Code of Practice on Research Degree Programmes

(Version effective from 1st August 2011)

This Code of Practice has been prepared by the Research Committee in order to assist research students,  Supervisors and Examiners. It applies to all higher degrees by research, and should be read in conjunction with Regulations XXVI. The references in brackets throughout are to the appropriate paragraph in Regulation XXVI.

This Code of Practice also has accompanying Appendices.

Registration

(Regulation XXVI Paragraph 4 & Paragraph 5)

1. The normal period of study for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy is three years full-time or five years part-time. The normal period of study for the Degree of Master of Philosophy is two years full- time and three years part-time. The normal period of study for an EngD or New Route PhD is four years full time. Students are expected to complete their research and write up their theses within these time scales unless they are granted an extension to their studies for completion of their thesis. Such extensions will be for no more than 12 months for full-time  students and 24 months for part-time students or 6 months for students on four year research degree programmes.

2. In exceptional cases, recommendations from Schools for longer or shorter periods of study will be considered where there is clear academic justification. Such recommendations are subject to approval by the Dean of the Graduate School.

3. Students aiming for the degree of PhD will normally be registered for an MPhil in the first instance. However, students holding an appropriate postgraduate degree which has provided research training may be registered initially for a PhD on the recommendation of their School when an offer of admission is made by the University.

4. Students will normally be informed of their expected Supervisor(s) when a formal offer of admission is made. However, it is recognised that circumstances may result in changes to the Supervisor(s) being made prior to, or during, the period of study.

5. Students  must re-register annually, subject to satisfactory progress review . Students are expected to re-register by the anniversary of their initial registration date. Students re- registering late will be charged a late registration fee at a level set by Council. If a student does not re-register within one month of the anniversary of their initial registration, their registration at the University will normally be deemed to have lapsed.

Suspension of Studies

6. Students may apply to the Research Student Office for a suspension of their studies. The application must have the support of the Associate Dean (Research) of their School and  Supervisor(s) and will be considered by the Dean of the Graduate School. Suspension of studies will be for a maximum of 12 months in the first instance and will normally apply only during a period of full registration. Requests for suspensions for personal, health or family reasons will be considered sympathetically. However, no requests will be approved for the purposes of employment, temporary lectureships, exchanges, voluntary service overseas or expeditions/sports. Suspensions of studies during the extension period will not normally be considered except on medical grounds.

Tuition Fees

7. Tuition fees will be charged annually for the student's period of study defined in paragraphs 1 and 2 above and are payable on registration. Students will receive a written notice of the need to re-register annually from the Research Student Office and any outstanding debt will be drawn to their attention. Re-registration will not be permitted if debts of any kind with the University are outstanding and registration may be terminated in accordance with Regulation XVI

Transfer of Research Students between Universities.

8. The transfer of research students between Universities is normally associated with the appointment of their Supervisor to another post. There may, however, be other circumstances which make a transfer desirable or necessary. In any case the circumstances surrounding any transfers should be made clear at the outset. 
There are no nationally agreed protocols for the transfer of students. Each University may therefore have procedures which cannot be covered in this document. 

8.1 Transfers from Loughborough University 

8.1.1 Where a member of staff responsible for the supervision of research students is appointed to another University the research students' position must be addressed at the earliest opportunity. The Research Student Office should be notified at the outset of any discussions. 

8.1.2 It will be the responsibility of the Associate Dean(Research) of the School, in consultation with the Supervisor, to  discuss with the students as to their wish either to remain at Loughborough University or to transfer. 

8.1.3 It  will be the Supervisor's responsibility to liaise with the receiving University as to their terms and for agreeing a transfer. Any supporting documentation will be supplied by the Research Student Office on request. The receiving University will be asked to supply written confirmation that the student has been accepted. 

8.1.4 It  will be the Supervisor's responsibility to liaise with the student's sponsoring body regarding transferring registration to another institution. Particular attention should be paid to any additional fee charges which might be incurred. All agreements with sponsoring bodies should be obtained in writing. 
Where a student is being funded from University funds such funding will not transfer with the student. Where a student is being funded from a research contract the advice of the Finance Office on the contractual arrangements should be sought at an early stage. 

8.1.5 The transfer of any students  will be subject to the agreement of the Dean of School. Where a student is unwilling or unable to transfer to another institution, the School should make every possible attempt to appoint a replacement Supervisor within or outside the School. The particular funding arrangements will require individual negotiation. 

