Guidebook for Supervision of

University of Sydney Higher

Degree Research Students

at

Charles Sturt University

Orange Campus

Originally prepared by Dr. Mary Jane Mahony

March 1999

Updated by Professor Geoff Gurr and Mrs. K. Gilchrist

June 2009

SAWS, Charles Sturt University

Acknowledgements

The contribution of Dr. D. Al Bakri to the original development of materials included in this

manual is particularly valued.

CONTENTS Page

Resources 3

Forms and Printed Advice

Other References

Academic Board Polices and Procedures

INTRODUCTION 4

GETTING TO KNOW THE INSTITUTION 4

The Rural Management Research Institute (RMRI) Management

Committee

The Library

OTHER FACILITIES 5

Library – Electronic Journals

Offices for Research Students 6

Payment of Travel and Consumables for Research Students

Campus Vehicles

Mail

Airline Bookings 7

ETHICS 7

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 8

APPOINTMENT OF POSTGRADUATE SUOERVISORS 9-10

PROGRESS: RESEARCH PROPOSAL 11-13

PROGRESS: PROBATION 13

PROGRESS: TRANSFER FROM MPHIL TO PHD

CANDIDATURE 14-15

PROGRESS: MONITORING AND SUPPORTING THE

CANDIDATE 16-18

EARLY SUBMISSION OF PHD 19

THESIS: SUBMISSION 20

2

THESIS: EXAMINATION – MPHIL (RurMgmt) 21-24

THESIS: EXAMINATION – PHD 25-30

Appendices:

Appendix 1 – Higher Degree Forms 31

Appendix 2 – Supervision: Appointment of Associate Supervisors 32

Appendix 3 – Transfer from MPhil to PhD Candidature 33

Appendix 4 – Period of Study 34

3

RESOURCES

Forms and Printed Advice

Forms referred to in this document may be accessed on-line at:

http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/research/usyd-students

Other References

PhD Award Subcommittee: forms, reports and guidelines

http://sydney.edu.au/ab/committees/PhD_award/phd_award_forms.shtml

Academic board PhD policies

http://sydney.edu.au/ab/policies/PG_PhD.pdf

Graduate studies handbook

http://sydney.edu.au/handbooks/postgrad_hb/

4

INTRODUCTION

The University of Sydney‟s Faculty of Rural Management (FRM) on the Orange campus

transferred to Charles Sturt University (CSU) in mid-2006 and was subsequently absorbed into

the School of Agricultural and Wine Sciences.

All current higher degree research (HDR) students who were enrolled as of Second Semester

2005 remain University of Sydney candidates. This requires that their candidatures are in

accordance with University of Sydney policy along with FRM specific resolutions and practice.

The aim of this booklet is to provide a guide to management of higher degree research students

in this context. Thus it serves as a complement to the University of Sydney‟s „Graduate Studies

Handbook‟.

Forms commonly used in the management of higher degree research students can be accessed at

http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/research/usyd-students

GETTING TO KNOW THE INSTITUTION

THE RURAL MANAGEMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE (RMRI) MANAGEMENT

COMMITTEE

The RMRI is the research arm of the FRM and has oversight of research students.

The RMRI Management Committee is chaired by Professor Geoff Gurr.

THE LIBRARY

The Orange Campus CSU Library specialises in agriculture, agribusiness, and land resources

management; all USyd students have access to it through their CSU student card.

In addition all continuing USyd students are entitled to apply for a USyd library card. This card

is useful for making visits in person to the USyd library, and enables the use of all libraries

within the University of Sydney. As of a trail period being conducted in 2011, it may also now

need to be kept current in order for students to continue to have access to online journals via the

Unikey system.

5

For students located outside of Sydney the easiest method to just borrow books from the USyd

library is to apply through CSU online as an inter library loan.

For students who have submitted:

Students who would like to continue borrowing from the library should complete the form and

follow the instructions on how to obtain a card at (for 2011):

http://sydney.edu.au/card_centre/applications/temporary.shtml

This type of card is available only to postgraduate students.

If you would simply like continued access to the library‟s electronic resources then you should

check to ensure your Unikey continues (see below).

Futher information and Troubleshooting:

Matthew Evans (Director, Student Admin Orange campus, phone 57537) is

currently responsible for sending a list of enrolled USyd students to the Card

Centre at USyd each year and subsequently passing on to students any advice

received from the Centre about necessity for card renewal and/or procedures to

do so.

If such advice has not been received from USyd, the manager of the Card Centre as of April

2011 is:

JODIE LOWE | Manager

Campus Card Centre | Campus Card Services

THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY

T +61 2 9351 7273 | F +61 2 9351 7278

OTHER FACILITIES

USYD LIBRARY – ELECTRONIC JOURNALS

As a postgraduate student you will find it essential to learn to access specialist databases. These

databases can be accessed from the USyd Library homepage (www.library.usyd.edu.au). You

will require a Unikey.

Unikey access must be renewed by USyd each year; an updated list of eligible students

(including their logins) must be sent with accompanying explanation to USyd I.T. Help

desk at ict.support@sydney.edu.au each year. For 2011 this will be done in July by the

Admin Assistant ; students’ access is expected to be renewed til September 2012. After

this has been done, renewal as of September 2011 should proceed automatically even

though renewal warning notices will continue to be automatically generated to students

during September 2011.

6

Troubleshooting: Orange IT staff cannot assist with this. As long as the above list has been

provided to USyd I.T., any residual problems should then be referred to a supervisor at USyd

through their Help desk (tel: 02 9351 6000; email: ict.support@sydney.edu.au).

OFFICES FOR RESEARCH STUDENTS

Full-time research students based at the Faculty are provided with office accommodation,

usually on a shared basis.

Part-time research students and all research students usually based away from the campus will

be provided with office accommodation appropriate to meet their needs when at the campus for

extended periods (that is, periods beyond the length of a residential school). Your supervisor

will be responsible for recommending such an arrangement for you to the Sub Dean if space is

limited.

