#that i am dealing with immigration and final exams and continuing my applications

[altschmerzes]

EVERYTHING HAPPENS SO MUCH ALL THE TIME

[raevfitta]

Things that are different in Sweden: Defending your PhD Thesis

So as the memories start to haze over, I am going to try to recount the steps that got me to where I am today: the process of finishing your PhD in Sweden. (Shout out to @tiikerikani​ so I can borrow her Things that are different in Finland theme, based on What's Different in Canada.) 

So this is going to be about my road to defending my PhD in Economic History at Uppsala University. It will be a very long and sometimes rambling post. I started my program in September 2012 and defended in March 2017 (about four and a half years - so a success). This will be my reflections on the process of being a Canadian trying to navigate this strange and quasi-medieval system. Since my department is small, some of these things along the way are fairly specific to it. BUT if you want to read about what makes Sweden really unique, just scroll to the bottom and start reading at “The Public Defence: From Planning to After-Party” part of this - that part is more comparable to the regular Swedish experience. 

Before the PhD...

So in 2010, I was accepted to do my Masters in Sweden. It was the last year for people outside of the EU to get the chance to do their Masters for free. I had done my Bachelors in History and Scandinavian Studies so I already “knew” Swedish before arriving. Needless to say, I likely wouldn’t have been able to get to the point of finishing my PhD without the chances to both learn Swedish AND to be able to do my MA tuition free. Right now, Sweden is still “working on” making Masters programs more accessible to foreign students again. You get better opportunities for housing, and they are trying to figure out how to make the education cost seem justifiable. If you want to do a Masters, and really want to come to Sweden, the cost might be worth it. 

I finished my Masters in May 2012 and received an A on my MA thesis. This is another step that you need to have in order to get accepted to this longer PhD process. Having a strong thesis is primarily what programs (at least in the humanities and social sciences) are looking for. The extra criteria (grades in your course work, for example) are not really considered. Since I didn’t have a Bachelors thesis, I needed to have a fairly strong Masters. From what I have heard from the selection committee, that is how I was picked for one of four spots. 

What about the residence thing?

I’m not Swedish - I’m from Canada. I got accepted fairly quickly into a PhD program (I finished my Masters in May and got news of my PhD spot in June or July) so I did not have to worry about the issues of a work or study permit. Since I started studying in September 2010, I had until then to figure something out. The migration board in Sweden is notoriously random when it comes to extending permits. I have never had a “major” issue (other than one time it took damn near three months for a decision) and now have permanent residency. Again, this process is fairly individual. I suspect that the reason it is easier for PhD students to get permanent residency now (it is fairly recent reform, passed in the last two to three years) is because they are demanding international Masters students pay. Permanent residency means that I am not TOO panicked about the job thing now (just highly panicked not overwhelmingly panicked). Needless to say, I will be very glad come September when I don’t have to head down to the immigration office.

The whole PhD process from the daily tasks, to the course work

My year was highly competitive. There were four positions with faculty funding available and there were apparently 20-30 applicants (some of them were the random applicants that were discounted right away but there were many MANY competitive people in the running.) I was the only non-Swede accepted in my year, but there were two other international people at my department. Needless to say, my department uses Swedish as a daily language. If you get accepted to a PhD program in Sweden, you are expected to learn Swedish. You aren’t demanded to learn it or required to show that you can speak Swedish, but there are always debates from department to department about how to deal with this “issue.” Coming from the University of Alberta, where there was a fairly diverse grad student population having to learn and prove they can speak English, this aspect still feels soft to me in Sweden. The TISUS is required to study at the undergrad level, but not the grad level. In a way, this is to allow foreign funding to come to departments - the TISUS is offered rarely when compared to the TOEFL but then again Swedish is a small language. But I think that if you want to have a life in Sweden, you need to learn the language. It will help you over time, especially when it comes to people sending emails without an English translation, trying to get other work, making friends, etc. People will either act bitchy about this or try to help you. I am at the point where I am fluent but get easily frustrated when some one doesn’t understand me. Sometimes, Swedes ask me if I am Norwegian when I speak since I sound “right” but also “not right” at the same time...