8.1.6 If a student wishes to initiate a transfer for an acceptable reason other than accompanying their Supervisor, then every effort should be made by the School in conjunction with the Research Student Office to assist them in accomplishing the above procedures. In case of difficulties students should be referred to the Research Student Office. 

8.2. Transfers to Loughborough University 

8.2.1 All transfers to the University involving credit for research commenced elsewhere will be subject to the approval of the Dean of the Graduate School. It will be expected that research training has been accomplished otherwise this will be required. 

8.2.2 Candidates must be in a position to register for a minimum of 12 months and pay fees in order to be eligible to register for a degree. 

8.2.3 The Research Student Office should be alerted at an early stage of any potential transfer. 

8.2.4 The following documentation must be provided by the incoming Supervisor or by the student if they are not transferring with a Supervisor: 

8.2.5 An application form must be submitted to the School and subject to their agreement, the case will be made to the Dean of the Graduate School via the Research Student Office.  Once the case for credit transfer has been approved a formal offer will be issued

Progress Monitoring

(Reg XXVI paragraph 4.5)

Regular progress monitoring  must be undertaken as part of the supervisory process through regular supervisory contact and the review of written work.

Year One Review

9. Before a full-time student will be permitted to re-register for their second year of research, he/she will be required to submit  evidence of their research progress to date and be assessed. This evidence will normally be a report of the order of 10,000 words or their equivalent on the research carried out, but it may also include research publications. The report should contain a plan and timetable for completion and separate details of any research or transferable skills training. Assessment of the report will include a progress review meeting. The progress review meeting will be conducted by at least one independent reviewer who is not the student's Supervisor . If there is more than one independent reviewer one will act as chair in the meeting and be responsible for producing the progress report and recommendation. The  Director of Research Degree Programme should arrange the meeting and the Supervisor may attend as an Observer with the student’s agreement.

10. Before the end of their first 12 months of study, all part-time students will be required to submit a report of 5,000 words on the research to date and will be subject to a progress review  before progressing to year 2. By 24 months registration they should submit evidence of their research progress to date  which  will normally be a  report of the order of 10,000 words but may also include research publications. The decision to upgrade registration from MPhil to PhD may be taken at the earliest at this point. The report must include a timetable and a plan for the completion of the research. Separate details of any research or transferable skills training should accompany the report. The report will be assessed at a progress review meeting.
The progress review meeting should provide an opportunity to evaluate academic progress, research training and plans for future study. It should also provide an opportunity for student feedback.

Criteria for Assessment

11. In order to upgrade a registration from MPhil to PhD the research reports should show evidence of a viable research programme including a plan for completion, a grasp of appropriate research methods , potential for publication, an element of originality and evidence of adequate progress including successful achievement of research targets.
Outcomes

12.Subject to the agreement of the independent reviewer the report and progress review meeting will normally form the basis of a recommendation to the Associate Dean (Research) of the School as to whether the student should be permitted to continue their registration, whether that registration should be for an MPhil or PhD or whether the student should be permitted to rewrite and resubmit their research report within a specified period of no more than 3 months. In the event of an objection to the outcome from the Supervisor, a further review should be undertaken by a third party.
Students should be informed of the outcome of the review without delay

Termination

(Reg XXVI paragraphs 4.6 & 15.11)

13. The Dean of the School may recommend at any time that a student's registration be terminated on the grounds of unsatisfactory progress. The Dean of the School must inform the student and Research Student Office of the reasons for the termination of registration. For a student who has not yet completed 12 months registration unsatisfactory progress will normally relate to unauthorised absence or failure to meet agreed research targets. In these circumstances the Dean of the School in which the student is registered should submit a written recommendation to the Research Student Office. Subject to the agreement of a Dean from another School, that there is a prima facie case for termination of studies, the Research Student Office will notify the candidate of the reasons for the termination. A student whose studies are terminated has the right of appeal under paragraph 15.11 of Regulation XXVI.