PAYMENT OF TRAVEL AND CONSUMABLES FOR RESEARCH STUDENTS

The appropriate manager, usually your supervisor, must approve all orders and payments.

Students working in grant funded projects should liaise with their supervisors regarding

operating costs.

CAMPUS VEHICLES

Use of Campus pool cars by postgraduate research students for fieldwork related to their studies

must be negotiated with and approved by their Primary Supervisor. Extensive use of a vehicle

must be discussed prior to commencement of activity especially if a vehicle will be required to

be taken out of Orange. All requests for car bookings must be made in the C.S. U. travel book

and approved by the Head of School.

All Faculty pool vehicles are fitted with first aid kits. You should check the kit is in order

before commencing any fieldwork trip.

Please see the admin asst for SAWS at Orange (Karyn Snare, ext. 57581) for the travel book.

Students are reminded that travel (and all other research activities) require a risk management to

be completed. A number of emergency beacons and mobile phones (including a satellite phone)

are available for loan when you are in the field.

MAIL

All campus-based postgraduate students are allocated pigeonholes in the Administration

Building for receiving mail.

7

AIRLINE BOOKINGS

Airline travel is arranged through Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga Campus.

Appropriate Charles Sturt University travel forms must be completed prior to travel, and in the

case of overseas travel you should allow approximately eight weeks for the approval process.

ETHICS

Every researcher is responsible for considering ethical issues arising in research with humans

and with animals. Community expectations of due process are high. Please become familiar

with the University‟s web site http://sydney.edu.au/research_support/ethics/

RESEARCH WITH PEOPLE

Any student carrying out research which involves humans (even survey and interview work)

must seek ethics approval. Application for approval must be made on the appropriate forms,

see

http://sydney.edu.au/research_support/ethics/human/forms.shtml

There is no local contact person. Enquiries can be addressed to

ro.humanethics@sydney.edu.au

RESEARCH WITH ANIMALS

Any student carrying out research with vertebrate animals must seek ethics approval.

Application for approval must be made on the appropriate forms available at the website-

http://sydney.edu.au/research_support/ethics/animal/

START EARLY

Ethics approval application forms go to the Camperdown Campus of the University for

consideration, so sufficient time must be allocated in the project plan for approval to be gained

before the data collection is begun. The approval committee meets monthly. A schedule of

meeting dates for the Animal Ethics Committee is available at

http://sydney.edu.au/research_support/ethics/animal/deadlines.shtml

Schedule of dates for the Human Ethics Committee is available at

http://sydney.edu.au/research_support/ethics/human/deadlines.shtml

8

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

See http://sydney.edu.au/handbooks/postgrad_hb/intellectual_property/rule.shtml

The University acknowledges that students own the work they produce as students.

If you are a postgraduate research student, you should read this chapter carefully and discuss it

with your supervisors. The recommendation “Agreement should be reached between the

student and the supervisor concerning authorship of publications and acknowledgement of

contributions during and after the candidature. There should be open and mutual recognition of

the candidate‟s and supervisor‟s contribution on all published work arising from the project”

is a beneficial one.

If you are a postgraduate coursework student undertaking a project or dissertation which

involves one or more supervisors (or other collaborators) you may find it valuable to have a

similar discussion to that recommended to postgraduate research students. The Faculty

encourages the publication of work by students that makes a contribution.

9

APPOINTMENT OF POSTGRADUATE SUPERVISORS1

Key People

Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)

Primary Supervisor

Student

Chair (RMRI Management Committee)

Administrative Assistant (Research)

See also

http://sydney.edu.au/handbooks/postgrad_hb/research/supervision_progress/supervision.shtml

Primary Supervisor. Identification of the Primary Supervisor (PS) occurs when a potential

postgraduate research student applies for admission to the research degree program. The

student is only accepted if an appropriate PS can be provided, and if assignment of this

supervisory responsibility is agreeable to both supervisor and applicant. The prospective PS is

consulted during the assessment of the application.

Associate Supervisor(s). Identification of appropriate associate supervisors occurs either during

the application process or during the first third of candidature. Where identified during the

application process, the nominated associate supervisor is consulted during the assessment of

the application. Associate Supervisors external to FRM are appointed in an honorary capacity.

Associate Supervisors external to both FRM and the University must be approved by the Dean

of the FRM according to University policy, on the recommendation of the Primary Supervisor

and the Director, RMRI .

Criteria for Supervisor Appointment2

General criteria for appointment of postgraduate research student supervisors are set out in the

diagram on the next page.

Change of Supervisor/s

There are many reasons for considering a change of supervisor. Any change is first discussed by

the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) with the student and the existing supervisors, and

then with the proposed new supervisor/s. If a change is agreed, it is then confirmed in writing to

the student and supervisor/s, with a copy to Client Services for the student‟s file.

1 Approved by Academic Board 12 November 2003 – Date of effect: 1 January 2004 2 Approved by Board of PostGraduate Studies March 1998

10

Existing research project initiated by FRM academic (Project awarded funding or project proposal already subjected to

peer review)

Project Leader is automatically appointed provided that the

appointee has a research degree appropriate to the candidature.

If the Project Leader does not have a research degree appropriate to

the candidature, a supervisory team is negotiated in consultation

with the Project Leader and the candidate to ensure appropriate

supervision for the level of candidature.

Research project/topic initiated by prospective student

An academic staff member is identified who is currently active in

relevant research and publication who is willing to supervise. The

RMRI Management Committee is advised by email to enable

comment. After 7 working days the appointment is confirmed by

the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students).

Person outside FRM

Primary Supervisor nominates, after consultation with the Sub

Dean (Sydney ResearchStudents) and candidate, using Nomination

Form. Appointment is confirmed by the Sub Dean (Sydney

Resarch Students). The RMRI Management Committee is advised

at its next meeting.

