . A few weeks in advance of the viva I asked whether or not the examiners would like a presentation, and if so of what length. They said yes, 10-12 minutes. My supervisor strongly suggested making it on the shorter side: short and snappy is good and you’re about to have hours to discuss the details.
• Discussion (5 hours, yes, really!) . More on this in a moment.
• Decision and final comments (10 minutes) . I was asked to leave the metaphorical room (Teams call, remember!) and after a few minutes was invited back in after which they told me I’d passed with minor corrections. They gave a summary of the next steps, which were mostly administrative with paperwork, and briefly went over what changes/corrections they were expecting to the thesis.

What did we discuss for five hours?

Before my viva I had visions of it being like a job interview that lasts for hours and hours. They ask a slightly tough or awkward question, you try and answer, rinse and repeat x 100. The reality was really different.

The experience was much less intense than I was expecting. The examiners said from the outset that they were happy with the quality of the work and just aimed to give feedback to improve both the thesis and publications.

The vast majority of the viva was spent going page by page through the thesis covering points that the examiners had written down: not questions, merely suggestions. Very little of the viva involved me getting questioned: most of what I said was probably along the lines of “I agree, that’s a great idea”.

The examiners commented that they liked the [short] length of the thesis (140 pages before references) which may have helped. I was expecting at least a few dodgy questions such as explaining the content of a particular reference or deriving something from first principles. In all honestly I’m not sure I’d have been prepared for some of this, so was fine with not getting a hard time of it.

There were very few questions in general which was somewhat of a relief, though I was kind of looking forward to more of a discussion around the project. There were only two actual questions I think I got asked: one explaining why a particular technique wasn’t representative, and secondly a much more fluffy question of what would I do differently if I was starting again. That was it. I was really expecting more questions.

Every viva is unique so I can’t claim that my experience is representative but I will say that it was a relief to get through it unscathed.

What I wish I’d done differently

Asked more questions myself . The viva is one of the few times you’re likely to have hours of access to academic experts with such a keen interest in your work.

Was it tiring?

A little, just as any meeting which lasts over five hours would be. But because I didn’t feel like I was actually getting quizzed the whole time it was nowhere near as tiring as it could have been. Mostly I was tired just from having to pay attention for that long: I usually don’t sit still for more than 20 minutes!

What happened afterwards?

My viva was in March 2020, at the start of lockdown. I’d moved from London just the week prior and had to cancel the scheduled celebratory drinks with colleagues. So instead I had a glass of champagne with my girlfriend and her parents (who I was staying with).

After that, I got cracking right away the next morning on making the examiners’ suggested changes to my thesis.

My Advice If You’re Preparing For Your Own PhD Viva

• Download my free viva preparation guide .
• Read your thesis!
• Look up likely questions (if you want), here are some Common PhD Viva Questions
• Don’t over prepare
• Be honest. If you’re not sure about something, make this clear. Feel free to say you’re not sure.
• Ask questions
• Enjoy it! Channel those nerves as excitement and make the most of having experts show such an interest in your work.

Do you have any other questions about the PhD viva experience? Let me know in the comments and I’ll answer them as best I can!

If you’d like personalised help with preparing for your PhD viva I am now starting to offer a small number of one-to-one sessions. Please contact me to find out more or click here to book a call.

If you’re currently preparing for your own PhD viva, best of luck and remember to enjoy it! Be sure to check out the couple of other viva-related posts I’ve written .

Share this:

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)

Related Posts

21st January 2021 30th January 2024

26th November 2020 30th January 2024

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Privacy Overview

How to prepare your viva opening speech

A viva, or PhD thesis defence, typically starts with an opening speech by the PhD candidate. This opening speech can be prepared in advance. How? By following six simple steps that take you from checking university requirements, to structuring and practising your viva opening speech.

What is a viva opening speech?

Step 1: check the requirements for your viva opening speech, step 2: define the audience for your viva opening speech, step 3: develop key messages for your viva opening speech, step 4: structure your viva opening speech, step 5: create visual support for your viva opening speech, step 6: practice your viva opening speech.

Submitting a PhD thesis feels like a major milestone. And it is! But before being able to call themselves a ‘doctor’, most PhD students have to defend their thesis. And this thesis defence, or viva, tends to start with an opening speech.

A viva opening speech is a short presentation of the PhD thesis by the PhD candidate. It typically lasts between 10 and 30 minutes and kicks off the PhD defence during which the candidate has to answer questions from the examiners.

Questions from examiners are relatively unpredictable. A viva opening speech, however, can be prepared and practised in advance! Therefore, it constitutes a major part of getting reading for a PhD thesis defence.

Different universities have (sometimes vastly) different requirements for viva opening speeches. So, unfortunately, there is no one-size-fits-all advice.

Therefore, the first step to preparing a viva opening speech should always be to find out the specific regulations of your university.

Common factors to consider are the following:

• The length of the viva opening speech. Whether you have to prepare a 10-minute or a 30-minutes presentation matters considerably.
• The use of a (PowerPoint) presentation. Some universities require presentation slides. Others don’t. Make sure to follow all requirements or customary standards.
• The focus of the speech. Some universities explicitly ask for a summary of the whole PhD thesis. Others may prefer several key findings, or arguments to kick off the discussion.
• The target audience of the speech. Find out who you are supposed to address in your speech. More on this in Step 2!

Some information is easy to find. Some isn’t. Always talk to your PhD supervisor/s! PhD supervisors will know about the university requirements, can share their experiences and guide you in the right direction.

Once you are aware of your university’s regulation concerning viva opening speeches, it is smart to think a bit more about the target audience of your speech.

The target audience for your viva opening speech will influence the level of detail in your presentation, the complexity of the information, and the language and terminology you will use.

In the UK, for instance, the thesis defence usually involves only the examiners and the candidate. Thus, the viva opening speech will be directed at the examiners, who have all read the PhD thesis in advance and are experts in the candidate’s research field.

In contrast, in the Netherlands, for instance, PhD defences are public events. Viva opening speeches during these public events are used to share the focus of the thesis in simple language with the audience. The audience is usually family, friends and colleagues. Examiners are not even present during the speech.

Now it is time to brainstorm about the content of your viva opening speech! One harsh truth is that you simply cannot include everything. Summarising the work of 3, 4 or more years in a few minutes is incredibly challenging. You have to be selective. You have to summarise, abstract and prioritise.

The key messages for your viva opening speech should be in line with the nature of your PhD thesis. For those who have read your PhD thesis in advance, the content of your viva opening speech should not come as a surprise.

For instance, if you wrote a very theoretical PhD thesis, it makes no sense to focus your whole speech on your data collection and analysis. Instead, it makes more sense to emphasise the theoretical contributions of your PhD.

Next up, you should structure your viva opening speech: Breaking up the key messages into concrete parts helps you to develop a logic and convincing storyline.

Common ways to structure viva presentations are around the table of contents of the PhD thesis, around key findings, key arguments, or around case studies.