Further Progress Reviews

14. After successful submission of the 10,000 word report full-time students should produce a written report together with any appropriate supporting output within an appropriate timescale to enable re-registration before the end of year 2. The report should include a detailed plan of the research to be undertaken in year 3 and include details of any research or transferable skills training. A further written report should be produced before the end of year 3 which may be a draft of their thesis. Part-time students should produce reports annually for the remaining years of the registration. Assessment of these reports will include a progress review meeting. The progress review meeting will be conducted by at least one independent reviewer who is not the student's Supervisor and who ideally is the same person who conducted the first year review.  If there is more than one independent reviewer one will act as chair in the meeting and be responsible for producing the progress report and recommendation. The  Director of Research Degree Programme should arrange the meeting and the Supervisor may attend as an Observer with the student’s agreement.
Subject to the agreement of the independent reviewer the report and progress review meeting will normally form the basis of a recommendation to the Associate Dean (Research) of the School as to whether the student should be permitted to continue their registration or whether the student should be permitted to rewrite and resubmit their research report within a specified period of no more than 3 months. In the event of an objection to the outcome from the Supervisor, a further review should be undertaken by a third party.
Students should be informed of the outcome of the review without delay. 

15. All students will receive a written report from their Supervisor(s) concerning their progress each year after their progress review. This should normally be at least 300 words in length. It should include discussion of the viability of the research programme, the need for further research training to be undertaken, the students grasp of research methodology and the basis of the decision taken to upgrade registration where appropriate. It is the responsibility of the School to ensure that students receive these reports on a timely basis. Schools are advised to keep records of the issue of these reports and their receipt by students.

16. Schools must complete and annual report on a research student's progress which is available online. Students will not be re-registered prior to receipt of the report by the Research Student Office. This  will apply to students whose initial registration was on or after 1 July 2007.

Supervision

The Role of the Dean of School

17. The role of the Dean of the School is outlined below

17.1 It  is the responsibility of the Dean of the School to ensure as far as is practicable that the facilities are adequate for the proposed research project before a candidate is accepted for research. Offers of a place for research study should only be made once approved by the Dean of the School or nominee.

17.2. The Dean of the School or nominee will ensure that adequate arrangements are made and maintained for the effective supervision of the student.

17.3 The Dean of the School or nominee will allocate a Supervisor to a student with due reference to expertise and workload.

17.4 In the event of a Supervisor's extended absence from the University through sickness, leave of absence or study leave or if the Supervisor leaves the University, the Research Student Office must be notified by the Dean of the School or nominee of the alternative supervisory arrangements made.

17.5 The Dean of the School will appoint a  Director of Research Degree Programme for the School. More than one Director of Research Degree Programme may be appointed if the School considers this necessary. .

Eligibility of Research Degree Supervisors

18. Joint supervision arrangements should be put in place  where appropriate.  In such circumstances a main Supervisor should be designated. Joint supervision arrangements will be put in place where a research Supervisor is a probationary member of staff or, if it is appropriate, in the case of a part-time member of staff. Where a member of staff is retiring or retired they may, with the agreement of the Dean of the School or nominee, continue with the supervision of their current students if appropriate arrangements can be made.  Where there is joint supervision, one Supervisor will be designated from the outset as the person to ensure that administrative requirements and progress monitoring are carried out.

19. Supervisors will be appointed on the basis that their research expertise and experience is appropriate to the research to be undertaken.

20. Supervisors will only be appointed when there is reasonable expectation that they will be available to supervise the student for the normal duration of the student’s degree.

21. Supervisors  will normally be full-time members of the academic staff but with the agreement of the Dean of the Graduate School, the Dean of the School their nominee may appoint other suitably experienced and qualified staff  including research staff and staff on part-time contracts.