Person inside FRM

Nominated after consultation with Primary Supervisor, candidate

and the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students). The RMRI

Management Committee is advised by email. After 7 working

days the appointment is confirmed.

The role is formally acknowledged on advice of the Sub Dean

(Sydney Research Students) or Associate Supervisor by notifying

the RMRI Management Committee.

Mentor Will have some

specific relevant

expertise

Primary Supervisor Must –

Be a member of the

academic staff of the

University At Level B or

above

Hold a qualification at the

same level, or above, as

that for which the

candidate seeks to be

supervised and

demonstrate a record of

scholarly achievement.

Have acted as a supervisor

or an asociate supervisor

for al least 12 momths

duration at a recognised

tertiary institution, and

have completed the

University of SydneyITL

PG Supervision

Development Program.

Have acted as a supervisor

for the successful

completion of at least one

candidature at a recognised

tertiary institution.

Meet criteria as per first

two dots points for

Primary Supervisors or

have been appointed as

an honorary associate of

the University

Demonstrate ability to

successfully supervise a

candidature to

completion, or

Meet such other specific

requirements as the head

of department/school

may determine.

11

PROGRESS: RESEARCH PROPOSAL3

Key People

Student

Primary Supervisor

Associate Supervisor/s

Chair (RMRI Management Committee)

Administrative Assistant (Research)

Research Proposal Development

The student prepares a Research Proposal in consultation with the supervisor/s and according to

the published guidelines.

Where the candidature is part of an externally funded research project, the student‟s proposal

will be expected to demonstrate both the student‟s familiarity with the subject matter and his/her

own intended intellectual contribution. The development of the research proposal should be

completed within 6 months of commencement of candidature for full-time students (12 months

for part-time students). It is the responsibility of the student to meet this time requirement.

Research Proposal Review Process

The proposal review process contributes to:

evaluating the project‟s value and achievability in terms of producing the necessary

outcomes for a successful thesis

reviewing the calibre of the student

determining that the probationary period has been satisfactorily completed

developing the student‟s research management skills.

All the stages of the review process should normally be completed within eight (8) weeks from

the date of proposal submission by the student to the PS. The review process will be carried out

according to the following steps:

1. The student formally submits his/her proposal with a cover letter to the designated PS.

2. The PS nominates three proposal reviewers to the Administrative Assistant, RMRI

Management Committee. The three reviewers shall among them include one discipline

expert, one FRM experienced researcher, and one experienced supervisor of research

students at the candidature level. The associate supervisor of the student is normally one of

the three reviewers. The PS will be responsible for selecting reviewers who can provide

feedback in a timely manner and for ensuring that feedback is obtained.

3. Agreement of the RMRI Management Committee to the nominated reviewers is sought by

the Administrative Assistant (Research) via email within a set time limit of two (2) weeks

following receipt of advice of reviewers‟ names and details from the PS. The proposal will

3 The substance of this section was accepted by the FRM Board of Postgraduate Studies March 1998.

12

be available from the Administrative Assistant supporting the RMRI Management

Committee at this time for review by any member of the Board.

4. The reviewers provide written feedback to the PS on the proposal as per the proforma

within a period not normally exceeding four (4) weeks.

5. On receipt of the written feedback and after appropriate consultation with the student, the

PS will submit in writing to the Chair of the RMRI Management Committee at least ten (10)

days before a scheduled Committee meeting the following

an abstract of the student‟s research proposal,

a short statement outlining issues raised by the reviewers and how these have been

accepted into the proposal, and

a recommendation to the Committee on the proposal.

6. The Committee considers the recommendation at its next in-person or by circulation

meeting. Distributed papers will include the abstract of the student‟s proposal, and the PS‟s

statement and recommendation.

The Committee makes a decision on the recommendation based on circulated and available

documents, and any discussion in person or electronically, and will be one of the following three

options:

a) Approve the proposal and confirm candidature, OR

b) Approve the proposal subject to the satisfaction of the PS that the student has

addressed the Committee‟s specified recommendations. In this case the PS will

advise the Chair in writing when this has been achieved and the Chair will then

ensure that the student is advised that the proposal is approved and candidature

confirmed, OR

Refer back to the PS for further action and resubmission of the proposal as specified by the

Committee. This decision will only be made if there are fundamental problems with the

proposal that may inhibit the successful completion of the research project.

7. Students planning to seek conversion to PhD later in candidature may wish to indicate

that their MPhil proposal has been developed with this in mind. The following wording

is placed on the front cover of the proposal if this applicable.

This proposal outlines the plans for the postgraduate research project in the subject

area. Under the current rules for postgraduate students in the Faculty of Rural

Management, The University of Sydney, Orange this project is designed in the first

instance to satisfy the requirements for an MPhil. Additional research questions are

then posed and methods outlined that are designed to enable this project to satisfy the

requirements for a PhD. A review would be held around one year (full-time

equivalent) after this proposal has been approved for the candidate to convert from a

MPhil to a PhD subject to the agreement of candidate, supervisors and University.

13

PROGRESS: PROBATION4

Key People

Chair, RMRI Management Committee

Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)

Primary Supervisor

Student

Administrative Assistant (Research)

Procedure

All postgraduate research students are admitted on probation. At FRM probation is completed

when the following have occurred:

Acceptance by the RMRI Management Committee of the student‟s Research Proposal.

Statement by the Primary Supervisor on the student‟s competence in written English

expression provided to the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) for noting and

attachment to student file. This statement will recognise English language ability

appropriate to the field of study, and identify any problems and consequent remedial

actions for those who are likely to have difficulty with English expression in the writing

of a thesis.5

4 Approved by Board of Postgraduate Studies March 1998. 5 University policy statement formally operationalised in this way from 1999 at FRM.

