One of the good thing about being home recently was the chance to meet my associate supervisor Dr NAH. She had browsed through my findings chapters and highlight an important aspect of the thesis and thus, in my choice of examiners. I was initially hoping that she could suggest a few names for my external examiner from Malaysia, especially from her institution. However, she stressed a few points I need to ponder upon before I propose any names:
1) My study is a socio-legal study. Not too legal and yet not too social either. Perhaps more policy oriented rather than legal or social.
2) My study is heavily qualitative, but not based on the usual qualitative theoretical framework and the thesis is structured in such a way different than the ones usually examined in her institution.
3) My study needs to make some form of concrete suggestions, which may be strongly opposed by my supervisors in LTU.
All the above points are valid as I am drafting my discussion chapter. Not only do I need to ‘score’ a point with my readers, I also need to cater my writing towards my possible examiners. Recent experience of a colleague of mine at my School showed that choosing the ‘wrong’ examiner can be disastrous. They had based their choice of one of the examiners on his/her previous study some time ago. In between that time and now, it seems that the examiner had change his/her stance on a few issues. Thus, there’s a need to also researched the background of the proposed examiner thoroughly. Since mine is a bit of a mix, my pool of examiner back home is very limited. And some of them were actually my respondents in the study. Ahhhhh…fenin…fenin… But I guess, if you write a good thesis, it won’t matter that much. But still, semoga Allah permudahkan Insya Allah.