The Role of the Supervisor

22. Research Supervisors have the following responsibilities:

• at the commencement of the research,  to agree with the research student a written timetable for the conduct of the research and the completion of written work.
• to establish and maintain regular contact with the student by whatever means is most suitable given the student’s location and mode of study, including any period during which the student is working away from the University. The minimum number of formal contacts between full-time research students and research degree Supervisor(s) will normally be 12 per annum. Part-time research students, and students working away from the University, should have formal contact with their Supervisor at a frequency equivalent to the above related to their mode of study; however this contact may be maintained in part via video conferencing or email where necessary. Formal supervisory contact meetings and their outcomes must be recorded.
• to provide satisfactory guidance and support to the student on the progress of his/her research
• to give advice and instruction on research methods appropriate to the student’s field of study
• to encourage the student to keep himself/herself informed of all relevant developments within his/her subject.
• to report to the Associate Dean (Research) of the School annually on the student’s progress
• to provide advice on the preparation of the student’s thesis and to encourage him/her to write up and submit the thesis with necessary documentation before leaving the University
• to monitor the progress of the student within the guidelines of Regulations and University and School practice
• to ensure that the student is aware of the need to conduct his/her research according to ethical principles, and to provide advice on this matter
• to present a written progress report annually to the student at the point of re-registration
• to encourage and support students to publish and present their work where appropriate, and the public dissemination of the research
•  to make it clear to students that they are expected to participate in the planning of work to be done, encourage them to question advice that is given to them and to reach independent decisions on what work needs to be done. In the last resort a Supervisor should defer to a student's decision wherever possible.
• to take steps to ensure that regular contact  is maintained with their students once they have begun to write up their theses, whether or not they remain on campus, in order that their theses may be completed and submitted for examination in good time.
• to maintain contact with a research degree  student in the event of referral of their thesis should the  student feel the need for advice and assistance.
• to identify and recommend the appointment of the student’s research degree Examiners
• to ascertain if the student has any particular research or transferable skills training needs or if there are particular training programmes that the student is required to attend. The bulk of research training  takes place within the research process, through discussion between student and Supervisor, and through referral to appropriate reading.  However, Supervisors should ascertain at the outset if students have any additional requirements, and keep these under review throughout.
• to provide annual written reports.

Role of the  Director of Research Degree Programme

23. It is the responsibility of the Dean of the School to appoint one or more Directors of Research Degree Programme for the School. The duties of the Director of Research Degree Programme may vary but will include:

• to monitor the progress of the student through the system to ensure that this is well managed and fair, and that they receive annual reports on their performance.
• to act as an initial point of contact for a research student in the event of difficulties arising with the supervision of the research degree programme
• to co-ordinate the presentation and assessment of the research report required prior to a student’s extension of registration each year

Role of the Student

24.1 The responsibilities of a research student include:

• making satisfactory progress in the research project and any programme of work agreed with the Supervisor(s)
• submitting written work in an agreed time before meetings with the Supervisor(s)
• making a record of supervisory meetings as required by the Supervisor
• raising any problems with the Supervisor(s) and providing adequate explanation of any failure to attend meetings or to meet other commitments, so that appropriate guidance may be offered
• preparing any periodic and the  annual progress reports on the research project
• communicating research findings both orally and in writing, to others in the academic community
• drawing to the attention of the Supervisor(s) any circumstances that might require the mode of study to be modified or institutional registration to be extended, suspended or withdrawn
• making appropriate and economical use of teaching and learning facilities made available by the institution
• undertaking research training including transferable skills training and maintaining a record of that training
• submitting  for a research degree within the timescales provided for in the Regulations
• maintaining contact with his/her Supervisor while pursuing his/her research up to and including submission
• submitting a thesis to his/her Supervisor for comment prior to being submitted.

24.2. The student must be aware that the research to be pursued must be his/her own work and he/she should determine the research programme after an initial period of instruction and assistance from his/her Supervisor.

24.3. A student need not confine his/her requests for advice to his/her Supervisor but may approach any member of the academic staff who can help.

24.4. In exceptional cases a student may ask his/her  Director of Research Degree Programme for the Supervisor to be changed if the research is progressing along lines outside his/her Supervisor's area of expertise or for any other reason that the student may consider makes a change desirable.

24.5 If the initial request to the Director of Research Degree Programme for a change of Supervisor is agreed, this will then be subject to approval from the Dean of the School will appoint a new Supervisor. If a solution cannot be found an approach should then be made to the Director of the Graduate School, whose decision shall be final.

24.6 Subject to completing a minimum period of registration it is for the student to determine when his/her thesis is ready for submission. It is anticipated that submissions will be made with the support of the Supervisor. Where support is not given the matter will be referred to the Director of the Graduate School on the notification of the Research Student Office.

24.7 Notification of intention to submit a thesis must be given at least three months prior to the expected date of submission using the appropriate form which is available from the University website.

24.8 A student must ensure that he/she is familiar with University Regulations and may ask his/her  Director of Research Degree Programme, Supervisor or the Research Student Office for advice on their interpretation.