14

PROGRESS: TRANSFER FROM MPHIL TO PHD CANDIDATURE6

Key People

Primary Supervisor

Associate Supervisor/s

Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)

Student

Chair (RMRI Management Committee)

Members of the RMRI Management Committee

Administrative Assistant (Research)

Responsibility

The Committee ultimately confirms or denies a request by an MPhil student to transfer to PhD

candidature.

Procedure

All stages of the transfer process should normally be completed within 8-10 weeks. The steps

leading to the Committee‟s decision should include:

1. The MPhil student initiates the process by submitting to the PS

a written request to transfer to PhD candidature that should include a cover letter and a

revised Research Proposal. The request for transfer to PhD candidature cannot be made

before completing twelve (12) months from commencement of candidature for full time

students (24 months for part-time students). The student prepares a research proposal based

on the guidelines for preparing a Proposal for Transfer from MPhil to PhD candidature (see

Appendix 3). This comprehensive written proposal is developed in consultation with the

student‟s PS.

2. The PS nominates three reviewers to the Chair. The three reviewers shall among them

include one discipline expert, one FRM experienced researcher, one experienced supervisor

of research students at the candidature level. The associate supervisor of the student is

normally one of the three reviewers. The PS will be responsible for selecting reviewers who

can provide feedback in a timely manner and for ensuring that feedback is obtained.

3. Agreement of the Committee to the nominated reviewers is sought by the Administrative

Assistant (Research) via email within a set time limit of two (2) weeks following receipt of

advice of reviewers‟ names and details from the PS.

The proposal will be available at this time for review by any member of the Committee on

request from the Administrative Assistant (Research).

4. The reviewers provide written feedback to the PS on the proposal within a period not

normally exceeding four (4) weeks.

6 Approved by Board of Postgraduate Studies March 1998.

15

5. The student presents his/her proposal at an in-house seminar or elsewhere by negotiation

with the PS. (Sequence of events 2, 3 and 4 are agreed to by PS and student.)

6. On receipt of the written feedback from the reviewers, completing the seminar and after

appropriate consultation with the student, the PS will submit in writing to the Chair of the

RMRI Management Committee at least ten days before a scheduled Committee meeting:

the PS‟s recommendation to the Committee on the proposal as per the proforma .

The recommendation should include actions or explanations in relation to the

issues/concerns raised by the reviewers

If the student and the PS disagree over the readiness of the candidature transfer research

proposal to be presented to the Committee, the student may request that it goes ahead and

provides a written comment of his/her own in addition to the statements above.

1. The recommendation will be considered at the next meeting of the Committee and the

distributed papers will include the abstract of the student‟s proposal, and a short statement

from the Primary Supervisor outlining issues raised by the reviewers and how these have

been addressed.

2. The Committee‟s decision will be based on circulated and available documents, and any

discussion at the next Committee meeting held in person or electronically, and will be one

of the following four decisions:

a) Approve the proposal and confirm the transfer OR

b) Approve the transfer subject to the satisfaction of the PS that the student has

addressed the Committee‟s specified recommendations. In this case the PS will

advise the Chair in writing when this has been achieved and the Chair will then

ensure that the student is advised that transfer is approved OR

c) Refer back to the PS for further action and resubmission of the proposal as specified

by the Committee. This decision will only be made if there are fundamental

problems with the proposal that may inhibit the successful completion of the PhD

research project OR

d) Reject the request for transfer to PhD and direct that the student complete the MPhil

program.

16

PROGRESS: MONITORING AND SUPPORTING THE CANDIDATURE

Key People

Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)

Student

Primary Supervisor

Associate Supervisor/s

Administrative Assistant (Research)

Annual Progress Report7

„For research students the annual progress report form and the annual review process are

mechanisms whereby the faculty can be assured that satisfactory progress is being made‟

(University of Sydney Postgraduate Studies Handbook ).

The Annual Progress Report process consists of completion of a proforma (see Appendix 1 -

Annual Progress Report) by the student, PS and Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students). This

will be completed by the 11th-12th month of the candidature, and then each twelve months

thereafter until the thesis is submitted.

Completion of the Annual Progress Report is initiated by the Administrative Assistant

(Research).

Annual Review Process8

The Annual Review Process („Departmental Review‟) is part of a University-wide review of

progress system. „Departments are required to maintain a formal review process whereby the

candidature of each postgraduate research student is reviewed at the anniversary of their

enrolment throughout their candidature. The review‟s purpose is to assist the candidate and

relies on full and open communication…. The review shall include an assessment of the

research project including the resources being made available, the candidate‟s progress and the

supervisory arrangement. It shall include participation by a staff member not being either the

supervisor or the head of department and should normally be expected to include the Sub Dean

(Sydney Research Students). There shall normally be a segment where the student has the

opportunity to discuss in confidence his or her progress in the absence of the supervisor‟

(University of Sydney Postgraduate Studies Handbook ). The focus of this review is the

academic welfare of the student. Annual review is considered best practice by the University‟s

Graduate Studies Committee.

The review process will include the following steps:

1. After reviewing the Annual Progress Report, the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)

consults with the PS and the student to appoint a Review Panel that can deal with all issues

or concerns identified in the Progress Report or raised verbally by the supervisor or student.

7 Approved by Board of Postgraduate Studies March 1998. 8 Approved by Board of Postgraduate Studies March 1998.

17

The Review Panel should consist of Chair, two experienced academics (one of whom may

be the associate supervisor) and the PS.

2. The Panel meets with the student in person or using audio- or video-conferencing facilities

to discuss any of the written or verbal concerns identified by the supervisor and student.

This meeting is normally first held in the 12th-13th month of the candidature. The

supervisor/s leave the meeting for a period of time so that the remaining panel members

may discuss the supervision with the student.

3. The Chair of the Review Panel prepares a written report on the outcome of the meeting (see

Appendix I of the Report template). This report is subsequently included in Board papers

for noting and then copied to the student‟s file in Client Services.

4. If action is required, the Associate Dean (Research) works with the PS and student on the

necessary action, consulting the Committee for approval at the Committee‟s meeting or

through email, as appropriate.