Another reason that it is important to know Swedish (and English) is the course work. My PhD is in Economic History - a small department with limited course options. All of my courses had a Swedish component, either reading or speaking instruction. I was (thankfully) allowed to write in English. This is where the language thing gets murky again - I think that departments should be stricter on PhD students learning Swedish but at the same time, I take the English way out for things. I guess this mainly connects to the academic languages in Sweden being Swedish and English. So if you want to take courses, or teach courses, you should learn and use high-level Swedish. They will be easier on your written Swedish (lol see some of my emails) mostly because they are fairly crappy at English some of the time. This is another thing I am a bit critical of - Swedish PhD students writing in (poor) academic English because they think some one will be interested in their very, very Swedish subject. There are dissertations in my department that I have no IDEA why they are (barely) written in English. It will only get worse for our department (see later on in this rant about our proofreader retiring...)

My course work was larger compared to other departments - we had to take 90 credits in my year (now PhD students only need 75...). Most courses are work 7.5 credits so this is a year and a half of ONLY course work. Your dissertation, then, is only worth 150 credits compared to how they are weighted in other departments (for a total of 240). 

You are primarily expected to take courses at your department or faculty, or the equivalent department/faculty at another Swedish university that your department has an agreement with (we are part of a national network with economic history departments in Lund, Stockholm, Göteborg and Umeå). But since my dissertation topic was not necessarily “economic” and more “history” I read courses at the history department in Uppsala because I could justify it, as well as took a Latin course through the languages department. The only course I took at Stockholm was a Nightmare™ quantitative methods course. My other courses at Uppsala were an intro course (which included the presentation of two texts to the Higher Seminar), a qualitative methods course, a theory course, two introduction to economic history seminar courses, a course about the history of economic thought, and the above mentioned courses. We also got points for active participation at the higher seminar, which involves coming to a certain number over the course of four years and being an opponent to another PhD student. 

One of the courses that are important to take as a PhD student is the pedagogy course. It is not mandatory, but if you take it as a PhD student the department pays for you. The course I took for my pedagogy points was the online version so my experience is different than others who have taken it. My course stretched from November until April, while the standard classroom version is five intense weeks over about a month and a half (the standard 7.5 credit course set up here in Uppsala.) The pedagogy course mixes students, researchers, and even professors from all departments. If you want a promotion, for example to docent/associate professor, you need to have these points. There are people taking this course that have been teaching for 20 years. Needless to say, I never had the nightmare scenario of some one actually coming and watching me teach on some random course. We had a couple of Adobe Connect seminars and online group work. The course is basically a “make work” course - you are given some tools that will help you with teaching, but none of the actual basics (how to write a syllabus, how to write an exam, how to supervise a student) are taught there unless you go digging for them. I recommend getting this over with if you are given the chance - you will need it if you want to stay at the university in the future. 

Don’t you need to write a thesis too?

Oh yeah, that. When I applied to my program, I got in more based on the strength of my Masters thesis than the potential of my project. I tossed out something that I didn’t really think that much about and some how got in. I guess the main thing I walked in with were ideas about my source material, my research question, and the contexts for my time period and sources. I had an outline and plans to continue with some of the theories from my Masters, essentially. I knew I wanted to focus on newspapers and media transformation in the early modern period, also connected to the transformation of the public sphere and the state. I knew that my project wasn’t that strong, but I came in with an idea and my final dissertation is still related to it. At least at my department, they did not have heavy demands on the research proposal attached to the application IF you had a strong Masters thesis. HOWEVER I was not attached to a project. Some PhD spots are associated with project funding from researchers at the department. These projects are a lot more restrictive when it comes to your research focus, naturally. 

My department also had some strange ideas about supervisors. We had to CHOOSE our supervisors. This was the hardest for me, coming from another subject and faculty (and country). I had no IDEA about the research focus of the people in the department. This is where my struggles as a PhD student began - I am shy and was still very shaky in my Swedish when I started at the department. I asked the ONE person I knew well there and she sent me to one of her former supervisors and that was a mistake for me. I did not feel like this person understood what I wanted to do, nor did the random researcher we got as a secondary supervisor. I struggled my first year basically because I felt that I couldn’t discuss my research with my supervisors. I was floundering. Luckily, in my first year, I had the majority of my course work and could gather quite a bit of my sources and start into my previous research. My first year, for the longest time, seems like such a waste compared to other people mainly because I feel like I could have done MORE. 