Finding the right structure for your opening speech is so important that I wrote a whole post on how to structure your viva presentation, including examples of different viva presentation structures .

As in every speech or presentation, visual support can be helpful. Therefore, if you are allowed to use PowerPoint slides or other forms of visual support for your viva opening speech, it is sensible to make use of this opportunity.

As with regular presentations, avoid too much text on slides. Instead, make strategic use of images, photographs, figures or diagrams to develop your storyline and bring your points across.

Finally, practice your viva opening speech! If your target audience is the thesis examiners, present your speech to your supervisor/s or fellow PhD students. Ask them for feedback and use it to improve your speech.

If the target audience is the general public, present to family members or friends outside of academia. Do they understand what you are talking about? Can they follow your storyline?

You should practice your viva opening speech up to the point that you can present freely, without reading from your notes. However, don’t learn the whole speech by heart. It is always noticeable if someone just recites text, and it will make you sound like a robot.

Lastly, when you practice make sure to keep a timer at hand. Most viva opening speeches have to adhere to a strict time limitation, and will simply be cut off if they exceed the given time. You don’t want this to happen on your big day! So make sure to practice sticking to your time.

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox!

Subscribe and receive Master Academia's quarterly newsletter.

Planning your PhD research: A 3-year PhD timeline example

All you need to know about career objectives on phd resumes, related articles.

Better thesis writing with the Pomodoro® technique

PhD thesis types: Monograph and collection of articles

Minimalist writing for a better thesis

Why you cannot write a PhD thesis in 3-6 months

From admission to dissertation. Tips on making the PhD journey happy, productive and successful

18 tips to pass your Viva presentation

Viva Presentation of your PhD thesis requires you to prepare thoroughly. Viva Voce defense could be a failure if you don’t present properly. Learn tips on how to do PhD viva dissertation defense that makes you pass in doctoral viva. Face Viva exam confidently with an impressive opening speech. Keep some sample PhD viva questions and answers readily.

• Adjust voice as per the room size during the presentation of PhD viva.
• Clear Audibility is the first step for viva Voce success.
• Present Confidently viva thesis presentation.
• Do not stammer while defending PhD viva voce.
• Learn how to make an appropriate eye contact during PhD viva presentation.
• Keep ready some ready-made sample PhD viva answers.
• Know how to extend PhD viva validity.
• Never say you don’t know about any question
• Try to give your best from nothing during doctoral viva presentation.

Here are my detailed advanced tips on how to pass viva voce during your PhD studies. These viva tips will help you remain confident throughout your presentation

What is a Viva Voce?

A PhD scholar does not consider completing the thesis paper an accomplishment because they are still required to go through the viva voce process.

Although there are countries such as Australia that do not require one to do so, others like the United States necessitate the scholar to go through the process.

A viva voce is an oral examination whereby the researcher is required to stand before a panel of examiners to defend their dissertation .

This is why it is essential for the scholar to ensure that they have clearly mastered the field and the chosen topic by conducting the research on their own.

During the viva voce, the evaluators are at liberty to ask whatever question they feel is related to the topic and the candidate has the obligation of answering the question satisfactorily.

Simply put, a viva voce is an oral presentation that is aimed at proving that the researcher commands knowledge on the topic and has gained knowledge on the field of study.

When is PhD Viva voce examination conducted during PhD

A PhD viva voce examination is the last thing that comes in the PhD process whereby the researcher is required to present themselves before evaluators and answer any questions thrown at them regarding the thesis.

That said, the viva voce comes after the candidate has submitted their thesis to the faculty. Upon receiving the research paper, the evaluators may require the scholar to present themselves in person and required to exhibit what they have learned during the Ph.D. process.

Therefore, a viva voce comes after submission of the thesis and before the candidate earns the doctorate title.

How long is the PhD Viva Voce Presentation with example

Many Ph.D. candidates are concerned by the duration that a viva voce takes and we would like to point out that it all depends on how prepared one is for the same.

Traditionally, a viva voce is supposed to take ninety minutes with no hassles. However, it boils down to the examiners’ decision and if they feel that the time is not enough, then they can extend the process up to three hours.

The purpose of the process is to evaluate how much knowledge one has acquired during the Ph.D. and whether they are capable of answering questions related to their topic.

Therefore, it is true to state that the length of the viva voce will depend on the examiners. If the candidate does not satisfy their expectations, they are bound to ask more questions thus the process I likely to take more time

How many examiners will site in PhD Viva Examination

Many scholars are concerned about with the viva voce since it makes almost all candidates nervous as is the case of any situation where one has to stand before viva examiners and defend their work.

When one is deemed qualified to do a Ph.D., they are assigned a supervisor who ensures that the Ph.D. process is not marred by challenges through offering advice to the scholar.

The examiners are mostly two all of which should come from the university’s faculty. To ensure that the evaluation process is effective, they are mostly chosen from the same field as the candidate. Although it is not a must, there are occasions where the examining body may also comprise of external members.

This implies that the minimum number of examiners is two but they can be more according to the university’s decision.

Viva Preparation Questions

• What is the new thing that one feels to read your PhD dissertation?
• How do you prove this experiment can change the way others think?
• Explain the validity of your proposition with some examples.
• Give one strong why should we accept your thesis to be authoritative.
• What influenced you to make your thesis stand out from others

Why is PhD Viva Presentation conducted

A thesis is nothing short of a research paper which means that the scholar is expected to have taken their time to conduct thorough research using advanced techniques.

The main reason why a viva voce is conducted is to give the researcher an opportunity to defend their work before they are graded whether they meet qualifications or not.

The first thing that the scholar should know is that they should be able to defend their thesis which means that they should be aware of everything that is in the research paper. The reason for this is because one can never know what the examiners will ask and from which section of the thesis they will derive their questions.

It is essential that the scholar must ensure that they are prepared adequately by going through their thesis and ensure that they are able to answer any question arising from the same.

There are candidates who may be tempted to have other people write their thesis and although it may be perfect, the viva voce reveals the truth depending on whether they can defend the thesis or not.

Be what you are in your PhD Viva Exam

According to many candidates, the viva voce is an impeachment whereby they feel like they are grilled, but in a real sense, it is designed to prove to themselves and others whether they are in a situation to defend their title as a doctor of philosophy in their field.

It is therefore important for the candidate to ensure that they do not fall prey to brown nosing. They should not direct their efforts to sweet-talk the examiners by trying to impress them. Instead, the scholar is advised to play their role and prove to the evaluators that they are capable of defending what they have written in the thesis.

It is recommended that the scholar should be calm, relaxed and confident in their thesis and have the courage to stand before the examiners and express themselves.

The candidate should recognize the importance of the thesis and this is partly the reason why they have the responsibility of choosing their own topic and doing the research.

Never give one-word answers during Viva Voce viva exam

A viva voce must not be confused with a multiple choice questionnaire thus the researcher must appreciate that it is intended to diminish curiosity.