The normal expectation is an annual meeting throughout the candidature. More frequent review

meetings may be held where it is deemed to be of benefit to the student.

Preparation for Review Panels. Committee members find it beneficial to receive a document

which represents the project‟s state of play (e.g. project proposal, progress report, and/or thesis

plan) and copies of any publications to date. The PS is responsible for ensuring that the students

prepares and distributes these documents a reasonable time prior to the meeting.

Facilities for Review Panels. In some Review Committee meetings it is found necessary to take

the student through his/her work and thinking in an exhaustive manner. Where this is foreseen,

the panel meeting should be held where facilities such as a white board are available.

POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH SUPPORT SCHEME (PRSS)

The PRSS was introduced by the University in 2001 to provide direct support for currently

enrolled postgraduate research students. Under the scheme, funds are allocated to Schools or

Departments (in some cases Faculties) based on their higher degree research enrolment figures

in the previous year.

Who is eligible for funds?

Currently enrolled PhD students, full-time or part-time, are eligible to apply for funds under

the PRSS provided their candidature does not exceed eight full-time semesters (or part-time

equivalent at the closing date for applications.

Enrolled Masters by research students, full-time or part-time, are eligible to apply for funds

provided their candidature does not exceed four full-time semester (or part-time equivalent)

at the closing date for applications.

Other eligibility criteria

18

Applications will not be considered if the students have not demonstrated satisfactory

progress towards timely completion of the degree and/or the period of candidature has

been exceeded.

Justification for the use of funds. A brief statement outlining the benefits to the

application‟s candidature.

Support by the applicant’s supervisor/s.

Any achievement related to the research

CSU operating funds

Operating funds to defray costs directly associated with the student‟s research project are

provided by CSU at the rate of $2,750 per semester for full-time students and $1,375 per

semester for part-time students.

Guidelines for the use of this finding may be accessed from the „Maintenance Allocation

Guidelines” link at http://www.csu.edu.au/research/higher_degrees/funds/

A budget outlining expected expenses should be included in the Research Proposal.

Insurance Matters

Postgraduate research students need to be clear about how they are covered by insurance.

Completion of Authorities to Travel for travel within Australia and overseas are FRM‟s way of

determining official travel.

19

EARLY SUBMISSION OF PHD

Candidates undertaking a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) at the University of Sydney are required

to submit the thesis for examination after a minimum length of candidature.

Queries relating to the early submission of a PhD thesis should be directed to the Sub-Dean,

Sydney Research students.

Refer to Appendix 1, to access the form (Application for early submission of Doctor of

Philosophy (PhD) thesis. This form is to be used for applications to be considered in

accordance with Part 10, Division 4, section 78(4) of the University of Sydney (Amendment Act)

rule 1999 as amended. This clause states that in exceptional circumstances, the Chair of the

Academic Board may accept for examination a PhD thesis submitted by a candidate enrolled for

less than the minimum length of candidature.

Applications submitted in accordance with this provision are considered on a case-by-case

basis. All PhD requirements must be met, including that the work submitted was undertaken

during candidature, and evidence must be produced that the candidate has made exceptional

progress during candidature.

Applications for consideration by the Chair of the Academic Board should be completed by the

candidate, supervisor and head of department and submitted to the Administrative Assistant,

Research for a recommendation from the Dean to the Chair of the Academic Board.

To complete the application:

clearly state the length of time by which candidature is requested to be reduced (and thesis

to be submitted early) and the reason; and

attach any supporting documentation.

20

THESIS: SUBMISSION

Key People

Chair (RMRI Management Committee)

Student

Primary Supervisor

Administrative Assistant (Research)

Thesis Format

Theses are normally expected to be presented in traditional printed format (and currently must

be so lodged with the University and FRM libraries, with inclusions where appropriate).

Guidelines are provided at http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/research/usyd-students

More detailed guidelines are provided in the Resolutions of Academic Board regarding form

and binding of theses at

http://sydney.edu.au/ab/policies/PG_PhD.pdf

Also refer to the SUPRA publication “The Thesis Guide” at

http://www.supra.usyd.edu.au/assets/file/Publications/SUPRAthesisguide.pdf

Readiness for Examination

The Primary Supervisor must sign the Certificate of Suitability for Examination (Appendix 1,

Research Forms: PhD or MPhil Submission Statement of Supervisor) prior to the student‟s

submission of the thesis. The Administrative Assistant (Research) acknowledges receipt of the

thesis for examination (Appendix 1, Lodgement of Higher Degree Thesis).

21

THESIS: EXAMINATION – MPHIL(RURMGMT)

Key People Chair (RMRI Management Committee)

Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)

Administrative Assistant (Research)

Primary Supervisor

Procedures are fully detailed in the diagrams on the following pages.

Responsibility

Examination of research master‟s theses is under FRM‟s control while examination of doctoral

theses is carried out under the direction of the University‟s PhD subcommittee of the Graduate

Studies Committee.

Degree of MPhil(RurMgmt): Appointment of Examiners9

Number of Examiners. Two (2) (at least one of whom is external to the university).

Appointment of Examiners. Appointed by RMRI Management Committee on advice by the

Chair. Although University guidelines allow for appointment of the student's supervisor or

associate supervisor, FRM guidelines are that all examiners will be appointed from outside

FRM.

1. The Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) and the student's supervisor consult on

appropriate examiners and informally determine whether the selected persons would be

willing to undertake the task.