Examiners and Examination Procedures

(Reg XXVI paragraphs 10, 11 & 12)

25. Eligibility of Examiners

25.1 Examiners for a research degree submission will be appointed by the Dean of the Graduate School on the recommendation of the student’s Supervisor and Associate Dean (Research) of the School.

25.2 External Examiners will normally be research active members of academic staff at another institution of higher education or research institute.

25.3 Examiners must normally have previous experience of supervising and examining theses for the degree they are being nominated to examine.  Examiners should hold a record of completed research comparable to that required for the higher degree in question. 

25.4 In a highly specialised area it may be necessary exceptionally to approach a proposed External Examiner who may have had little previous experience of research degree supervision and/or examination.  In such circumstances, provided that the proposed External Examiner's expertise was unquestioned, they may be appointed in conjunction with a highly experienced Internal Examiner or a second External Examiner with a general and complementary knowledge of the subject area. 
Exceptionally where a second External Examiner is appointed a Senate Observer would also attend the oral to represent the University in the absence of an Internal Examiner.

25.5 It may be appropriate exceptionally to nominate an Examiner who is not an academic member of staff of another University, provided that they are an expert in the student's field of research. The first time the nomination is made evidence of their research activity shall be submitted.  In the event that they have little or no previous examination/supervision experience they may be appointed in conjunction with a highly experienced Internal Examiner or in exceptional circumstances a second External Examiner with general, complementary knowledge of the subject area.  Where a second External Examiner is appointed a Senate Observer will attend the oral examination to represent the University.   

25.6 In the event that a member of staff of a non UK University is proposed as an Examiner  familiarity with the UK research degree system either through previous employment or previous supervision/examination of research degree students should be demonstrated.  If this is not possible then an experienced Internal Examiner  should be appointed alongside who will undertake to brief the External Examiner on the expectations of a research degree submission.  

25.7 A former member of staff of Loughborough University may not act as an external examiner for a research degree submission within a period of two years from the date of their leaving the University.

25.8 Emeritus Professors may be considered for appointment as Internal Examiners if they have only recently retired from the University. A maximum interval of five years should be taken as a guideline.

26. Oral Examinations

26.1 Examiners must ensure that adequate time is set aside for the oral examination. This should include time for any pre-viva discussion between examiners, the viva itself and the drafting of the examiners’ report.

26.2 The oral examination should be held at Loughborough University. In exceptional circumstances it may be necessary for arrangements to be made to conduct the oral examination at an alternative location or by video conference link. The permission and advice of the Research Student Office and the AD(R) should be sought and followed prior to making any such alternative arrangements which must be agreed by all parties.

26.3 Attendance at an oral examination by the candidate for a higher degree may be waived only by the Vice Chancellor on the recommendation of an the Dean of the Graduate School with the advice of the candidate's Supervisor. In the case where attendance at the oral examination is waived a second or third External Examiner should be appointed as considered appropriate.

26.4 Where a candidate's attendance at an oral examination has been waived, the candidate's Examiners should meet to discuss their recommendation. If it is not possible for all the Examiners to meet this must be part of the case made to the Vice Chancellor when seeking to waive the requirements for a candidate to attend an oral examination.

26.5 Examiners should be cautious about their comments on the potential outcome of the examination at the outset of the viva, given that the viva is an integral part of the examination process.

27. Requirements for the Degree of Master of Philosophy

27.1 The examiners must study the thesis and  submit the candidate to an oral examination.

27.2 The thesis should contain work of merit presented in satisfactory literary form (including references, notes and bibliography, as appropriate), should not be of unnecessary length and should provide evidence of training in and application of research methods appropriate to the particular field of study. Candidates are advised not to exceed 50,000 words or their adjudged equivalent for a Master's thesis

27.3 The candidate is expected to satisfy the examiners that he/she has a general acquaintance with the published work relating to the subject of his/her thesis.

28. Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

28.1 The Examiners must study the thesis and submit the candidate to an oral examination.

28.2 The thesis should be presented in satisfactory literary form (including references, notes and bibliography, as appropriate) and should not be of unnecessary length. Candidates are advised not to exceed 80,000 words or their adjudged equivalent for a Doctoral thesis.

28.3 The thesis should represent a contribution to knowledge and contain original work worthy of publication. It should also provide evidence of training in and application of research methods appropriate to the particular field of study.