This cannot be achieved by giving one-word answers because the scholar is required to explain themselves as reflected in the thesis. Important to note is that a person’s standing or view on a certain view cannot be explained in a short statement.

The reason for this is because when one is asked a question during the viva voce, they are expected to state their position on the matter. The statement is not enough because it only triggers more questions.

Therefore, it is necessary that the scholar must support their claim by giving explanations as to why they support their arguments. In fact, the primary purpose of the viva voce is to ensure that the scholar can defend what they advocate for thus they should be in a position to give explanations and proof of what they are saying.

Be confident throughout the session (not over confident) during doctoral viva

According to human nature, there are people that find it easy to stand before others and air their view but the viva voce does not recognize that. It is essential that the scholar must be in a position to present themselves and stand for what they have presented to the faculty and the world.

At this level of learning, it is expected that the scholar must be confident enough to ensure that they can speak in front of a crowd leave alone two or three examiners. Confidence is a virtue that must be acquired by all scholars to ensure that they can stand before others and teach them or address key concerns that affect society.

However, the candidate must take caution not to be overconfident and the main reason for this is that too much confidence is interpreted as arrogance.

The bad thing about this is that the examiners are likely to get the wrong impression about the scholar. This is true because among the virtues that a Ph.D. teaches the candidate is patience and respect for others.

Do not show that you are afraid of Viva Voce of dissertation

The human mind is designed in such a manner that it controls the entire body and command activities that the individual will like and those that they will not.

One of the reasons why most scholars fail the viva voce process is that they tend to develop a negative attitude towards the same even before they go through the process.

It is essential that the scholar must be confident and not only outwardly but also inwardly. We recommend the scholar to ensure that they take all necessary measures to ensure that they do not exhibit fear in front of the examiners.

It is understandable that anyone is capable of nervousness while in front of a panel of examiners. However, we recommend that the scholar must pay attention to two things to boost their confidence. The first element is that they should prepare adequately for the process.

The second is that they should develop a positive attitude towards the viva voce. Adhering to these two advises is bound to increase the scholar’s confidence in themselves and their thesis.

My top Viva advice is to practice before one month

In the scholar’s life, before they take the Ph.D. course, it is true to say that they have gone through many examinations and passed. It is not automatic to pass an examination and it requires a lot of dedication and sacrifice.

Although there are individuals that may be tempted to take a shortcut, there is only one recipe to passing. All examinations require a lot of preparation and a viva voce is not exceptional.

This implies that the scholar must take their time to prepare for the viva voce beforehand. It is recommended that the candidate should take at least one month to prepare themselves.

It may seem like a difficult thing to do but we remind the scholar that they have a supervisor who has knowledge about the viva voce and they can offer useful advice that can make the process easy for the candidate.

Dress proper and be neat and formal during thesis viva preparation

The short description of a viva voce is that it is an oral presentation and therefore it means that there must be physical appearance.

Appearance has a powerful effect in that it creates a lasting impression on the examiners and therefore, the way that one presents themselves before the evaluators automatically make them judge the candidate’s character. The scholar wants the evaluators to be on their side and therefore the first thing that should pop in the scholar’s mind is creating a good impression.

It is essential because it may affect the examiners’ judgment which implies that a good impression is likely to yield good results while a bad impression is likely to yield bad results.

It is crucial that the scholar must dress formally for the viva voce and they should be neat. The proper dressing makes the scholar look responsible and in a position to defend their thesis.

Read your thesis once and thrice and prepare sample PhD viva answers

The viva voce is an oral presentation of the thesis and therefore it is necessary that the scholar must ensure that they have a proper understanding of their thesis before they engage with the examiners.

It is purposeful for the scholar to have 100% knowledge of the thesis even though it is common to forget some points. To avoid mistakes arising from being unable to answer some examiners’ questions, we recommend the scholar to make a point of revising the thesis before and after submitting to the faculty.

Some scholars might consider reading the thesis twice sufficient but this is not the case.

Others may be overconfident and feel that they do not have to read the thesis again but this is usually a recipe to disaster. It is our recommendation that the scholar reads through the thesis at least three times to ensure that they are familiar with all the points discussed within.

Learn how to start your opening speech of PhD Viva

It may sound tricky to summarize a paper comprising of at least 50,000 words in as little as five minutes but it is possible and the scholar should practice doing so.

Essentially, the examiners expect the scholar to have mastered their thesis and therefore they should be able to point out the problem surrounding the topic as well as the causes and recommended solution briefly.

At the onset of the viva voce, the scholar must be in a position to introduce the dissertation to the examiners briefly. This involves presenting an overview of the research paper.

Among the different sections of the thesis is the abstract section which was explained as a summary of the research paper. While preparing for the viva voce, the candidate is advised to consider the abstract and use it as a guideline for the oral presentation.

Listen to what your examiner is asking clearly

The easiest way to fail in any examination is answering the wrong questions or failing to address what the examiner requires.

It is mandatory for the candidate to pay attention to what the examiner is asking and carefully analyze points that they require from the candidate.

By doing so, the scholar is in a position to give the right feedback with reference to the thesis. It means that it is important for the candidate to concentrate during the viva voce and they should ensure that they are not distracted by anything else. 100% concentration is a requirement for the viva voce process if the candidate is going to answer questions satisfactorily.

Do not argue under any circumstance (just defend)

It should be noted that a viva voce is not a form of a debate where two parties are engaged in arguing. The candidate should note that the examiners are already professors and they are not there to engage in a battle of wits.

What they require from the candidate is proof that they have learned during the research and that they are in a position to demonstrate that they command knowledge in their specific fields.

That said, rather than argue, the candidate must ensure that the presentation is based on defending the thesis and shows the validity of the scholar’s standing regarding the points presented in the dissertation.

Pass- short corrections-resubmit- Fail after Ph.D. Viva defense

After the oral presentation, the examiners make a point of presenting their results to the candidate which point out areas that were sufficiently answered and those that were not.

The candidate should look into areas where they gave wrong answers and make a point of researching and making the necessary changes.

The correct answers should be passed to the examiners. The candidate must ensure that the correct answers are written as briefly as possible.

Do not write stuff on your hands or hold slip while defending viva thesis

During the oral presentation, it is necessary that the scholar avoids writing points in their hands or slip. It is so because it acts as a way of showing that the scholar has not prepared sufficiently for the viva voce.

In addition, it creates the impression that the researcher is not fully aware of the content in the thesis. Using written points give the impression of someone who is presenting a speech that has been written for them.

The candidate does not want the examiners feeling that they have not done the research for themselves as this would automatically lead to a fail.

How to do viva presentation with an impressive eye contact

A good presentation is one that the candidate commands presence before the examiners as it shows that they are confident with their work. It also shows that the scholar has worked hard for the thesis and they have nothing to fear regarding the viva voce.

One way of showing the examiners that the candidate is prepared and has dedicated themselves to the research is by making constant eye contact with the examiners.

The researcher should also be careful not to give too much attention to one examiner and instead they should keep eye contact with all the researchers during the whole viva voce.