A list of nominated examiners is formally presented (Appointment of

Masters_Examiners_Form_Orange.rtf) to the Chair of the RMRI Management Committee

2. Once the examiners have been agreed by the RMRI Management Committee, the

Administrative (Research) sends a letter of invitation to the examiners together with FRM

guidelines on the expectations of the degree and the thesis, and the Examiner's Comment

form (MPhil Examiners report 2.rtf)

9 Approved by Board of Postgraduate Studies June 1994.

22

Master's Thesis Examination:

Two months before planned submission

Student writes to Associate

Dean (Research) advising of

intention to submit within

three months

Associate Dean (Research):

1. acknowledges student's

advice in writing

2. reminds Primary

Supervisor that it is time

to nominate thesis

examiners

Primary Supervisor

1. completes any discussion of possible examiners with student

2. informally discusses proposed examiners with Associate Dean

(Research)

3. informally sounds out proposed examiners on their willingness

to examine

4. formally presents list of proposed examiners (2 plus reserve on

pro forma) to Chair, RMRI Management Committee

5. if not previously done as part of an Annual Review Report,

confirms in writing that the student has completed the

graduation requirement of seminar presentation or advises

when and how this requirement will be met.

Administrative Assistant (Research) advises Committee members of proposed examiners and requests

comment/confirmation. This will be carried our by email consultation if a Committee meeting is not

imminent.

Administrative Assistant (Research)

formally invites proposed examiners to

undertake the task with advice on

expectations, amount of honorarium and

timeline.

If one of the initial examiners is unable to

undertake the task, the reserve examiner is

then invited.

Primary Supervisor or Student advises the

Associate Dean (Research) in writing if the

proposed submission date slips behind by more

than a month, proposing a new submission date.

Chair (RMRI Management Committee) writes to examiners to advise delay in submission and ask each

examiner whether he/she is still available to complete the task in the requested timeframe.

If either of the agreed examiners is now unable to undertake the task, the reserve examiner is invited to examine.

When a reserve examiner is asked to examine, a second reserve examiner is then nominated.

23

Master's Thesis Examination:

submission and examination

Student submits to Associate Dean (Research) required number of theses, Certificate of Readiness, Thesis

Submission for Examination pro forma.

Administrative Assistant (Research) dispatches thesis, examination guidelines, and examination

report form to examiners.

Administrative

Assistant (Research)

sends reminder letter after

four weeks if report not

received

Administrative Assistant (Research) receives reports. When all

reports are received, rcommendations are considered by Chair (RMRI

Management Committee) and action taken as follows.

Outcome A:

If both examiners agree to award, or to award

with corrections to typographic errors only, the

Chair accepts the recommendations on behalf

of the Board and writes to the student and

Supervisor/s appropriately.

Outcome B:

In the case of any other recommendations from

the examiners, the Chair asks the Primary

Supervisor to consider the examiner's reports

confidentially and, in consultation with the Board

Chair, to prepare a recommendation to the Board.

The student is not included in these

considerations

Outcome A: The results are reported by the Chair to the RMRI Management Committee at its next

meeting.

Outcome B: The RMRI Management Committee considers the recommendation and decides on an

appropriate course of action with regard to awarding the subject to correction of typographic errors,

emendation, revision for re-non-award, or in exceptional cases appointment of a third examiner assessor.

The Chair then writes to the student and supervisor/s appropriately.

24

Master's Thesis Examination

Thesis finalisation

The Chair's letter to the candidate on the results of examination will specify the remaining conditions to be met

by the student before the degree is awarded. These will usually

Option A:

1. Correction of any

typographic errors

2. Formal binding as

required

3. Submission of

required number of

copies to the

Associate Dean

(Research).

Option B (I)

1. Revision of parts (emendation) of

the thesis document

2. Review of the changes by an

appointed person (usually the

Principal Supervisor)

3. Submission of a report by the

appointed person to the Board that

the required work has been

satisfactorily completed according

to the conditions stated.

Option B (ii)

1. Revision of the

whole (revision

of the thesis

document.

2. Re-submission

for re-

examination.

The RMRI Management Committee accepts the revised thesis and

agrees to awarding of the degree or if not satisfied determines further

action.

On acceptance, the Chair writes to the student so advising and

providing instructions on remaining steps.

On receipt of the required number of formally bound theses the Associate Dean (Research) will

advise the Client Services Manager to:

1. add the student's name to the next graduation list

2. write to the student advising that all graduation requirements have been met and that the

degree will be awarded at the next graduation ceremony.

25

THESIS: EXAMINATION - PHD

Key People

Chair (RMRI Management Committee)

Associate Dean (Research)

Administrative Assistant (Research)

Primary Supervisor

Chair (University of Sydney Graduate Studies Committee PhD Subcommittee)

Procedures are fully detailed in the diagrams on the following pages.

Responsibilities

Examination of doctoral theses is carried out under the direction of the PhD subcommittee of

the University‟s Graduate Studies Committee. Operationally, the PhD subcommittee is

primarily involved when examination is completed and a recommendation regarding awarding

of the degree is being made.

Degree of PhD: Appointment of Examiners

The Resolutions of Senate relating to the degree of Doctor of Philosophy require appointment of

three examiners, at least one of whom shall be external to the University. The names of these

examiners are then to be reported to the Academic Board which may appoint one or more

examiners. The Academic Board has delegated to the Committee for Graduate Studies its

powers with respect to graduate studies matters and the PhD Award Sub-Committee acts on

behalf of the Committee in consideration of examiners appointed by Faculties.

Examiners are recommended by the Associate Dean (Research) to the Chair (RMRI

Management Committee) on the form Appointment of Examiners Form PhD 2.rtf following

informal consultation with the PS. Steps to ensure that examiners are free from bias, for or

against either the student or supervisor must be taken. This should include a general discussion

of a wide range of possible examiners with the student by the supervisor and/or other academic

head; the student, the supervisor, or the academic head may initiate such discussion. Students

may in addition advise the names of persons they do not wish to see appointed as examiners

giving their reasons in writing; this information will then inform identification of appropriate

supervisors. The consultative process, however, should not result in the student being given the

names of his/her examiners and care must be taken not to jeopardise the integrity and

independence of the examination process.

