# Committee Members Disagree: Dissertation Defense Votes and Disputes > When committee members disagree, dissertation defense vote rules decide the result. See five US graduate school policies and what to do before, during and after. Canonical: https://www.thesisroom.com/blog/committee-members-disagree-dissertation-defense Last updated: 2026-10-27 Published: 2026-10-27 When committee members disagree, dissertation defense rules set by your graduate school decide the result. Some schools let you pass with one or two "no" votes, some need every member to agree, and some send the dispute to the graduate dean. A member who disagrees with the majority may also be able to put that view on record. So the useful question is what your own school does when members disagree. This guide sets out the published rules at five US graduate schools: Stanford, the University of Washington, the University of Michigan, Ohio State and the University of Minnesota. It then covers what you can do before, during and after the defense. Rules differ, so read your own graduate school's policy too. ## When committee members disagree: dissertation defense rules at five schools The answer depends on how many dissenting members your school's rule can absorb. The table shows each school's own rule and where a disagreement goes if it cannot be settled in the room. | School | Vote rule | How many "no" votes a pass survives | Where an unresolved disagreement goes | |---|---|---|---| | Stanford | At least four favorable votes out of five or six | One of five, two of six | Secret ballot settles it | | Minnesota | All members, or all members "save one", vote pass | One | Vote settles it | | Ohio State | Decision must be "unanimously affirmative" | None | Committee decides on a second exam | | Michigan | No vote rule stated on the policy page | Not stated | To the graduate dean as "final arbiter" | | Washington | No vote rule stated on the guidance page | Not stated | Dissenting members may send a minority report to the dean | Sources: [Stanford GAP 4.7.1](https://gap.stanford.edu/handbooks/gap-handbook/chapter-4/subchapter-7/page-4-7-1), [Minnesota doctoral completion policy](https://policy.umn.edu/education/doctoralcompletion), [Ohio State Graduate School Handbook, section 7](https://gradsch.osu.edu/graduate-school-handbook-gsh/gsh-section-7-doctoral-degrees), [Michigan Rackham policy, section 4](https://rackham.umich.edu/policy/section4/), [University of Washington, final examination](https://grad.uw.edu/policies/final-examination-dissertation-defense/). Stanford also sets thresholds for larger committees: five favorable votes out of seven, and six out of eight. For what each result is called once the vote is in, from pass to conditional pass to fail, see our guide to [dissertation defense outcomes](https://www.thesisroom.com/blog/dissertation-defense-outcomes). This guide stays on the disagreement itself. ## How each school handles a dissenting member A dissenting member's power ranges from a single veto to a written note on file. Knowing which one you face tells you how to prepare. ### Ohio State: one member can stop a pass Ohio State records a satisfactory result only when the committee's decision is "unanimously affirmative". One unsatisfactory vote means the exam is not passed. The committee then decides whether you may take a second exam, which must use the same committee unless the Graduate School approves a substitution. Ohio State can also assign a Graduate Faculty Representative, and one is assigned for second exams. This person is not a member of the examination committee. The representative "records a vote on the examination process and its fairness, rigor, professionalism", and must submit a negative vote if the process falls short. ### Stanford and Minnesota: one dissent does not sink you At Stanford, the candidate passes with "at least four favorable votes out of five or six". Voting is "by secret ballot", so you will not know who voted which way. The chair comes from another department and also votes. Minnesota says "all committee members, or all committee members save one, must vote pass". With either rule, one member's doubts can be outvoted, but you should still answer that member as carefully as anyone. ### Michigan: the dean settles disputes about the dissertation Rackham's policy says "any disagreement over the acceptability of a dissertation will be reported to the Dean of the graduate school". The dean acts "as final arbiter in consultation with the Dissertation Committee members". The rule is about whether the dissertation is acceptable, not only about the oral exam. ### Washington: a dissent can go on record The University of Washington says members who "do not agree with the majority opinion" are "encouraged to submit a minority report to the Dean of the Graduate School". The members who take part in the exam sign the committee signature form when the result is satisfactory. People talk on low sofas in a bright office lounge with large windows. Photo by TienDat Nguyen on Unsplash ## Disagreement before the defense day A disagreement can also block the defense before it is scheduled. At Minnesota, every designated reviewer has to certify the draft, and at Ohio State every committee member has to approve it. A disagreement there becomes a scheduling problem. - **Minnesota:** every designated reviewer must certify that the dissertation is "ready for defense" before the exam can take place. - **Ohio State:** a member's approval of the draft means the member judges it "of sufficient merit to warrant holding the final oral examination". Each member must approve the Application for Final Examination at least two weeks before the defense. - **Michigan:** members send written evaluations at least 3 working days before the defense, "so the entire committee may review the evaluations before the final defense". The Michigan rule gives you a practical lever. If two members want opposite changes, it is better that they see each other's views before the defense than during it. Rackham also says the committee chair, program staff or the student "may call a meeting of the dissertation committee, as needed". ### What to say when two members want opposite changes Send one email to the whole committee, copying your advisor, and set out both requests side by side. A short example you can adapt: > Subject: Two requests on (section) before I schedule my defense > > Dear committee, > > I have two requests on (section) that point in different directions. Dr A has asked me to (change). Dr B has asked me to (different change). I can see the case for each, and I would like to make one change that you can all support. > > Could we settle this at a short committee meeting, or by reply, before I submit the defense draft? My preference is (option), because (one-sentence