28.4 In addition the candidate is expected to satisfy the examiners that he/she is well acquainted with the general field of knowledge to which his/her subject relates.

29. Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Engineering

29.1 The requirements for the award of the Doctor of Engineering are distinct from the criteria used to assess the award of Doctor of Philosophy. Examiners should refer to the Regulations for the conduct and assessment of the EngD programme which are outlined in para 16 and 17 of Regulation XXVI.
The examination shall be conducted by two External and one Internal Examiners. The candidate's academic/industrial Supervisors may attend as Observers, unless the candidate objects to their attendance.

29.2 The Examiners must study the thesis (including the technical papers in the Appendix where appropriate) and  submit the candidate to an oral examination.

29.3 The thesis should be presented in a satisfactory literary form (including references, notes and bibliography, as appropriate). The thesis shall be 80,000 words in length or shall contain at least three refereed publications (including at least one journal publication) or technical reports and a 20,000 word discourse. The format of the EngD submission shall be in accordance with the requirements set out in an Annex to the Programme Specification for the curriculum-based component of the specific EngD programme.

29.4 The thesis should demonstrate innovation in the application of knowledge to the engineering business environment, expert knowledge of an Engineering area and the appreciation of industrial engineering and development culture.
It should also provide evidence of training in and the application of research methods appropriate to the particular field of study.

29.5 In addition the candidate is expected to satisfy the Examiners that he/she is well acquainted with the general field of knowledge to which his/her subject relates.

30. Examiners’ Recommendations

30.1 The Examiners will normally recommend that the degree be awarded or that the candidate's work be either referred or failed.

30.2 If the Examiners' recommendation is that the degree be awarded they may still require the candidate to make corrections to his/her thesis to the satisfaction of the Internal Examiner before his/her degree is conferred. The corrections must be completed within 6 months.

30.3 If the thesis, though inadequate, is deficient in certain respects only, the Examiners may recommend that it be referred for revision, and subsequent re-examination with or without a further oral examination. This revision must be completed within 12 months.

30.4 If the thesis is deemed to be adequate but the candidate fails to satisfy the examiners at the oral examination particularly in respect of 27.3 and 28.4, they may recommend that the candidate should undergo another oral examination on one occasion only, within a period specified by the Examiners not exceeding 12 months. In the case of a referral the revised thesis shall be submitted to all the original examiners via the Research Student Office. The examiners shall consider whether the corrections have been undertaken and whether the overall standard for the award of the research degree has been reached.

30.5 Where corrections are required or a thesis is referred the Examiners are required to submit a list of corrections or to specify the points which require further work. The list of corrections will be attached to the Examiners' report form and returned to the Research Student normally within ten working days of the oral examination.

30.6 In the case of a candidate for the award of Doctor of Philosophy the Examiners may recommend that the candidate be failed but be offered the degree of Master of Philosophy instead, having reached the required standard for that award.

Examiners’ Reports

31. The Internal and External Examiners  will complete a written preliminary report on the thesis prior to conducting the oral examination of the candidate. The report should be completed, on the pro forma supplied, prior to any consultation between Examiners. Individual preliminary reports should be submitted to the Research Student Office together with the Examiners' joint final report on the thesis and viva as specified in para 32 on completion of the examination.

32. A joint report is preferred following the viva but each Examiner may give a brief statement of the grounds for his/her recommendation on the form provided. The formal written report should be submitted to the Research Student Office as soon as possible and normally within 10 working days of the oral examination.

Further Advice

33. In the event that a student is required to undertake further work on the thesis submission to meet the Examiners' requirements, the Examiners may be approached through the candidate's Supervisor for further clarification regarding the work to be accomplished if it is felt that additional guidance is necessary. It is the candidate's responsibility to undertake the additional work seeking advice from their Supervisor as necessary. Examiners should not be expected to comment on the revised submission prior to re-examination.