It was only when I changed supervisors that I found out that the supervisor I ended up with had suggested he could take me from the beginning at the supervisor meeting. When PhD students apply, the department has several committees that discuss the acceptance process. Part of that is talking with a group of those with positions at the department about possible supervision. Previously (before I started) students were assigned supervisors from the beginning based on the competence of the supervisor (primarily associated with methodology or time period). I don’t know if I would have been more successful if I started with my supervisor, but I really hated my first year. It was lonely, depressing, and I got very little actual research done. The fact that my project is now FINISHED just shows you how you have to work through these doubts and issues. If you are unsure about your supervisor, you are allowed to change. You shouldn’t jump ship at the first sign of troubles, but if you cannot work with a person, you will not finish. This is a demanding process that people will get MAD at one another for a time but you should have some sort of positive relationship with your supervisors. 

Another reason I struggled in my first year was the shared office situation. I did not walk into my PhD thinking I would have my own office, but it had been a while since I worked in an office environment where people would be walking around, talking, and coming in and out of a room. I ADORE my office mates and NEVER thought they were bad or strange people but I really just struggle being around people. I sat right next to the door so I would always jump when people would run in and out. We sat there for nearly two years before getting two-person rooms. I also feel like I got very little work done in that situation. It was hard to focus and I generally felt like the department would just tell me to suck it up if I complained. I brought up these things at the regular “performance reviews” with the director of grad studies and generally tried to show I could work through the issues, but still raised the fact that they said we would eventually get more individual rooms. When I moved to the two-person room, my work ethic and attitude changed. But when I got my OWN office, I really turned everything around. I had my office for a year, essentially from my final seminar to my book being sent to publication, and in that year, my dissertation became a book. I really compensated for the time I had trouble focusing my working extremely hard in my last year. This is probably not advisable...

Thesis timeline

I mentioned above the final seminar. My department has a fairly good system for helping PhD students remain on track to finish within the “four-year funding” window. Of course it doesn’t work for everyone, and doesn’t go for all departments. The history department, for example, is just starting to implement this idea of a final seminar to actually FORCE PhD students to present and follow a timeline. If you start to fall behind, find yourself unfocused and struggling, these steps feel insurmountable. One of the important things to remember about writing a PhD is that it will be hard and demanding. You have many responsibilities and many of them depend on only YOU. If you want to teach, you need to show an initiative for it - you won’t be handed it. If you want to present at conferences, it will be up to you. Needless to say, the department tries to force you into being organized with your time and that is really a positive if you are like me and need structure.

In the first year, we presented two papers at the higher seminar. In the first term (Winter 2012), I presented my thesis proposal (a longer paper, based on what I presented with my application). In the second term (Spring 2013), I presented an empirical “test” of that proposal (ie, I tried to show that my crazy idea of reading economic news in newspapers was actually viable). Neither of my papers were very good and were heavily criticized but most papers are. People will make comments like “why can’t you do it THIS way” (in other words “DO IT MY WAY”) and “why can’t you make this more THIS WAY” (in my case about writing about things during the 18th and 19th century was not seen as a good thing...and I should make it more about the modern world aka time after WWII) Seminar environments are not for the weak so needless to say I cried quite a bit after each seminar. But I still took the advice and criticism and thought through the problems with my papers. These were some of the first steps in creating my thesis.