Plan some expected questions and your answers

Whichever situation that one finds that they are required to make a presentation before a panel or a group of people, the first thing that the person does is to prepare adequately.

It is useful for the candidate to expect some questions that are likely to be asked during the presentation and therefore the scholar should make a list of some of them and work on possible answers.

Although one cannot fully predict the type of questions, it is important for the candidate to conduct a research of previous viva voce that have been done on the same field. Also, the scholar must consult the supervisor who may have useful advice.

Be ready to explain the drawbacks of your thesis cleverly

There is no perfect research and all of them are liable to limitations which the candidate must make a point of acknowledging before they are asked.

The scholar must be prepared to mention the drawbacks and explain why they arise. Merely stating the drawbacks is not enough since it will only make the examiners curios and therefore the candidate must defend the thesis wit-fully taking care to show that the limitations could not be avoided.

Challenges encountered during the thesis should be noted since they might be helpful in explaining the limitations or drawbacks.

Make rehearsals before two days of your viva voce

It has been noted that the scholar must ensure that they are fully prepared for the viva voce before meeting the examiners. Apart from reading through the thesis at least three times, the candidate should ensure that they prepare for the presentation prior to the scheduled day of the meeting.

If possible, the candidate is advised to look for friends and prepare a mock viva voce whereby they act as the examiners and ask questions that the candidate feel could potentially be asked.

This process should be done at least two days before the presentation. A rehearsal is important because it assists the candidate to engage how much they know pertaining to their thesis and some areas that may not have been given adequate attention can be addressed.

Never say “I don’t know” Somehow defend PhD viva (Be it wrong its ok)

A research paper consists of a lot of content and it may not be possible to remember everything that is contained in the same. It is common for the examiners to ask questions that the candidate has not prepared themselves to answer but this should not deter them from answering.

In case the candidate encounters such questions, they should not hastily state that they do not have the answer. Instead, the candidate should take their time and reflect on the thesis and analyze the connection between the question and the thesis.

It is understandable if the answer is not correct but at least the candidate should try to answer the question.

Prepare some positive statements of English to use them during presentation of your viva

One way of preparing for the viva voce is to ensure that one has answers to the examiner’s questions. The main areas of concern are the main points and how they are relevant to the topic.

A presentation must have statements that can be defended at all times since they help the scholar to show the importance of the thesis to the community. Such statements must be positive in nature and exhibit backing up of the thesis.

They should be prepared in English since it is the universal language that is applicable to almost all job specifications in the job market.

How to present PhD viva presentation positively

Positive statements are one way of the researcher showing that they have confidence in themselves and the thesis. Throughout the viva voce, the candidate must ensure that they have a positive attitude which is essential because it draws the examiners on their side.

A positive attitude makes it possible to answer questions easily and there is a likelihood that the examiners may not ask questions that put the candidate in bad situations. It enables the scholar to be motivated and therefore they are able to answer questions freely without feeling tense.

Be audible and do not look shy during thesis viva presentation

It is understandable that some people may have difficulty in standing before people and speaking their minds. However, the scholar is advised to remember that this is their dissertation and the presentation is among the stakeholders that determine whether one will pass or fail.

To counter shyness, the candidate is advised to prepare themselves adequately before the viva voce process. It is important because it boosts the candidate’s moral and level of motivation.

A scholar that is prepared becomes confident in themselves and they also develop a positive attitude which makes it easier to face the examiners and answer any question hurled at them without fear.

If you have had any experience with public speaking skills, you can do this task very easily. But unfortunately, you might have been lazy not to learn these skills when your English Teacher taught you during your school days. You need to give your count now while doing your Ph.D. viva. These skills are very necessary to get through these oral sessions. The way you speak is what matters seriously for the examiners or the reviewers.

Once you are through enough to make it, you can become successful. This way you can become a lot more confident and you will pass this viva without any doubt. While presenting do remember that you have to make some preparation for the last two months. This preparation is the only backbone for your viva. If you do not prepare beforehand you will face trouble while presenting your Ph.D. viva oral

When you keep this in mind, there are some other tips, I want to give here. See how PhD candidates do their viva online. If you go on to youtube you will get many videos in real time. Learn from them how they are able to present during such stressful sessions. I suggest you watch at least one video about Ph.D. viva or any other sessions with respect to Viva. This will surely give you fuller knowledge and viva presentations presentation tips about viva

When you want to give Ph.D. viva, try to show respect who are around you. They may be irritating sometimes to face. But you must never lose temper if someone asks you an inappropriate question. These type of unrelated questions are very common while giving your Ph.D. viva oral examination.

Master all the techniques on how to face audience and PhD supervisor during your viva voce. The way you speak, the way you behave, the way you respond, the way you manage, the way you present. All such skills must be learned before going to viva session.

You cannot make yourself a bluff in front of others for simple questions. So in order to avoid this, you must take your viva seriously and make sufficient preparation.

Never lose heart rather increase your active participation in the viva. If someone corrects you, accept it humbly and proceed to the next defending minutes. So Ph.D. viva is not a big problem if you follow all these suggestions throughout the reading on how to do Ph.D. Viva Voce.phd viva tips

Syam Prasad Reddy T

Hello, My name is Syam, Asst. Professor of English and Mentor for Ph.D. students worldwide. I have worked years to give you these amazing tips to complete your Ph.D. successfully. Having put a lot of efforts means to make your Ph.D. journey easier. Thank you for visiting my Ph.D. blog.

You May Also Like

Google Jam topics

Top 100 Jam topics in an Interview Session

How to Introduce Myself in Jam Session

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Story of cities #8: St Petersburg – is the 'city built on bones' starting to crumble?

Built on a swamp at the cost of thousands of lives, Peter the Great’s ‘antidote to Moscow’ has survived uprisings, sieges and floods to become Europe’s third largest city. But is history now catching up with St Petersburg?

On 16 May 1703, while looking over sparse marshlands near the mouth of the Baltic Sea that he had taken from the Swedes, Tsar Peter the Great cut two strips of turf from Hare’s Island on the Neva river, laid them in a cross and declared: “Let there be a city here.” As he spoke, an eagle appeared overhead in an auspicious omen.

Or at least that’s the myth of St Petersburg’s founding. In reality, Peter the Great wasn’t even there, and most likely neither was the eagle. It was a group of soldiers under the command of his friend, General Alexander Menshikov, who began building what would become the Peter and Paul Fortress on Hare’s Island in May 1703. The tsar only arrived the following month.

But although untrue, this myth perfectly encapsulates the origins of St Petersburg. Built on an inhospitable swamp at the cost of thousands of lives, it was brought into being through the iron will of Peter, who needed a warm-water port and a fortress against the Swedes. Moreover, it was to be his “window to Europe”: a new capital where Peter’s western-inspired reforms of the military, bureaucracy and national culture would take hold.

