ABSTRACT
Part of an international comparative study, the chapter focuses on the PhD defence at the University of Trieste, Italy. An overview of the regulatory framework on national and institutional levels is provided. The case consists of two separate dissertation defences under the same PhD programme taking place on the same day in front of the same Board of Examiners.
The methodology encompasses semi-structured interviews done before and after the defences with the PhD candidates, two supervisors, and the members of the Board of Examiners. They are complemented by a detailed ethnographic observation of the defences. The analysis reveals that the candidates are expected to possess research maturity and abilities to defend what they have written in the dissertations. Despite this, the candidates expected in advance to pass the defence as the preliminary reviews they had received were positive, and they do not perceive it as an examination. The nature of the defence as a public event although displaying some degree of formality is not strictly ceremonial and is perceived as a step in the process of becoming Research Doctor (Dottore di Recerca).