At some point during the second or start of the third year, you are expected to have a half-time seminar. At this point, you should have the majority of your courses completed as well. I had my half-time seminar in December 2014 (Winter 2014 term, so during my third year). Now, at this point I had changed supervisors at the start of the 2013 Winter term. I got a real boost from them and actually began crafting a REAL introduction chapter. Some half-time seminars have longer texts. Mine was essentially two and a half chapters (my introduction, which eventually became two chapters), an empirical chapter (now my third chapter), and some tossed together conclusions (I don’t think that any of them survived to my final version.) We had an external opponent, but only from another department. Again, this seminar was not well received but I got some good comments and ideas (from my opponent rather than my department) for how to move forward. NONE of these seminars are “graded.” You are expected to present a text of a certain length and show progress each time. This is like the course work - you either pass or fail. There are no A-D grades at this level (and at most departments at Uppsala, they don’t give these grades anymore.)

It was also during my third year that I started teaching - this involved helping my supervisor with his Master course and getting more supervision. I started supervising undergrad students already in 2013, but in 2014 I got a little bit more responsibilities and pedagogic work. My supervisor had surgery at this time so it was a good solution to him being “sick” and me needing teaching hours. Needless to say, the Winter term of 2014/Spring term of 2015 were a bit of a mess. At this point, we also changed rooms (in the Spring term of 2015Jan-Feb. 2015). I think it was at this point that I REALLY began to have more confidence and take things more seriously. Sitting with only one other person was SUCH a relief for me. My roommate was hardly there and when she was, she was super focused and didn’t need to gossip all of the time. At this point, the new PhD students were becoming established and had this “open door PhD room attitude” of people running in and out, discussing politics more than thesis work. I was soooo thankful to not be in that group, to say the least. My office made didn’t have any awful habits, so I was able to start following my time line and was at the office more. My Swedish was better and I was making progress with my writing. My supervisors and I drew up a plan for the “final stage” and things started to feel “real.” I got more teaching by working with Erasmus students at seminars and starting to feel like a “real” grad student. 

My final seminar was during my fourth year (Jan. 2016). We had found an opponent that was based on my source material. Now, even this “draft” was not complete. I had my (very) long introduction, two empirical chapters, and conclusions that were just ramblings basically. The main role my opponent played for this draft was because he knew my sources and could critique them in a way my supervisors couldn’t. To me, this was really helpful compared to some one going over my theories. So, after this, we set up the final stage for preparing for my defence with the head of the department and the director of grad studies. I also moved into my own room (essentially on the day of my final seminar) so I was really starting to feel like there was light at the end of the tunnel. 

The final course I needed to complete was my pedagogy course and it mercifully ended in April. Once my courses were completed, we started making the final planning. Again, keeping track of my courses was mainly my responsibility. I told my supervisors about it, but they had no real role in finding or fixing courses for me. Some supervisors (especially if they are really specialized in the field) offer “reading courses.” This is also a solution for PhD students who can’t (won’t?) learn Swedish - you basically read a bunch of books selected for you by your supervisor and you write a paper about it. 

The pre-defence 

The final step before you can officially book a defence date is to have the professor reading. This is more like defending in North America except that you don’t have an external opponent or a committee at this point (so nothing LIKE North America). You’ll notice that I don’t have anything in here about comps or candidacy or things like that. Everyone I talked to about comps look at me like I am from Mars (and I just say know - I am from the Anglo tradition...). I guess since we need to present often at higher seminar, this acts as a form of comps. But it is by no MEANS as stressful or complicated as comps...reading courses, in this regard, replace this component, as well.

The final seminar acts as the external aspect of your defence, although that opponent has no real say of whether or not you can “technically” move forward. My professor reading was booked for the summer of 2016 (I needed to send my text Aug. 15!). The readers we selected were (lol) my supervisor’s former supervisor and one of his former PhD students. The professor’s reading is where you get the final check to defend. I worked essentially non-stop in the summer of 2016. I also got the position of Erasmus coordinator at the department, so that guaranteed extra prolongation (I had money until Sept. 2016 but with this and my other teaching, I had almost full paycheques until about November.) 