St Petersburg survived its adverse beginnings and then a revolution, a catastrophic siege in the second world war and seven decades of communist rule, to become the third largest city in Europe. Now, however, it faces the twin challenge of preserving its past while solving quality-of-life problems to ensure its future.

“It’s the classic question of how to preserve and develop at the same time,” says Svyatoslav Murunov, an urbanist based in the city. “The historic centre of St Petersburg is mummified. It’s not developing and it’s even deteriorating; it has viruses like commercial advertising and high-rise construction that ruin the view.”

The establishment of St Petersburg is a story that has been both celebrated and deplored in Russia, with history books trumpeting the achievement while authors lament its unnatural and bloody creation. Fyodor Dostoyevsky called it the “most abstract and premeditated city in the whole world”, and national poet Alexander Pushkin both eulogised and condemned it in his famous work The Bronze Horseman , which describes the disastrous flood of 1824 and the bronze statue of Peter that stands on Senate Square.

Starting with the construction of the Peter and Paul Fortress, Peter dragooned thousands of conscripts, convicts and prisoners of war to erect the city from scratch in a place where snow can fall as early as September and as late as May. Tree trunks had to be sunk into the swampy ground before it could support structures.

Living in ramshackle quarters and working with inadequate tools – often digging by hand and carrying the dirt in the front of their shirts – these involuntary labourers died in their thousands, carried off by disease or frequent flooding. As a result, St Petersburg became known as the “city built on bones”.

Antidote to the chaos of Moscow

Peter had got the idea for his reforms and his new capital during his travels through Europe, when he worked for a time in a shipbuilding yard in Amsterdam. Wanting his new city to be similarly based around the sea, he initially forbade bridges, even though a variety of officials and even his own physician died while navigating the treacherous Neva in small boats.

The city plan was based on Amsterdam’s, with straight prospects radiating outward from a centre – in this case, the Admiralty shipyard – and criss-crossed by canals. Peter’s system of artificial canals on Vasilyevsky Island silted up and were eventually made into roads, but the numerous channels on the southern side of the Neva became major aquatic arteries after the city centre was moved there. These canals, now hemmed in by stone embankments, have given the city its nickname: “the Venice of the North”.

Seeking an antidote to Moscow’s chaotic, organic construction, Peter laid down three main rules for his fledgling city: buildings must be constructed next to each other with their faces along a “red line”; streets must be straight, not curved; and everything must be built of stone.

Foreign architects including the German Andreas Schlüter and the Swiss Italian Domenico Trezzini were instrumental in developing the city’s layout, and its distinctively grandiose “Petrine Baroque” architecture. It is this style of building, with its white columns, arched windows and pastel-coloured walls (typically begrimed by the harsh climate) that gives the city much of its atmosphere of picturesque decay.

“[Peter’s] main task was to make Petersburg a real city, because Russian cities at that point where just a pile of buildings, naturally grown,” says the architect Daniyar Yusupov. “Schlüter made a grid city so that a courtyard was within each building – except that there were cows, sheds and other very non-urban things in the courtyards at that time.”

Just as the northern city’s dark and dismal winters give way to its glorious White Nights , when daylight is interrupted by only few hours of twilight, those difficult early days gave way to a flowering of a new state and cultural institutions. In 1712, Peter officially moved Russia’s capital to St Petersburg, and the country’s great aristocratic families soon followed with their own palaces – especially after the emperor banned building in stone everywhere but there.

Perhaps no building better represented the extravagant lifestyles of the new capital and its western-inspired cultural boom than the palace of Russia’s richest family , the Sheremetevs, which is locally known as the Fountain House. Built in the 1740s with a baroque yellow-and-white facade, the inside of the mansion was adorned with European furnishings and works by artists including Raphael, Van Dyck and Rembrandt.

It became a centre of high society, hosting lavish dinners and balls, not to mention concerts, plays and operas performed by the Sheremetevs’ serfs (bonded peasants). The family trained hundreds of them as artists, craftsmen and performers each year, and its theatrical troupe was the foremost in the nation.

Alongside the luxury of the imperial court and nobles’ palaces, however, the working classes laboured in poverty – a situation that spiralled out of control around the turn of the 20th century, as industrialisation drew ever more peasants to the capital to work in factories. This time also saw the appearance of the narrow, oddly shaped “well courtyards” that St Petersburg is famous for, as developers tried to squeeze in low-income apartments behind more expensive street-view flats.

According to Alexander Karpov, an urban planning expert and advisor to the St Petersburg legislature, the “urban planning mistake” of chaotic new construction was a direct cause of the October Revolution in 1917 , when Bolshevik forces captured the Winter Palace and established the world’s first socialist state. “The city couldn’t create conditions of life for the huge crowd of people, and they weren’t able to adapt socially or economically,” Karpov says. “These people made up the critical mass that then exploded.”

Urban planning mistakes continue to plague the city to this day, albeit with less momentous consequences. During the Soviet era, the main change to the city’s landscape, as in most parts of the USSR, was the widespread construction of “micro-districts” : huge standardised blocks of identical flats for 10,000-20,000 people constructed around vital infrastructure, penetrated only by small service roads.

As a result, most residents live in a vast band of “sleeper” neighbourhoods and have to travel through the “grey zone” of under-utilised factories to reach their jobs in the centre, leading to congestion in the underground and on the streets. St Petersburg once had more than 400 miles of tram lines , the largest such network in the world – but many of these have been torn up since the Soviet breakup.

“The density and connectivity of the street network needs to be raised, not in the centre but in the manufacturing belt,” says Karpov. “They’re building the underground very slowly; it’s an embarrassing tempo. Lines for buses, trolleybus and trams would be simpler, but these aren’t being built.”

Meanwhile, the downtown has its own problems, even though the entire historic centre is a Unesco world heritage site . According to the architectural preservation group Lively City, 10 to 15 historic buildings are lost each year, ruined in bad-faith renovations or simply torn down to make way for new-builds. Although St Petersburg passed a law in 2009 protecting “objects of cultural heritage” in the centre, owners can get around this and tear down buildings if they can prove them to be hazardous.

“Buildings are sometimes saved but often it’s a long war, unfortunately,” says Natalya Sivokhina, a Lively City activist. “We protect a building but then they try again to destroy it, or they disfigure it. When we achieve something, usually some business or lobby or interested officials are involved, and it’s hard to get a final victory.”

The authorities have even been found to be complicit in prohibited demolitions. In February, a district court ruled that the city’s preservation committee illegally allowed an investor to tear down the top floor and one wing of an 18th-century mansion on Glinka Street last year, planning to make it into a hotel. The building was once the home of the great admiral Nikolai Mordvinov and is protected as a monument of regional significance.

But the bete noir of local activists is the Lakhta Centre , a new headquarters for the state gas champion Gazprom that is planned to be the tallest building in Europe upon completion in 2018 – in a city with no other skyscrapers. Originally located directly across the Neva river from the governor’s office, the project was moved to the north-west outskirts after a public outcry .

