Research Degrees Handbook

for ResM, MD, MPhil/PhD and PhD programmes

December 2019

2019 Edition

- 2 -

UNIVERSITY OF PLYMOUTH

RESEARCH DEGREES HANDBOOK

LIST OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION TO THIS HANDBOOK ............................................................... 5 THE DOCTORAL COLLEGE ................................................................................. 6

1. Introduction ................................................................................................ 6 2. Doctoral College Governance & Reporting Structure ................................ 7 3. Doctoral College Scope & Responsibilities ................................................ 7

Related to the business of the Doctoral College Board: ............................ 7 Related to the business of the Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee .. 8

4. Communication with the Doctoral College ................................................. 9 YOUR PROGRAMME OF STUDY AS A RESEARCH DEGREE CANDIDATE .. 10

1. Key Staff Members and Support Structures ............................................ 10 2. Research Degree Terms ......................................................................... 12 3. Enrolment ................................................................................................ 15 4. Induction .................................................................................................. 16 5. Your Responsibilities ............................................................................... 18 6. Registration Period .................................................................................. 19

Extension to registration .......................................................................... 20 Interruption to registration ........................................................................ 21 Amendments to registration (mode of study) ........................................... 22 Withdrawal from registration .................................................................... 22 Termination of registration ....................................................................... 23

7. Fee Paying Structure ............................................................................... 23 8. Project Approval ...................................................................................... 24 9. Confirmation of Route .............................................................................. 26 10. Research Training ................................................................................... 28 11. Monitoring of Progress ............................................................................. 30

Failure to progress ................................................................................... 30 12. Amendments, Changes and Transfers .................................................... 30 13. Your Thesis ............................................................................................. 31 14. Submission of Your Thesis ...................................................................... 33 15. The Examination of Your Thesis .............................................................. 34

The viva voce (oral) examination ............................................................. 35 Examination outcomes and award of your degree ................................... 36

16. Teaching as a Postgraduate Researcher ................................................ 41 17. Problems and Questions ......................................................................... 42 18. Complaints Procedure ............................................................................. 44

List of contents 2019 Edition

- 3 -

19. Appeals Against Academic Decisions ...................................................... 45 20. Alumni Research Fellow Scheme ............................................................ 46

NOTES FOR SUPERVISORS .............................................................................. 47 1. Appointment of Supervisors and Responsibilities .................................... 47 2. The Programme of Study ......................................................................... 49

Overview, concerns and questions .......................................................... 49 The start of the programme ..................................................................... 49 The registration period ............................................................................. 51 Monitoring your student’s progress .......................................................... 52 Lack of academic progress ...................................................................... 53 Loss of contact with a candidate .............................................................. 54 Project approval ....................................................................................... 54 Confirmation of route ............................................................................... 56 Submission of the thesis .......................................................................... 57 Academic Offences/Research Misconduct .............................................. 58

3. Nomination and Appointment of the Examination Team .......................... 58 4. The Examination Process ........................................................................ 62

Documentation issued prior to the viva voce examination ....................... 62 The viva voce (oral) examination ............................................................. 64 Following the viva voce examination ....................................................... 65

5. Alumni Research Fellowship Scheme ..................................................... 66 GUIDANCE NOTES FOR ‘EXPERT COMMENTATORS’ (PROJECT APPROVAL & CONFIRMATION OF ROUTE) ................................. 67

1. General .................................................................................................... 67 2. Project Approval (RDC.1) ........................................................................ 68

Guidance for reviewing the Data Management Plan................................ 68 3. Confirmation of Route (RDC.2) ................................................................ 70

MINIMUM RESOURCES FOR POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDENTS ..... 71 1. Purpose of Minimum Benchmarking ........................................................ 71 2. Provision of all PGR Students ................................................................. 71 3. Distance Students.................................................................................... 72

SCHOOL AND FACULTY ACTIVITIES AND EXPECTATIONS FOR POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH DEGREES ........................................................ 73

1. Faculty-level ............................................................................................ 73 2. School-level ............................................................................................. 75