At this point, I don’t know if my supervisors “actually” believed in my or they really DID believe in me. We had many MANY discussions that required me to go home and think about what I did and didn’t do. Rewriting this manuscript was about working very, very hard to put together an (almost) book. But (they told me afterward) when they got my manuscript for the professor’s reading, they realized that I had done it. I would make it. My conclusions were still weak (as hell) but I had done what I needed to do. Everyone says “kill your darlings” in writing and that is damned true. You need to be succinct and to the point, along with being summarative and critical of previous research and yourself. I did not listen to my supervisors about EVERYTHING they said, but I did take their advice. I think the most important thing about writing a dissertation is learning how to put, in your own words, the combination of your research, your analysis of the sources, your analysis of the previous research, along with your supervisors’ advice into something unique and clear. I know my dissertation isn’t perfect, but finding that combination is what writing a dissertation is about - not everyone can change the world, but you need to know what PART of the world you can change and write from that perspective.

The professor’s reading will tell you essentially what timeline you are working with to reach your defence. At my department, other PhD students have had to have SECOND professor’s readings. I remember nervously asking if I needed to send my changes again and they said it wasn’t necessary. This really surprised me because I had had SO MUCH criticism at the higher seminar. When I brought that up to my reviewers, they said that in my earlier texts, I hadn’t been that CLEAR in what I wanted to do. The judgement I got was that I could be finished within “several weeks” so that meant a couple of months. They had many recommendations (some I followed, some I didn’t...). It was here that the final process began towards printing a book and having a public defence.

My main supervisor couldn’t be at my professor’s reading, but my secondary supervisor was. He was from another department (history) so, for me, he was a source of sanity in another subject (economic history) that I still struggle so say I am a “master” of. We had an excited little conversation after and he pointed out what was wrong with my concluding chapter (he said it was a combination of my partner’s ideas - he’s a professor in history - and my main supervisor’s ideas.) So that meant in order to be “me”, I needed to redo all of it. 

I think that when it comes to writing a thesis, this is another thing to think about. If something isn’t working, just start from scratch. Don’t delete it all (of course) but start with a new introduction. Put your ideas in another order and don’t try to REWRITE your way out of it. I am so thankful for having supervisors who could “see” when I needed to just start over again and not rewrite until it turned into pure garbage.   

The Public Defence: From Planning to After-Party

After the professor’s reading, we confirmed with my opponent that I would be defending at the start of the Spring term of 2017. We didn’t have an exact date yet, but that part took a while to iron out (see later on: the party aspect, the having a morning defence slot...). The start of the Winter term of 2016 was a countdown to many, many things. 

Finishing the book was something else that you don’t really get in other traditions. You aren’t finishing something that you take down to the bookbinders to make six or seven copies. You are finishing a book that will be published and can be bought in STORES. IT HAS AN ISBN NUMBER!!!

At my department, our resident proofreader and paginator retired JUST before I would finish (I can’t go into the nightmares she had with the guy that defended just before m). Since I had worked with InDesign in my previous life, I was able to paginate my own book. Some people have extra money for printing their books (at publishers that aren’t our university press) so they are able to get professional firms and proofreaders. For me, I asked my friends to read through chapters while also working intensely on it. My supervisors left me to finish a bulk of this without rereading it (again for the billionth time). The last things they read were my introduction and conclusions (naturally). 

Once we decided a date (we figured this out in September-October after much disagreement because I would be defending either during spring break for Uppsala schools or spring break for Stockholm schools, along with one of my supervisor’s 40th birthdays...), I contacted the publishing office at the university. They gave me the final timeline for when things needed to be sent in to them. This was when the January deadlines were given to me to send my book to the printers (you send one PDF that you get back and are allowed to make changes to and then another that comes a week later that you CAN’T make changes to - if you find anything wrong at this point, you can request an extra sheet to be printed that they slip in at the start of the book), the date when my book would arrive, and the date for my nailing .... all leading up to the defence. 

Since our books are published before the defence, this part of the journey is quite different than systems for PhDs in other countries as well. This part was also the most stressful for me - because you can still fail even if you have your book published. All of the seminars and professor’s readings are there and are MEANT to catch these things - ultimate weaknesses in your research that means you have not fulfilled the qualities for completing a doctorate. Your supervisors also argue on your behalf to the department about finishing on time BUT if you have a really weak thesis and force it into publication, you are on your own with it comes to passing or failing. Some people try to do this - they don’t listen to their supervisors or the people around them and defend even though it is a bad idea. After you have “nailed” your thesis, you can’t take it back - it is out in the world for judgement. 