Many activists still see this as a defeat, since the Gazprom tower will nonetheless alter the skyline that is visible from the promenades that line every river and canal. The “panorama” is greatly treasured in St Petersburg: the city’s layout, in both the imperial- and Soviet-era districts, includes many astoundingly long lines of sight. Standing on the highway at Pulkovo airport on the southern edge of the city, it is possible to see the spire of the cathedral in the Peter and Paul Fortress, more than 10 miles away.

“The whole city is built on these themes,” Karpov says. “It’s one of the ways to reflect the imperial concept … The greatness was visible in this concept, in these great orientation points. And this is very deeply rooted. It’s what makes up the genetic code of the city.”

According to local historian and author Lev Lurye, St Petersburg has more than 15,000 buildings that date back before 1914 – and most of them need to be renovated. A city programme to do repair work has moved agonisingly slowly, and flats in historic buildings generally sell for less due to their poor condition. “For sale” and “for rent” signs can often be spotted in windows even on Nevsky Prospect, the city’s main street.

“The factor of capitalisation is not right,” Yusupov says. “They can sell for lots of money just because it’s the city centre – but the quality and social infrastructure don’t match up.”

A smattering of projects have sprung up in recent years to utilise the many empty palaces, merchant houses and other structures downtown. Oligarch and Chelsea Football Club owner Roman Abramovich is bankrolling the ambitious redevelopment of New Holland , an island in the centre that currently holds brick naval facilities from the 18th century.

Other entrepreneurs have taken a more low-budget approach, starting cultural centres in old buildings such as the former Smolny bread factory, which now holds Loft Project Etagi : a makeshift honeycomb of gallery space, cafes, hipster stores and a hostel. Taking advantage of a cheap 11-month rental agreement and doing all repairs themselves, the administrators of Taiga Creative Space have transformed a mansion built in 1730 on the Neva embankment into office and retail space for creative-minded businesses, including a second-hand guitar store and a screenprinting studio. Coordinator Daria Kachavina says that many other languishing buildings could be put to similar use, were it not for the reluctance of property owners to rent for less than the market price.

“[Historic buildings] are empty because landlords have gotten used to certain standards. They can’t expand their horizons and think maybe they could rent cheaply to artistic people and then five years later give it to mid-level businesses,” she says.

Besides preserving its historic architecture, St Petersburg has also been slow to improve quality of life, and a controversial plan to reconstruct the city centre was recently cancelled. Lurye says that rather than a grandiose plan, the city simply needs more parks, more public transport and fewer fences between its intricate network of courtyards to encourage more foot traffic.

“The main problem of downtown is an absence of green space,” he says. “We are the least green city in Europe, among the big cities.”

One positive side-effect of the Gazprom tower protests was that they catalysed the formation of a civil society and residents’ involvement in urban planning politics. The ruling United Russia party, which dominates lawmaking bodies in most other regions, has only 20 out of 50 seats in the St Petersburg parliament, meaning the local government is more receptive to residents than in other places.

“We are number one in civil society activity, in terms of projects that are copied in other Russian cities, and these are volunteer projects,” says Krasimir Vransky, founder of the Beautiful Petersburg website and mobile app, which allows residents to file complaints to the city over local problems. Started after Vransky successfully complained about a store illegally selling alcohol in his courtyard, he says the group has solved 30,000 local problems and has now branched out into urban planning research.

Another activist group working to adapt the city for modern living is Velosipedizatsia (“bicyclisation”), which aims to reduce traffic gridlock and crowding on public transport by promoting bicycles – still a relatively infrequent sight on St Petersburg’s high granite sidewalks. Thanks to the group’s lobbying and promotional efforts, the city plans to create more than 20 miles of bicycle routes this year; the first three of 16 planned routes .

For Olga Mnishko, a coordinator at Velosipedizatsia, urban innovations such as bike paths are critical if St Petersburg’s population is to continue to grow and thrive amid Russia’s economic recession. “In Russia this isn’t understood, because in Russia there are two cities that are important: Moscow and St Petersburg,” she says.

“But in the future, I think there will be many cool cities, and if St Petersburg continues to just be a city-museum, no one will come here to live. The city was built in the 18th century – but now it’s the 21st century, and there are different demands being placed on it. We need new values so that people stay here, and don’t move to Copenhagen.”

Does your city have a little-known story that made a major impact on its development? Please share it in the comments below or on Twitter using #storyofcities

• The story of cities
• Architecture

Comments (…)

Most viewed.

• About Our Authors
• SRAS: Study Abroad or Online
• GeoHistory: Geopolitics, History, News
• PopKult: Popular Culture
• Museum Studies: Museum Science, High Culture, City Planning
• Students Abroad: Travel Guides

Popular articles

The Marine Façade, launched in 2004, is the largest and most recent of Petersburg’s urban development plans.

The Marine Façade and the Petersburg Myth in Post-Soviet Russia

Published: June 23, 2012

St. Petersburg has always been Russia’s “window to the West.” At the time of its construction in the eighteenth century, Peter the Great envisioned a city encompassing the greatest architectural achievements of Western Europe: the romantic island-canal systems of Venice and Amsterdam, luxurious baroque architecture, and a court rivaling that of the French in power and elegance. However, the city has not always lived up to its intended purpose—to prove that Russia could leave behind her backwards ways and enter modernity with the rest of Europe (Figes 10). Thus the Petersburg myth was born—its foundations lying in this discrepancy between the idealized city and its real counterpart. The myth, which expresses Russia’s complicated experience of modernity, continues to be prevalent in contemporary St. Petersburg. The Marine Façade development project embodies the Petersburg myth and the three-hundred-year-old dichotomy between dreams and reality that lies at the heart of the city.

Watch a documentary that Sophia Kosar made using this research!

The Marine Façade, launched in 2004, is the largest and most recent of Petersburg’s urban development plans. A joint project between the St. Petersburg City Administration and several private firms, the plan involves a commercial passenger port (which has already been built and is currently operating), a new business district, neighborhoods, and an expansion of the city’s transportation system. The port was the main justification for constructing the Marine Façade; until the port’s construction, Petersburg was the only major European city without a passenger seaport (Shimberg).

Considering Peter the Great’s intent to turn the city into his empire’s main commercial port, the Marine Façade is already part of Petersburg’s cultural tradition. In order to render Petersburg a more prominent trading location, Peter increased production of Russian ships and encouraged foreign merchants through trade concessions (Massie 358). Years later, a modern Petersburg facing the same challenge finds remedy in the new Marine Facade, welcoming luxury cruises in place of freight liners. (Mitiurev, MFMC). Until the Passenger Port was built, passenger ships had to share limited port space with cargo ships and oil tankers (Marine Port SPb). In order to cope with the pressures of a modern city and popular tourist destination, Petersburg had to create incentives for ships to utilize this new port. Thus the idea for the grandiose Marine Façade district was born, an ultra-modern contrast to the rest of the city that would provide comfort and leisure for tourists.