NOTES OF GUIDANCE FOR EXAMINERS ........................................................ 77 1. Appointment of Examiners ....................................................................... 77 2. The Role of the Examiners Prior to Oral Examination ............................. 78 3. Submission of the Thesis ......................................................................... 78 4. Preparation for the Oral (Viva Voce) Examination ................................... 80 5. The Oral Examination .............................................................................. 81 6. Examination Outcomes ............................................................................ 82 7. Examination of Thesis: Procedure & Outcome Recommendations ......... 83 8. Award of a ‘Pass’ Degree: Procedure ...................................................... 86 9. Corrections to the Thesis: Procedure ...................................................... 87

List of contents 2019 Edition

- 4 -

10. Resubmission following Deferral: Procedure ........................................... 88 11. Compensatory/lower award: Procedure ................................................... 90 12. PhDs on the basis of Prior Published Works ........................................... 91 13. Appeals Against Academic Decisions ...................................................... 91 14. Questions and Concerns ......................................................................... 91 15. Flowchart of PGR Examination Outcomes .............................................. 91

THE ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF INDEPENDENT CHAIRS AT VIVA VOCE EXAMINATIONS OF RESEARCH DEGREES ................................ 93 POSTHUMOUS RESEARCH DEGREES AND AEGROTAT AWARDS ............. 98 FEE AMENDMENTS ............................................................................................ 99

Interruptions ............................................................................................. 99 Withdrawal ............................................................................................... 99 Extensions ............................................................................................. 100 Early submissions of thesis: .................................................................. 100

DESCRIPTORS OF HIGHER EDUCATION QUALIFICATIONS ....................... 101 1. Master’s level ......................................................................................... 101 2. Doctoral level ......................................................................................... 102

STUDENT REPRESENTATION ON DOCTORAL COLLEGE BOARD (DCB) . 104 THESIS PRESENTATION ................................................................................. 106

2019 Edition

- 5 -

INTRODUCTION TO THIS HANDBOOK

This Handbook should be read in conjunction with the University-wide Academic Regulations (standard regulations for research degrees are combined with those for taught programmes) and the University Student Handbook. Main changes since last edition have been highlighted throughout this handbook. It has been prepared to help explain the obligatory and operational aspects of research degree programmes. While the main section (‘Your Programme of Study’) is written directly for PGR (Postgraduate Research) students, other sections aim to provide guidance, clarity and assistance to their Supervisors, Examiners, and key staff across the University working to support you. School supplements (sometimes combining one or more School), outlining local resources and expectations, can be found on the Doctoral College Moodle pages. As a research degree student, you are also required to read and adhere to the following policies and procedures (all available via the Research Ethics webpages): • Intellectual Property Policy • University of Plymouth Research Ethics Policy, Code of Good Research

Practice and the University Research Data Policy

Please note that separate and/or additional regulations apply to students registered for the following Professional Doctorates: Doctor of Education (EdD), Doctorate of Engineering (EngD), Doctorate of Business Administration (DBA), Doctor of Public Administration (DPA) and Doctorate of Clinical Psychology (DClinPsy). All of the above programmes have their own Handbooks. There are also separate regulations and guidelines for PhDs on the Basis of Prior Published Works. IMPORTANT: New regulations related to Examination Outcomes came into effect on 1 September 2018 for PGR students who submit their thesis for the first time on or after this date. This Handbook reflects these new regulations. If you submitted your thesis before this date (or are examining one), please refer to the University’s 2017-18 Regulations and the 2017 Research Degrees Handbook (including the Notes of Guidance for Examiners included within). Please note that resubmitted theses that were submitted for their first examination before 1 September 2018 will also be examined according to the ‘old regulations’ (2017-18).

If you have any comments, questions or suggestions related to this Handbook, please contact the Doctoral College: doctoralcollege@plymouth.ac.uk.