So when you are defending your thesis in Sweden, you are really just performing something more ceremonial. If you on the verge of failing, your opponent or committee will step in during the three weeks between publication and the defence and quietly tell you to unbook your party and essentially that your defence will not go well. Sometimes, the defence itself is called off. 

It is still very stressful and very draining, but once your book is printed you have “basically” passed if you have followed all of the advice and directions along the way. I generally believed that something would go wrong with mine (something with my methodology or sources) and I would have to call the whole thing off. I still think about that. 

We had our last supervision on Dec. 19 and I was “on my own” for completing the deadlines set up by the publishing office over the next month or so. This meant making sure I had the list of other dissertations at the end of the book, and had, well, a finished book. I needed to check that the pictures I would be including could be published, as well as pick cover art and write an abstract and a summary for the backside. I followed the style of previous dissertations mainly because my department doesn’t have a proper guide for styles. THAT part was the final stress for me. You don’t know how to format your footnotes and you don’t know how to format your references if you aren’t given proper direction. Since you only get one shot at finishing this, you really need to put a lot of time into this final stage of writing: style. Another word of advice: learn a footnote program and make friends with it. My notes and references were never properly organized. I am SURE I still missed referencing some one I noted in a footnote. 

Once my rewriting was complete, I moved my files from Word to InDesign. This was how I made my final changes and it felt “finally” real that I would be finishing soon. If you have graphics in your thesis (or just care about how text looks on a page), this program (or an equivalent) is SO much easier than Word. If you are going to lay out your own thesis, try to learn a good lay out program beforehand. Learn what orphans and widows are. Care about how spacing looks. 

I took some “time” off around Christmas but I was really focused and made my January deadlines. Throughout this time, we had also made the arrangements for the party. Defences in Sweden are also associated with having a party to celebrate your achievement. You are expected to invite your entire department, family, friends, opponent, supervisors, etc. I had made the reservations for the location at the same time my date was confirmed with the opponent and committee. Once my book was set to print, I was able to change gears and focus on planning the party. I selected a menu I hoped would be okay for everyone and thought about who to invite aside from my department. I also started planning the invitations and the song books...

It takes a few weeks for the book to be printed, but three weeks before the defence you have a public “nailing” of the book. You get to be Martin Luther, essentially. My books came on a Tuesday, and I nailed my book on a Friday at the university library rather than the main university building, since it is currently under construction. My book is 254 pages long so I was really thankful that the guys at the library receiving dock have a drill available for it. Once your book is delivered to your office, you bring ten (plus one) copies to the mail room at the university library (in the basement, to the side, with a door that is marked “Exit only for PhD students”). You then get a slip that says you have done the final job and you take the “plus one” book up to nail it. It took quite a bit of arm strength to get the nail into the board and the book. Apparently you could hear my nailing three floors up in the microfilm room....

After the nailing, you are expected to distribute the book. I sent a PDF to my opponent once that was done (essentially the one I converted before sending it to the printers around the end of January) but now I had a book to send. I sent my book to universities (and technical schools) throughout Sweden, but I also distributed it to colleagues at my department as well as “former” colleagues at the History department. People were invited to my “nailing coffee” or spikfika to get their books and invitations to the party. We bought Ukrainian champagne and I baked cupcakes, but most people at my department get the coffee cart from the cafeteria and buy princesstårta. I wanted something that was more “me” so that was what I did. It was slavic and pink. This is three weeks before the defence so now the weeks are just going to fly by.

People need to pay to attend the party. This meant I needed to wait for people to both RSVP AND pay. The venue needed the numbers the week of the party but it was still hard to wrangle about 70 people into paying attention to deadlines. I was also teaching quite a bit at this point, and my family arrived. If there is ANY advice I can give to people, it is try not to defend at the same time as a bulk of your teaching. I hardly had any time to reread my dissertation. 