reason tied to your research question). > > Thank you, > (name) The email does not ask one member to back down. It puts the choice in front of the people who vote, and it shows your own reasoning. For scripts on defending your own position to a member, see [how to disagree with your dissertation committee](https://www.thesisroom.com/blog/how-to-disagree-with-dissertation-committee). ## When members disagree during the defense Two members questioning you from different angles does not tell you how either will vote. Your task in the room is to answer each member's point on its own terms and not get pulled into taking sides. When two members state opposite views of the same choice, try wording like this: > "I think Dr A and Dr B see this choice differently. Let me explain why I made it, and then I would welcome guidance on whether you want it reframed in the revisions." This keeps you as the person who explains the work, and it hands any change back to the committee. At Minnesota, members must then tell you "in writing of all required revisions", so a conflict should not stay vague for long. ## After the defense: if the result is split Ask your chair, the same day, what was decided and what happens next. Then check your school's route for the case you are in: 1. **You passed despite a dissenting vote.** At Washington, the dissenting member may still file a minority report. Keep a copy of your revisions list and the chair's written summary of the result. 2. **One "no" vote meant you did not pass.** At Ohio State, the committee decides whether you may take a second exam. A second failure ends candidacy in that program. 3. **The committee could not agree whether the dissertation is acceptable.** At Michigan, that goes to the graduate dean. Ask the graduate school which office handles it and what it needs from you. 4. **You think the process was unfair.** That is a separate question from the vote. Read our guide to a [dissertation defense appeal](https://www.thesisroom.com/blog/dissertation-defense-appeal) before you act. If one member's disagreement is long-running, a change of committee may be possible. Minnesota allows changes in membership "if approved by the director of graduate studies and the collegiate unit". Raise it with your advisor and director of graduate studies, not with the member first. ## If you are in Canada or the UK In Canada, the event is spelled "defence". At McGill, the Pro-Dean chairs the doctoral oral defence "but is not a voting member" ([McGill, doctoral oral defence](https://www.mcgill.ca/gps/thesis/thesis-guidelines/oral-defence)). McGill says "Normally, a consensus is reached", but the Pro-Dean may call for a formal vote ([McGill, oral defence proceedings](https://www.mcgill.ca/gps/thesis/thesis-guidelines/oral-defence/oral-defence-proceedings)). In a UK viva, examiners agree a recommendation instead of holding a committee vote at the universities we checked. UCL, for example, tells examiners "You may only note one outcome on the joint report" ([UCL examiner viva guidance](https://www.ucl.ac.uk/study/doctoral-school/regulations/examiners/examiner-viva-guidance)). We cover that system in [what happens when examiners disagree in a viva](https://www.thesisroom.com/blog/examiners-disagree-in-viva). ## What Thesisroom does with this A split vote often traces back to one passage that two members read differently. Thesisroom's [Defense Practice](https://www.thesisroom.com/room#viva) writes questions a committee could ask, each tied to a specific passage or page of your own dissertation. You can answer in writing or out loud, in three styles: Practice, Rapid round and Mock panel. Defense Practice does not write answers or scripts. The emails and wording in this guide are starting points for you to put in your own voice. ## Frequently asked questions ### Do all committee members have to agree to pass a dissertation defense? Only at some schools. Ohio State needs a "unanimously affirmative" decision. Minnesota allows one member to vote against, and Stanford needs at least four favorable votes out of five or six. Check your own graduate school's policy. ### Can one committee member fail you? Under a unanimous rule, yes. At Ohio State, one unsatisfactory vote means the exam is not passed. At Minnesota and Stanford, a single dissenting vote does not by itself stop a pass on a five-member committee. ### What is a minority report at a dissertation defense? It is a written statement from a member who disagrees with the majority. The University of Washington encourages such members to send a minority report to the Dean of the Graduate School. It records the dissent without changing the vote itself. ### Who decides if the committee cannot agree? It depends on the school. At Michigan, disagreement over a dissertation's acceptability goes to the graduate dean, who acts as final arbiter after consulting the committee. Elsewhere, the vote rule itself settles it. ### Is voting at a dissertation defense secret? At Stanford, yes: voting at the University Oral Examination is by secret ballot. Other schools do not all say. Ask your chair how the vote is taken before the day. ### Can I change committee members if one keeps disagreeing? At some schools, yes. At Minnesota, membership changes need approval from the director of graduate studies and the collegiate unit. Talk to your advisor first, and keep the request about the needs of the project. ## Sources - [Stanford University: GAP 4.7.1, University Oral Examinations and Committees](https://gap.stanford.edu/handbooks/gap-handbook/chapter-4/subchapter-7/page-4-7-1) - [University of Minnesota: Doctoral degree completion policy](https://policy.umn.edu/education/doctoralcompletion) - [Ohio State University: Graduate School Handbook, section 7, doctoral degrees](https://gradsch.osu.edu/graduate-school-handbook-gsh/gsh-section-7-doctoral-degrees) - [University of Michigan Rackham: Policy section 4, doctoral degrees](https://rackham.umich.edu/policy/section4/) - [University of Washington Graduate School: Final examination, dissertation defense](https://grad.uw.edu/policies/final-examination-dissertation-defense/) - [McGill University: Doctoral oral defence](https://www.mcgill.ca/gps/thesis/thesis-guidelines/oral-defence) - [McGill University: Oral defence proceedings](https://www.mcgill.ca/gps/thesis/thesis-guidelines/oral-defence/oral-defence-proceedings) - [UCL Doctoral School: Examiner viva guidance](https://www.ucl.ac.uk/study/doctoral-school/regulations/examiners/examiner-viva-guidance) How this guide was made: Thesisroom drafted this guide with the help of AI writing tools, then checked every fact, figure and source by hand against the references linked above. ## Related - [All guides](https://www.thesisroom.com/blog) - [Check references free](https://www.thesisroom.com/citation-check)