In this attempt to innovate we can see that the weight of the Petersburg myth still rests upon the city. The downtown, now the historic center, was the pinnacle of modernity in its day. It was also just as contrived as the Marine Facade. Dostoevsky critically called Petersburg “the most intentional city” (Munro 15). The completed Marine Façade is to be a sleek downtown area that will cater to tourists, professionals, and wealthy residents. It will cover 450 hectares of reclaimed land, nearly half the size of Vasilievsky Island as it exists today. The port, opened in 2008, consists of a rectangular bay in which international commercial cruise liners can dock at one of four terminals. The business and residential are still in construction; the intended finish date is 2020, when the land will be sold to private entities (Shimberg). The reclaimed land, called the “precoat,” is gathered from the Gulf of Finland, and, once completed, will serve as the foundation of the district. The precoat, like the rest of Petersburg, is created by man’s domination over nature; the very islands and embankments of the historical city were also reclaimed from the Neva three centuries ago.

This artificiality is key to the Petersburg myth and the city’s history. The city is seductive with its beauty and symbolic modernity, but these qualities hide the city’s darker half—the unnatural and autocratic. The Marine Façade exhibits these same traits. By facilitating increased tourism, it will help the city, its economy, and infrastructure. However, these benefits come at the cost of the environment and the city’s residents.

Appropriate for St. Petersburg, the Marine Façade plans are decidedly utopian. Scale models in the Marine Façade Management Company’s office show a sophisticated district that will stand in stark contrast to the Kruschev-era cement apartment buildings on the edge of Vasilievsky today. The Western High Speed Diameter highway is to run horizontally through the district, alleviating Vasilievsky’s congestion issues by providing an alternative to the city’s famous bridges. There is a plan to expand the metro system, adding two more stations to the two currently on the Island (Kuznetsova, MFMC). Just as Petersburg was extremely fashionable in the 1700s, the Marine Façade is designed to be the most contemporary district in all of Russia.

There are, however, several drawbacks to the project that residents of St. Petersburg do not fail to notice. Locals still have major reservations about the motives behind the project, its implementation, and its effect on the city. Debate over the Marine Façade has focused on two sensitive sets of values: the aesthetic and the practical. Generally, proponents are the city authorities and corporate developers, who will benefit economically from the project. Detractors include architects, residents of Vasilievsky Island, ecological groups, and political groups that oppose the authorities currently in office.

Those who feel that the Petersburg’s aesthetic tradition should be preserved worry that the Marine Façade will change the city’s aura. The classic Petersburg style is characterized by a horizontal skyline, linear architecture, symmetry, and a strong contrast between water and stone. An architect, historical restoration expert, and city native, Rafael Maratovich Dayanov considers the Marine Façade “upsetting” from an aesthetic point of view. He sees it as a question of forgetting Petersburg’s architectural identity and is afraid that the city will change beyond all recognition for the worse.

The city’s distinctive style is a direct reflection of the Western architects Peter commissioned to build his city. Completely departing from traditional Russian form, he ordered the Moscow nobility to build palaces in Petersburg in the new fashion. He forced thousands of peasants from across Russia to come construct the new city and live there afterward. The combined human toll of building accidents, disease, and flooding illustrate the autocratic nature of Peter’s project (Massie 356, 360-62). In Dayanov’s words, the city was the dream of “one man.” The commoners and nobles hated the location and the hardships it caused for them, “but Peter would not listen” (Massie 360-61).

Similarly, the Marine Façade completely departs from the Baroque aesthetic of the city. The government and managing firms want it to look like a 21 st -century business district, totally incongruous with the existing style. Again paralleling the city’s birth, the Marine Façade is a top-down execution; the residents of St. Petersburg and Vasilievsky Island have had little say in the project’s implementation, though it disrupts the lives of many, as well as the surrounding environment.

In fact, Vasilievsky Island is a UNESCO World Heritage site. Because it is protected by UNESCO, the Petersburg government regulates the style of all new construction within the city limits. Under the City Administration are two architectural committees that have jurisdiction over the city’s design. One, the Committee for Urban Planning and Architecture, passes all legislation concerning new development in the historical area. However, the Marine Façade area lies under a different municipal authority, and is therefore not subject to the same set of architectural and structural regulations (Assembly ZAKS Website). This means that the 450 hectares of new development are not required to conform to the historical style.

Aside from aesthetic concerns, many see the Marine Façade as an impractical and harmful endeavor. They argue that it is detrimental to the environment in the coastal area and to the daily lives of those who live there. Journalist Victoria Rabotnova, a resident of Vasilievsky Island, wonders why the port complex could not be built somewhere else along the coast. Before deciding on Vasilievsky, other options were on the table—such as Kanonersky Island, located to the south of Vasilievsky and far enough from the historical center that it would not be as controversial. Rabotnova’s theory is that Vasilievsky was chosen because placing the port near an existing residential district would give the developers an excuse to build the new district (Robotnova).

Ecological groups were furious at the lack of concern over the project’s environmental impact, as the land reclamation process causes extreme turbidity around the coast and where the Neva meets the bay (Medvedev and Zaitseva). In 2010 the St. Petersburg People’s Democratic Union of Youth protested against the destruction of local fish populations, caused by the land reclamation process (RPDU Website). Other ecologists complain that the project will destroy the coast, reduce the number of green areas in the city, and make the Neva Bay unfit for wildlife (ZOV petition).

Yet the government approved the Vasilievsky project for construction, and it passed all the necessary tests concerning environmental safety. Journalists Nadezhda Zaitseva and Alexander Medvedev quote an unnamed member of parliament who took part in the Marine Façade meetings of the Standing Committee on Health and Environmental Legislative Assembly in 2005: “’We asked the experts questions about the impact … on the surrounding area, the impact … on the water quality in the Gulf of Finland and came to the conclusion that … it does not adversely affect either the health of the air or water.’” He also said he believes Vasilievsky is the only place where a port like this could be located, although many experts are quick to argue to the contrary.

Again, the Marine Façade echoes the city’s construction. Before Peter the Great developed it, the swampy mouth of the Neva was nearly uninhabitable. However, Peter desperately wanted a port, and its construction would allow him to move away from Moscow, the capital he so hated. Foreigners and nobles did not believe the city would survive past Peter’s reign as the climate was so poor and the residents so despised it. However, for Peter, “no obstacle was great enough to prevent his carrying out his design” (Massie 364-65).

Economically, many Vasilievsky residents are upset about the Marine Façade’s effect on apartment values. People who bought expensive waterfront property in the Primorskaya area are extremely angry and have formed lobbying coalitions protesting Marine Façade construction. Not only will they lose the beautiful view of the Gulf, they will also lose value on their once-prime real estate. One NGO, “Protecting the Island Vasilievsky” (abbreviated ZOV in Russian), filed a lawsuit in 2006 attempting to stop development of the Western High Speed Diameter on the grounds that it would decimate the value of surrounding real estate (Teplouhov).