2019 Edition

- 6 -

THE DOCTORAL COLLEGE

1. Introduction The University of Plymouth’s Doctoral College works with staff and students in all areas of the University’s world-leading research to ensure that our diverse community of postgraduate and postdoctoral early career researchers is offered the best possible experience. Part of the Academic Registry, it acts as the locus of responsibility and expertise for postgraduate research degrees at the University. Its primary purpose is to support excellence and employability across all stages of the researcher journey by facilitating and providing first class training and excellent supervision, networking and development opportunities and mentoring. Established in September 2017 and building on the successes of the University’s Graduate School, which it replaced, the Doctoral College aims to stimulate and facilitate a vibrant intellectual environment across and between disciplines for ResM, MD, MPhil/PhD and Professional Doctorate candidates, as well as postdoctoral early career researchers on fixed term contracts, allowing each individual to reach their full potential. The Doctoral College runs training sessions for supervisors & examiners, University-level inductions for new students, as well as a well-established and successful Researcher Development Programme that includes a wide range of courses and sessions to help postgraduate and postdoctoral early career researchers develop and broaden their research and transferable skills. These are all free for all research students and staff at the University. For further information about this programme, please email researchskills@plymouth.ac.uk. Key staff: Professor Roberta Mock Director of the Doctoral College Professor Anthony Caleshu (until February 2020) / Dr Sana Murrani (after February 2020

Deputy Director of the Doctoral College (Faculty of Arts & Humanities)

Professor Steven Furnell Deputy Director of the Doctoral College (Faculty of Science & Engineering)

Professor Bridie Kent Deputy Director of the Doctoral College (Faculty of Health: for Schools of Psychology, Nursing & Midwifery, and Health Professions)

Dr Claudia Barros Deputy Director of the Doctoral College (Faculty of Health: for Schools of Medicine, Dentistry, and Biomedical Sciences)

Dr Cristina Rivas Doctoral College Manager Sarah Kearns Researcher Development Manager

UoP Doctoral College 2019 Edition

- 7 -

2. Doctoral College Governance & Reporting Structure 2.1. Doctoral College Board reports to Senate and is responsible for the

governance and strategic enhancement of postgraduate research degrees (PGR) and postdoctoral ECR research within the University. It meets three times in each academic year. There are PGR and postdoctoral ECR representatives on Doctoral College Board, which always includes student-led business. Please see ‘Student Representation on Doctoral College Board’ section of this Handbook.

2.2. The Doctoral College Quality Sub-committee, which also meets three times each academic year, reports directly to Doctoral College Board. It is responsible for PGR Quality, Management and Enhancement issues, including those related to regulations, student progression, examination and monitoring. It also has oversight of training and professional development (including that of doctoral and research masters candidates, supervisors and examiners).

3. Doctoral College Scope & Responsibilities Related to the business of the Doctoral College Board:

3.1. To support PGR cohort development by creating & maintaining an effective network that links doctoral researcher representatives and academic and professional staff from different discipline areas, Faculties and directorates;

3.2. To work with Faculties, Schools and Institutes to support all postgraduate research students by providing a stimulating research environment with relevant career development, research dissemination and funding opportunities and postgraduate-specific facilities;

UoP Doctoral College 2019 Edition

- 8 -

3.3. To act as a central point of information for prospective doctoral researchers;

3.4. To co-ordinate the communication and promotion of doctoral research opportunities, studentships, events, and information for internal and external stakeholders (including potential applicants, existing doctoral researchers, supervisors, research councils, etc.);

3.5. To create and maintain an excellent website that is both outward facing (for recruitment) and inward facing (student experience);

3.6. To provide strategic direction for the distribution of doctoral funding initiatives, particularly University Studentships, in consultation with Faculties;

3.7. To identify postgraduate research requirements and develop cross-disciplinary and cross-faculty collaboration to enrich the student experience;

3.8. To facilitate and develop national and international partnerships and consortia for PGR activity;

3.9. To celebrate the success of our postgraduate research students and promote the postgraduate and early career research community and its achievements across and beyond the institution;

3.10. To work alongside the Student Union to organise social and networking events and activities which generate a sense of community among PGR students, as well as providing opportunities for student feedback and listening to the student voice;

3.11. To ensure that there is an appropriate representation of the Doctoral College at relevant external events and communicate, on behalf of the University, with relevant government and other bodies engaged in consultation related to issues of relevance to PGR and early career research staff on fixed term contracts;

3.12. To work with the University’s Marketing and Communication and Alumni Engagement teams to enhance PGR recruitment, visibility, student development and student experience.