In order to reduce delays it is desirable to contact examiners in advance of their appointment to

see if they are willing and able to act within the time frame expected. Provision is also made on

the form for the nomination of a fourth or fifth person as an alternative examiner should one or

more of the recommended examiners decline to act or later withdraw.

1. Associate Dean (Research) and the student's supervisor consult on appropriate examination

and informally determine whether the selected persons would be willing to undertake the

task.

26

2. A list of nominated examiners is formally presented (Appointment of Examiners Form PhD

2.rtf) to the Chair of the Committee by the Associate Dean (Research).

3. The Chair of the RMRI Management Committee presents the names of the examiners to the

RMRI Management Committee for approval as a confidential item.

4) Recommendations approved by the Board are forwarded to the University‟s PhD Award Sub-

Committee for final approval, at least 4 weeks prior to the expected submission date.

5) Once the examiners have been approved, the Administrative Assistant (Research) sends a

letter of invitation to the examiners together with guidelines on the expectations of the degree

and the thesis, and the Examiner's Comment form ( Examiners_Report_Form_PhD 2.rtf )

The following specific points should be noted:

The examiners should be known to be familiar with the supervision/examination of research

theses. Full details of the examiners must include title, position held, home institution (and

address of the institution) of each examiner. Recommendations for examiners who are not

persons of obvious academic standing must be supported with justifying statements.

Examiners should normally be still active in research/scholarship thus ensuring that their

knowledge of the field is current. Recommendations for the appointment as examiner of

someone who has retired should be supported with a justifying statement including how

long it has been since the person retired.

The Academic Board allows a supervisor to be appointed as examiner although individual

faculties may hold different policies on this matter. Normally a person should not be

recommended for appointment as an examiner if he or she has been a supervisor of the

student and is also the head of the department or academic unit concerned. If this is

considered academically necessary a justifying statement should be provided.

The University is concerned to minimise delay in the examining process. If any significant

delay has occurred between the date of submission of the thesis and recommendation of the

appointment of examiners, head of departments are asked to explain the circumstances.

When a PhD thesis is being presented for re-examination normally the original examiners

should be re-appointed provided they are available unless, in the opinion of the Faculty

concerned, the examiners have required modifications of the thesis that the Faculty deems to

be unnecessary or undesirable or there appear to be academic reasons for not appointing any

or all of the original examiners.

Reporting PhD Awards Made at FRM

PhD awards made at faculty level (see diagrams for guidelines) are reported at quarterly each

year to the PhD Award Sub-Committee. The completed form should be forwarded to the

Secretary to the PhD Award Subcommittee as an email attachment, and followed with posting

of the Certificate of Confirmation. See

http://sydney.edu.au/ab/committees/PhD_Award/phd_award_forms.shtml

27

Both date of submission of the thesis and date the student is informed in writing of the

examination result must be included. The period between the two dates is the official

examination period. Any time taken for corrections or emendations leading to graduation is not

considered part of the examination period. Where the initial examination lead to a revision

requirement, both sets of dates must be included.

28

PhD Thesis Examination:

Three months before intended submission

Student writes to Associate

Dean (Research) advising of

intention to submit within three

months.

Associate Dean (Research)

1. acknowledges student's advice in writing

2. reminds Principal Supervisor that it is time to nominate

thesis examiners

Primary Supervisor

1. completes any discussion of possible examiners with student

2. informally discusses proposed examiners with Chair (RMRI Management Committee)

3. informally sounds out proposed examiners on their willingness to examine

4. formally presents list of proposed examiners including reserve (3 plus 1 reserve on pro forma) to Chair

(RMRI Management Committee)

5. if not previously done as part of an Annual Review Report, confirms in writing to Associate Dean

(Research) that the student has completed the graduation requirement of seminar presentation or

advises when and how this requirement will be met.

Chair (RMRI Management Committee) advises Committee members of proposed examiners and requests

comment/confirmation. This will be carried out by email consultation if a Committee meeting is not imminent.

Chair (RMRI Management

Committee) advises the PhD

Subcommittee Chair of the Graduate

Studies Committee of the examiners

to be appointed.

Principal Supervisor or Student

advises Chair (RMRI Management

Committee) in writing if the proposed

submission date slips behind by more

than a month, proposing a new intended

submission date.

Chair (RMRI Management Committee)

1. Writes to examiners to advise delay in submission and ask each examiner whether he/she is still available

to complete the task in the requested timeframe.

2. If any of the agreed examiners is now unable to undertake the task, the reserve examiner is invited to

examine.

3. When a reserve examiner is asked to examine, the Principal Supervisor is asked to propose a second

reserve examiner who is considered via the normal procedure.

29

PhD Thesis Examination:

Submission and presentation to examiners

Student submits to Associate Dean (Research) required number of copies, Certificate of

Readiness and Thesis Submittion for Examination pro forma.

Administrative Assistant (Research) dispatches thesis, examination guidelines, and

examination report form to each of the examiners.

Administrative Assistant (Research)

sends reminder letter after four weeks if

report not received.

Administrative Assistant (Research) receives reports. When all reports are received,

recommendations are considered by Chair (RMRI Management Committee) and

appropriate action taken.

30

PhD Thesis Examination:

Consideration of examiners' recommendations

Agreement or Minor

Disagreement of Examiners'

Recommendations:

If all examiners agree to award, or to

award with corrections to

typographic errors only, the Chair

accepts the recommendations on

behalf of the Committee and the

University.

If one examiner recommends minor

emendations and the others

recommend correction of

typographic errors or no changes,

and the HOD (= Faculty Dean) also

recommends that the degree be

awarded subject to emendations, the

Chair accepts the recommendations

on behalf of the Committee and the

University, and writes to the student

and supervisor/s appropriately.

Differences among Examiners'

Recommendations

In the case of any other recommendations

from the examiners, the Chair asks the

Principal Supervisor to consider the

examiner's reports confidentially and, in

consultation with the Committee Chair,

to prepare advice to the Board. The

student is not included in these

considerations.