I talked to my opponent the week of my defence. We went through what we were going to talk about and any thoughts I had about my work. I told him about what I had been criticized about before. Opponents for PhD defences need to be external - this means from another university in Sweden or an international opponent. I ended up having a Swedish opponent and we decided to do the defence in Swedish (not my first choice....). I talked to him about this as well. This is another reason to learn Swedish - if your opponent is also Swedish, you might be asked to do this for the ease of the opponent and committee. Your committee is made up of an external, some one from another faculty, and some one from your department (some committee have more members - there is space for five names on the sheet and reasoning why you need the extra people). My supervisors helped me form the committee so I didn’t need to run around and begging people to be on it. 

Your committee and not your opponent decide if you pass or fail. The opponent is there to examine your thesis, but your grading committee decides whether you pass or fail. 

So the day of my defence arrives. March 3. I had managed to book a morning defence. Another tip: book a morning defence. Like I just said, the grading committee are going to need to meet to discuss your work before the party. They generally prefer to do it over lunch so having the slot from 10-12 is preferable. You get two hour defences at Uppsala, not the million hour ones in other countries. At my department, we also traditionally book on Fridays (the History department also does this for most defences.) You cannot defend at the same time as some one else from your faculty, so that means there are only two slots available (morning and afternoon) for each faculty. I was able to get the morning slot only because another girl had to drop out (she booked both the morning and the afternoon and didn’t tell me, even though I asked her, that she would be giving up the day.) I almost had to book the afternoon and that would have made a bunch of people upset. Instead I got the auditorium I didn’t like... 

We arrived on campus about an hour before the defence and my opponent (by coincidence) was right behind us. I recognized him (we had met once years ago) and sort of stared at him as he followed us in the doors. He was very very nervous so he eventually admitted he recognized me and we brought him up to the department. We set him up in an empty office and I double checked that the flowers and water were purchased (usually one of the admins take money from petty cash and do this.) I went down to the auditorium and checked that the computer worked, and if we needed microphones. I grabbed them from reception, but we ended up not using them. They are actually more annoying than they are beneficial. 

By this point (about a half an hour to go), my supervisors arrived (I was annoyed they weren’t there sooner...). Everyone met my family and we got set up. We came down to the auditorium and set up my opponent’s powerpoint and waited for other people to start arriving. I had no idea what was going to happen, what I should do, and how I should act. 

I have been to other people’s defences at this auditorium, but have never taught in it. There are three spaces large enough for defences on my campus. Some people are allowed to defend at the main university building if they request it, but I have only been to one defence like that. Thank GOD my one supervisor was there because I had NO IDEA how to turn on the computer for my opponent’s powerpoint. I had to log in as myself and was so worried that my desktop (with all my teaching powerpoints) would show up on the big screen.

Everyone got settled. I was starting to run out of copies of my dissertation at this point so I only bough like five copies down. Another piece of advice: try to get 200 copies printed. I got 180 and only have just over 20 left for, you know, the rest of my career (unless I buy more...). You might need to pay a little (the faculty has a ceiling for how much they contribute to printing if you don’t have outside funding) but it will be worth it to have more copies. 

We started my defence in English for the benefit of my family (and also because the moderator thought the defence would be in English and had prepared in English....) but then I was able to say a few words. This is another good thing to do: your opponent will be doing most of the talking so it is good to have SOMETHING to say. I was able to bring up two of the mistakes I had made (and noticed) that were big enough to name (I had some errors in my citations, for example). At this point, everything was rolling in Swedish.

My opponent gave a summary of my book (which lasted about 20 minutes or so) and then I was able to comment if it was a correct interpretation. To me, it was. Then he started to analyze each of my chapters. There was a main concentration on my introduction and some on my methods, before moving into my three time periods in my three empirical chapters. This is where the memories start to get hazy. My defence just seemed to fly by. I didn’t know where to look so I just kept my eyes on my opponent and at my notebook. He mainly looked at his screen and then at me. There were no real “arguments” between us - and no real disagreements. He did point out some weaknesses (I could have brought up more of the critical mercantile perspective shown in my sources) but we were able to have a fairly balanced conversation. There were some things I couldn’t answer - here is more advice: if you can’t answer it, just say your opponent did a good job pointing that out and move on. Don’t try to talk yourself out of a hole because then you are just babbling. 