Although Peter’s nobles built the city’s original palaces, they too endured economic hardship because of construction. Having no choice but to move to the new capital, the costs of construction and food led many to estimate they had lost two thirds of their wealth (Massie 361). The people hated St. Petersburg; they “suffered greatly but did not complain” (Massie 364). Today’s residents have no problems raising their voices against the Marine Façade, but they are no more effective than their 18 th -century counterparts.

It is a fact that public opinion has not been acknowledged in the project’s implementation. Groups such as ZOV and the St. Petersburg Youth League have tried laboriously to change the plans, but to no avail. ZOV has held rallies and written to both Presidents Medvedev and Putin during their terms in office (Sharagina). They have also petitioned the local Petersburg government (ZOV petition). Tatiana Sharagina, who owns an apartment next to the port, is a prominent member of ZOV and elected representative of Vasilievsky Island. She admits the group has not had much success with accomplishing their goals, considering the port is already functioning. Residents of an apartment building located on Morskaya Naberezhnaya, right next to the construction, wrote a petition expressing their grievances about the way the noise of the construction was disrupting their everyday lives. With the estimated deadline of the project set at 2020, they will have to put up with the disturbances for a while to come (House no. 15/17 petition). But as long as the city can get its makeover, the people’s plights do not seem to be an obstacle.

American journalist David Greene published an article on St. Petersburg, in which he really does consider it Russia’s façade. “Peter the Great,” he says, ” imagined a luxurious playground for the ruling elite … [now] some residents think Russia’s current leaders are using the city for the same purpose.” Petersburg is a special city, as tour groups from cruise liners can enter without a Russian visa as long as they are accompanied at all times by a licensed tour guide. Greene says that this, combined with the atmospheric discrepancy between Petersburg and the rest of Russia, gives the Russian government control over foreigners’ impressions of the country. Not only does the Marine Façade facilitate this superficial tourist experience of the country, but the surrounding areas will also send these types of visitors a different perception of the country than what really exists, purposefully disguising its negative attributes.

Petersburg was built to be, and remains to this day, Russia’s “window”—not “door”—to the West; as in image, it is “more constricted … more subject to control” (Munro 266). The Marine Façade facilitates this same control, as the connection between Russia and tourists can be controlled. The façade of modern business may hide the similarities between the Marine Façade and Peter’s vision, but they are both utopias of modernity. Both stem from the intent to put Russia on a par with Western Europe, but both are, in actuality, monuments to Russia’s top-down power structure. The Petersburg myth lives on into the present: the Marine Façade exemplifies the myth and shows that it is still an important part of the city and its culture. The conflicts between new and old, the powerful and powerless, vision and reality can all be found under the surface of the Marine Façade.

Works Cited

Committee on City Planning and Architecture Official Website. Saint Petersburg City Administration. Accessed 26 July 2011. http://www.kgainfo.spb.ru/.

Dayanov, Rafael Maratovich. Personal interview. 5 July 2011.

Figes, Orlando. Natasha’s Dance: A Cultural History of Russia. New York: Picador 2002.

Greene, David. “St. Petersburg: A Glimpse Of What Russia Is Not.” NPR. 26 Aug. 2010. Accessed 26 July 2011. <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129435807>.

Kuznetsova, Svetlana. Personal interview. 12 July 2011.

Legislative Assembly of St. Petersburg ZAKS. “The MP is Looking for Owners of the ‘Marine Facade.’” ZAKS.ru. 13 April 2011. Accessed 26 July 2011. <http://zaks.ru/new/archive/view/79086>.

Marine Façade Management Company . Marine Façade Management Company.  Accessed 27 April, 2011 <http://www.mfspb.ru/>.

Marine Port St. Petersburg. 2006. Accessed 26 July 2011. <http://www.seaport.spb.ru/>.

Massie, Robert K. Peter the Great: His Life and World . New York: Knopf, 1980.

Medvedev, Alexander and Nadezhda Zaitseva. “Deputies Think that the ‘Marine Façade’ is Environmentally Friendly.” Nevastroika: Petersburg of the Future . 26 Sep. 2005. Accessed 26 July 2011. <http://www.nevastroika.ru/a0/ru/archive/view.thtml?i=2989>

Mitiurev, Yurii. Personal interview. 19 July 2011.

Munro, George E. The Most Intentional City: St. Petersburg in the Reign of Catherine the Great . Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2008.

Rabotnova, Victoria. “Behind the Façade of the “Marine Façade”: the Interests of the Residents Are Not Included.” “Guarantor” Center for Legal Services. Accessed 26 July 2011. <http://legalru.ru/document.php?id=7758>

Residents of House no. 15/17 of Morskoy Naberezhnaya. “Statement on the effects of construction on neighbors’ quality of living.” ZOF Website . NGO ZOV

“Vasilievsky Island Residents Against the Western High Speed Diameter, Passenger Terminal, and Alluvial Areas.” Accessed 26 July 2011. <http://voinfo.narod.ru/galo.doc>.

Reznik, Maxim. Personal interview. 14 July 2011.

Russian People’s Democratic Union (RPDU). “St. Petersburg Youth League Has Stood Up For the Ecology of the Gulf of Finland.”

Russian People’s Democratic Union . 12 May 2010. Accessed 26 July 2011. <http://rnds-sz.ru/news/129>.

Saint Petersburg Encyclopaedia . Alexander Margolis. The Likechev Foundation. Accessed 26 July 2011. <http://www.encspb.ru/en/index.php>.

Sharagina, Tatiana. Personal interview. 22 July 2011.

Shimberg, Alexander. Personal interview. 11 July 2011.

Teplouhov, Andrei. “On the Gulf of Finland, NGO Activists of Vasilevsky Island Believe That the Western High Speed Diameter Will Reduce the Cost of Their Property.” St. Petersburg Building. 31 January 2007. Accessed 26 July 2011. <http://www.zastroyka-spb.ru/?id=34300>.

ZOV. “Petition to Governor Matvienko and the Legislative Assembly.” ZOF Website . NGO ZOV “Vasilievsky Island Residents Against the Western High Speed Diameter, Passenger Terminal, and Alluvial Areas.” Accessed 26 July 2011.      <http://voinfo.narod.ru/st30.htm%3Fi%3D19966%26p%3D0&usg=ALkJrhiUZtGL3-771sTV3FVP8FSxxoglsA >.

About the author

Sophia Kosar

Sophia Kosar, at the time she wrote for this site, was a sophomore at The College of William and Mary. She spent the summer of 2011 in St. Petersburg, conducting research on the Marine Façade urban development program taking place on the edge of Vasilievsky Island as part of William and Mary's research program. This included interviewing NGO activists, the leader of the St. Petersburg branch of Yabloko political party, the Chief Architect of St. Petersburg, and representatives of Gazprom and the Marine Façade Management Company. She planned to spend the 2012/2013 academic year at Kazan State University studying Russian. In the future she hoped to continue her study of Russian and Central Asian cultures, and following her interests to a profession dealing with Russian infrastructure and civil engineering.

Program attended: Challenge Grants

View all posts by: Sophia Kosar