The Committee considers the advice and

makes a recommendation on the outcome

of the thesis examination.

The Committee Chair sends the

Committee‟s recommendation and all

examiners‟ reports to the PhD

Subcommittee of the Graduate Studies

Committee for determination of the

University's final decision.

This is then advised to the

Committee at its next meeting, and

to the PhD Subcommittee of the

Graduate Studies Committee in a

quarterly report.

The Graduate Studies Committee's PhD

Subcommittee makes the final

determination and advises the Chair (RMRI

Management Committee) who then advises

the student and the Principal Supervisor

appropriately.

31

PhD Thesis Examination:

Thesis finalisation

Option A:

1. Correction of any

typographic errors

2. Formal binding as

required

3. Submission of

required number of

copies to the

Associate Dean

(Research)

Option B(i)

1. Revision of parts

(emendation) of the

thesis document.

2. Review of the changes

by an appointed person

(usually the Principal

Supervisor)

3. Submission of a report

by the appointed person

to the Committee that

the required work has

been satisfactorily

completed according to

the conditions stated.

Option B(ii)

1. Revision of

the whole

(revision) of

the thesis

document.

2. Re-

submission

for re-

examination.

The Committee accepts the revised

thesis and agrees to awarding of the

degree or if not satisfied determines

further action.

On acceptance, the Chair writes to the

student so advising and providing

instructions on remaining steps.

On receipt of the required number of formally bound theses the Associate Dean (Research)

advises the Client Services Manager to:

1. add the student's name to the next graduation list

2. write to the student advising that all graduation requirements have been met and that

the degree will be awarded at the next graduation ceremony.

The Chair's letter to the student on the results of examination will specify the remaining

conditions to be met by the student before the degree is awarded. These will usually include:

32

APPENDIX 1 HIGHER DEGREE FORMS

The following forms can be accessed at:

http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/research/usyd-students

Annual Progress Report

DSAg Appointment of Examiners

DSAg Examiners report

DSAg Revised Resubmitted Examiners Report

DSAg Submission Statement of Supervisor

Lodgement of Higher Degree Thesis

MPhil Appointment of Examiners

MPhil examiners report

MPhil Revised Resubmitted Examiners Report

MPhil Submission Statement of Supervisor

Originality of Work

PhD Appointment of Examiners

PhD Examiners Guidelines

PhD Revised Resubmitted Examiners Report

PhD Examiners Report

Thesis Documentation Checklist

Application for early submission of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) thesis

33

APPENDIX 2 SUPERVISION: APPOINTMENT OF ASSOCIATE

SUPERVISORS10

It is generally University policy, and so FRM policy, to appoint one or more associate

supervisors to look after postgraduate research students (see The University of Sydney

Postgraduate Studies Handbook).

1. The Associate Dean (Research) and the Primary Supervisor confer about associate

supervisor(s) for a student and come to an agreement which is in the best interest of the

student. The student should be consulted at an appropriate stage.

2. The proposed Associate Supervisor is approached by the Primary Supervisor to take on the

role in an honorary capacity if not an eligible member of FRM staff. (In the case of

individuals from elsewhere in the University a case-by-case review of resource implications

would normally occur, but the normal expectation would also be of an honorary capacity.)

3. On informal agreement by the proposed Associate Supervisor:

For FRM staff, the Pro Dean is advised and their workload negotiated and adjusted

appropriately

For individuals external to the University, a nomination is made to the FRM Dean using the

form which follows.

4. On satisfactory resolution of Step 3, the Associate Dean (Research) writes to the

nominated Associate Supervisor on behalf of the FRM, expressing thanks for agreement to

undertake the role, listing any expectations agreed in consultation with the Primary

Supervisor and the proposed Associate Supervisor and providing copies of the University's

and FRM‟s guidelines on postgraduate studies where appropriate.

5. When the student under supervision has achieved the award the FRM Dean, on initiation by

the Administrative Assistant, Research), will write to the Associate Supervisor thanking

him/her for the contribution to FRM‟s research and education programs.

10 From procedural policy document approved by College Principal June 1995.

34

APPENDIX 3 TRANSFER FROM MPHIL TO PHD CANDIDATURE

The expectations given in Gui delines for Preparing Proposals for Postgraduate Research

must be addressed and the following additional information must be provided:

Three-page progress report of phase 1 of the project summarising the main findings,

conclusions and any complications in terms of achieving the set objectives.

The relationship between the completed and proposed research must be clearly articulated.

In addition to the Transfer Project Proposal, a complementary document may be added as an

appendix to provide other evidence that support the student‟s ability and the potential of the

research project to produce a successful PhD Thesis. This evidence could include publications,

additional funds attracted, collaboration with other organisations.

35

APPENDIX 4 PERIOD OF STUDY

Minimum

Normal Completion

Maximum

Expected Progression

Research Master‟s - Full Time

Yr 1 Semester 1

Semester 2

Yr 2 Semester 3

Semester 4

Yr 3 Semester 5

Semester 6

Expected Progression

Research Master‟s - Part-time

Yr 1 Semester 1

Semester 2

Yr 2 Semester 3

Semester 4

Yr 3 Semester 5

Semester 6

Yr 4 Semester 7

Semester 8

Yr 5 Semester 9

Semester 10

Yr 6 Semester 11

Semester 12

Expected Progression

PhD - Full-time

Yr 1 Semester 1

Semester 2

Yr 2 Semester 3

Semester 4

Yr 3 Semester 5

Semester 6

Yr 4 Semester 7

Semester 8

Yr 5 Semester 9

Semester 10

Expected Progression

PhD - Part-time

Yr 1 Semester 1

Semester 2

Yr 2 Semester 3

Semester 4

Yr 3 Semester 5

Semester 6

Yr 4 Semester 7

Semester 8

Yr 5 Semester 9

Semester 10

Yr 6 Semester 11

Semester 12

Yr 7 Semester 13

Semester 14

,

71