The two hours were over very, very quickly. My opponent summarized the dissertation and then the committee was allowed to ask questions (just a note that my opponent wasn’t able to get through everything he wanted to say...). I got three fairly random questions from my grading committee: the external asked why I didn’t have more summarizing tables of my results, the non-faculty member asked why I didn’t include the Swedish original quotes (SOMETHING I WANTED TO DO BUT EVERYONE TOLD ME TO TAKE THEM OUT) and finally the person from my department asked if I could’ve added an extra time period further on into industrialization (again, the constant complaint of making things more “modern” from my department.) 

Then it was over. People applauded and I gave my opponent a quick hug before everyone came down to congratulate me. Already, people were saying what a good job I did. I am not sure if this was because I was so familiar with my text, or because I had not spent TOO much time preparing. If I had read through my book a few more times, I might have started to second guess myself more. 

The last people to thank me were my supervisors and my family. My supervisors were SO proud and I could tell. This was when we all sort of parted. My family and I went up to my office and grabbed our coats to go for lunch, and the committee, my opponent, and my supervisors went for the grading lunch. 

We made our way into town and about only just more than an HOUR after we had parted, my main supervisor called me to say I had passed. This was a part I didn’t know about. I wasn’t aware that you were told BEFORE the party. So it doesn’t seem like there were too many disagreements between my committee and my supervisors regarding me passing, given how short the time was.

We went home to change and make the final table arrangements. Traditionally, you are expected to place people at the tables rather than let them sit wherever. I sat next to my opponent on one side, my main supervisor on the other, and my other supervisor across from me. My family was placed throughout the table, mixed with my partner’s family and professors from the departments (we counted and over HALF of the people at the party had their PhD and nearly 20 others were PhD students so this was a very, very educated crowd.)

I had printed out the traditional song books before the party as well (the day before - from the printer at the department next door to mine since some one had borked our colour printer.) I only had a few songs since I am not much of a gasque/nation song person (I love snaps but not really snaps songs). My party was at a student nation (see: Things that are different in Uppsala ... some where online...) so I thought I should have SOME songs. 

When we got to the nation (I had my party at Uplands), we were able to make the table rearrangements and put the song books and names on the tables. We were there more than a half an hour before the guests but there was still quite a bit to do. We then went to the downstairs area and waited for everyone to arrive around 6.30. Champagne was passed out and shortly before we went to eat dinner at 7, the committee member from my department announced I passed. NOW the celebration could really begin. 

The party was filled with really moving speeches. Pretty much all of them made me and many others cry (especially my supervisors and my mom and uncle’s.) Everyone gave their speeches in English so that was really important to me. My supervisors gave the first speech, and then the order sort of blurs for me. One of the members of the history department gave a speech (I was the first one from my master’s programme of ALL the years to finish a phd). My PhD colleague, who will defend next after me, gave a lovely speech. My mom gave a speech, and so did my uncle. My committee member gave a speech, and so did the head of the department. My opponent also gave a sort of “on the spot” speech about fake news and relevance of questions about the media. My partner gave a speech, and so did the wife of my toastmaster. A friend of mine, who is away, sent a video so we played that. The computer was going the entire time in the background so there were ALWAYS pictures of cats shown throughout the meal. A colleague from the history department sang a Stan Rogers song and I made people join in for the whole thing just as the meal ended. 

It was a long but also great day. We had a little time left at the nation, and then came back to the apartment for an afterparty. My opponent even came and it was just fantastic. I basically held him hostage until 4 a.m.

So, if there is any way to summarize this whole thing (aka tl;dr): doing a PhD in Sweden is different than in North America or other traditions. In addition to this whole not having to pay tuition, along with getting paid for four years, you get a book published BEFORE you defend. You have a giant party rather than just a dinner with your family and (maybe) your supervisors. 

I’m right now stuck in this “post-defence depression” that feels very empty and lonely so it sort of helps to reflect on these “brighter” moments...I almost want to tell people to not defend and in a way I understand why so many people draw out the process for so long. 

I’m going to recount what it is like to “convocate” here in May. There are canons and castles involved!!!