34.  Submission by Publications

(Reg XXVI Paragraph 6)

The following guidelines have been approved for the submission of a thesis by publications:
The regulations for Higher Degrees by Research permit members of staff of the University of five years standing and graduates of the University to submit published work, or other academic output, for a higher degree of the University. Senate has approved the following guidelines for such submissions:

1. The general principles for any submission for a higher degree should apply: namely that the work should represent an original contribution to knowledge, should provide evidence of training in and the application of research methods appropriate to the field of study and should not have been presented for a higher award at another institution. In addition the candidate should be able to demonstrate that he/she is well acquainted with the general field of knowledge to which the subject relates.
2. The published work or other academic output, must form a coherent whole and relate to a common theme. It should be comparable in substance and size to a submission by research thesis.
3. A submission may take one of the following forms :-
   1. A minimum of eight research articles from refereed journals, or other equivalent academic output, would normally be expected for a PhD submission. An introductory chapter should accompany the articles. This chapter should be up to 6000 words in length and should, where not apparent from the articles themselves, explain the common theme of the papers or output, linking them into a coherent whole; explain the methodology; place the articles in a theoretical context provided by the wider literature; suggest what further work needs to be done and indicate the author's contribution to co-authored publications or output. Other research output such as computer software or patents may also be presented provided that the material is publicly available.
   2. A single research monograph may be presented for a PhD submissionThis method of submission (by publications or other academic output) would not normally be appropriate for the award of the degree of MPhil.

34.1 In addition to the thesis the following must be submitted:

1. a signed certificate stating that neither the thesis nor the original work contained therein has been submitted to this or any other institution for a degree;
2. three additional copies of the abstract, not bound into the thesis, of about 300 words and not longer than can be accommodated on one side of a sheet of A4 paper, which are required for library abstracting purposes.
3. a list of 6 to 10 'Key words' in order to assist the University Library to catalogue the thesis.

34.2 Where a submission of published work is being made under paragraph 6 or 7 of the Regulations, paper, journal articles and other unbound items should be bound in soft covers for submission. It is preferable that such articles etc. are photocopies on A4 paper so that the submission is of uniform consistency. Books and monographs may be submitted separately from the bound collection of articles. The bound collection should contain:

• a sheet giving the candidate's name, a title descriptive of the collection of documents and the degree for which it has been submitted; and
• a list of items included in the submission.
• a statement specifying the current location of copyright in each case.

35 PhD Submissions by Practice – Staff Candidates

Guidelines

1. The general principles for any submission for a higher degree should apply, namely that the work should represent an original contribution to knowledge,should provide evidence of training in and the application of research methods appropriate to the field of study and should not have been presented for a higher award at another institution. In addition the candidate should be able to demonstrate that she/he is well acquainted with the general field of knowledge to which the subject relates.
2. Practical output must demonstrably embody original research. Submissions by this route must show that they are subject to interrogation and critical review and demonstrate impact on or influence the work of peers, policy and the development of practice.
3. The research outcomes must form a coherent whole and relate to a common theme. The submission should be equivalent to one by research thesis.
4. A submission may take one of the following forms:
5. A minimum of eight presentations within the public domain would normally be expected for a PhD submission. For the purpose of these guidelines, by definition ‘presentations’ should include a full and comprehensive record of each outcome, contextual material, including published texts and, where necessary and appropriate additional explanatory material. An introductory chapter should accompany the sum of presentations. This chapter should be up to 6,000 words in length and should explain the common theme of the presentations; explain the methodology; explain the way in which the presentations embody original research; place the outcomes in a theoretical context provided by the wider literature and field; suggest what further work needs to be done and indicate the candidate's contribution to collaborative projects.  
6. A single outcome exhibited or otherwise presented within the public domain equivalent to a research monograph. An introductory text as outlined above, should accompany the outcome.
7. A permanent record of the presentation(s) in an appropriate binding shall be submitted to the Research Student Office and, following successful examination, shall be deposited in the University Library

36 Practice Based Research Degrees

Guidelines

1. A research degree submission with a practice element is designed to accommodate the idea that not all knowledge is best represented and communicated in written form. It will enable innovative practices of research and representation in doctoral work.
2. Subject to the agreement of the appropriate academic School, a candidate for the award of the degree of PhD or MPhil may submit a project on a single research topic that has two elements; i) a written thesis and ii) a substantial practical component. The practical work may take the form of creative output appropriate to the field of study, for example, artefacts, film, performance, photography. The research outcomes must form a coherent whole. Research proposals and the resources required to undertake the research shall be subject to careful review with the candidate at the outset of the research.
3. The general principles for any submission for a higher degree should apply. Accordingly Examiners will assess all submissions in accordance with the criteria for the award of an MPhil or PhD set out in paragraphs 27 and 28 of the Code of Practice.
4. The written element of the submission is expected to be normally 40,000 words in length. Both written and practical elements together should address the research question, the methodology adopted, the critical and theoretical framework for the research and demonstrate original research, analytical skill and rigour. The specific model adopted for submission will refer to School guidelines and be subject to careful review.
5. This mode of submission would normally be appropriate in the the School of Design and the School of the Arts, English and Drama. It may also be appropriate in other subject areas. In all cases, however, the practical work must have been undertaken as part of the registered research programme.
6. The written and practical elements of the submission shall be submitted for examination in accordance with Regulation XXVI. Examiners will normally be required to attend a presentation in an appropriate form. Such presentations should normally be arranged to coincide with the oral examination or be made available in a recorded format at the oral examination.
7. A permanent record of the practical element of the thesis shall be deposited with the written thesis in the University Library. This record may consist of photographs, DVD or other audio visual material. Examiners may require amendments or revisions to the written or practical element of the submission. In cases where the Examiners require amendments to the practical element of the submission, they should first be satisfied that their concerns cannot be addressed through amendments to the written element of the submission. Where this is not possible Examiners should consider whether an additional practical arrangement could be used to address any concerns rather than revise the original practical element.
   

37 PhD by Creative Writing

Guidelines

The Creative Writing thesis should be designed so as to address an overarching research question, answering this partly through academic research, and partly through a creative component. The creative element could be a cycle of poems, novel, section of a novel, novella, play script, or collection of short stories.  The word length of this section will normally be between 50,000 and 70,000 words, depending on the genre. 
In addition there should be an analytical element of 10,000 - 30,000 words. This should place the creative element in its academic and/or theoretical context, and show explicitly how the thesis as a whole leads to new substantially improved insights.
In all other respects the thesis must conform to the same standards required for a conventional PhD submission. It should normally be no longer than 80,000 words in length, make an original contribution to knowledge, demonstrate appropriate research methods and training and be worthy of publication in whole or in part.

 

Code of Practice on the Conduct of Appeals Against Termination of Research Degree Studies and Fail Outcome Following Thesis Examination

(Reg XXVI Paragraph 15 and Paragraph 16

38 . Given the existence of procedures for complaint and redress during the study period (which should normally be dealt with through the  Director of Research Degree Programme as and when they arise), alleged inadequacy of supervisory or other arrangements during the period of study should not constitute grounds for an appeal unless there are exceptional reasons for it not having to come to light until after the examination, in which case it may be considered under paragraph 15.1.
Paragraph 15 of Regulation XXVI lays down the procedure to be adopted for the filing and hearing of appeals. Whilst the Appeals Committee, constituted under Paragraph 15.4, is permitted to determine its own method of proceeding the following basic practices will be adopted:

• The appellant and the Dean of the School or the Examiners whose decision is being questioned (the respondents), will be invited by the Committee to submit written statements on the subject of the appeal. The statements and any additional documents will be circulated to all those attending the hearing at least 5 working days prior to the hearing. Papers will be circulated after this period only with the permission of the Chair. Tabled papers will not be accepted.
• The appellant and the respondent will be invited by the Committee to appear before it, both to present their written submission and to be subjected to questioning by the Committee. The appellant may be accompanied by a friend of his/her own choosing.
• The hearing will be conducted as follows:-
  The Appellant and/or his/her friend presents the student's case for Appeal. The respondent(s) will be invited to make a statement. The Appeal Committee may ask questions of the Appellant and Respondent(s). The Appellant/friend and Respondent(s) may ask questions through the Chair. The Appellant will be given the opportunity to make a final statement.
• The Committee deliberates and reaches its decision in private (accompanied by its Secretary).
• Should the Committee wish to seek advice or information from an individual not present or to see documentation not circulated for the meeting it may decide to adjourn the meeting and meet again at a later date. However, this procedure will only be used when absolutely necessary to avoid prolonging the appeal process.
• The Committee may arrive at its decision by a simple majority. In the event of a tied vote the Chairman may use a casting vote. If he/she chooses not to exercise his/her right to a casting vote, the Committee will inform Senate of its inability to make a firm recommendation.
• The appellant and the respondent(s) will be informed of the Committee's decision which will then be communicated in writing to both parties without delay.