Related to the business of the Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee 3.13. To lead and direct the development and delivery of doctoral research

provision across the University and maintain operational oversight of the quality, management and enhancement of research degree provision;

3.14. To maintain primary institutional-level responsibility for governance of PGR activity, including the design, development and ongoing evaluation of PGR procedures and regulations;

3.15. To set standards and expectations for postgraduate research students and supervisors, ensuring that the University is compliant with the QAA UK Quality Code for Higher Education;

UoP Doctoral College 2019 Edition

- 9 -

3.16. To ensure that innovative and accessible training is provided for postgraduate and postdoctoral early career researchers, supervisors and examiners;

3.17. To maintain primary responsibility for operational areas of PGR activity including administration of application, enrolment, extenuating circumstances, examination and award processes; maintaining student records; raising fees and invoices as appropriate; running the Assessment Board for taught elements of research degrees; monitoring student progress via GradBook; and liaising with UKVI compliance team;

3.18. To manage and disseminate results of the Postgraduate Research Experience Survey (PRES) and other initiatives to measure and respond to indicators of student satisfaction;

3.19. To manage and disseminate results of the Careers in Research Online Survey (CROS) and other initiatives to measure and respond to indicators of research staff satisfaction.

4. Communication with the Doctoral College 4.1. The Doctoral College email address is:

doctoralcollege@plymouth.ac.uk. Your message will always be forwarded to the most appropriate recipient to handle your query).

4.2. You may also visit the Doctoral College office in person. The address is 8-9 Kirkby Place, University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth PL4 8AA. The opening hours are 9:00–16:30 Monday to Thursday, and 9:00–16:00 on Fridays. If you need to see somebody in particular, it is best to make an appointment first by email or telephone: +44 1752 587640. There are private spaces available if you wish to speak to somebody confidentially.

4.3. The Doctoral College will always communicate to you via your University of Plymouth email account. Please ensure you check this regularly and/or set up a forward to your preferred email account.

4.4. A Doctoral College newsletter is sent to all PGR students, normally every 6-8 weeks. This includes opportunities, notices and reminders of important tasks.

2019 Edition

- 10 -

YOUR PROGRAMME OF STUDY AS A RESEARCH DEGREE CANDIDATE

1. Key Staff Members and Support Structures

1.1. In this Handbook, the group of people responsible for the administration and quality assurance of your research degree is called the Research Degree Management Unit.

1.2. As a research degree candidate, you will have at least two supervisors and not normally more than three supervisors. One of your supervisors will be your Director of Studies (DoS). 1.2.1. All of your supervisors are required to complete mandatory

training, which is refreshed every two years. 1.2.2. For more information about the appointment of supervisors,

please see ‘Appointment and Responsibilities of Supervisors’ in the ‘Guidelines for Supervisors’ section of this Handbook.

1.3. The responsibilities of your Director of Studies are as follows: 1.3.1. to provide the leadership of the supervisory team and to

provide support to you on an agreed, regular and frequent basis,

1.3.2. to impart knowledge in the area of your research programme and/or your theoretical or methodological approach,

1.3.3. to develop an effective working relationship with you and to provide an encouraging and supportive environment,

1.3.4. to maintain regular contact through meetings and to co-ordinate meetings with the other supervisors as well as being responsive to your needs outside of agreed meeting times,

1.3.5. to keep a record of supervisory meetings, 1.3.6. to introduce you to external publications, professional bodies,

contacts and sources in your field of study, 1.3.7. to involve you in the activities of a research group and its

workshops and conferences, 1.3.8. to assist with the planning of the research programme, advise

on literature sources, investigative and analytical techniques and arrange a programme of advanced training in generic and specific aspects of your research programme,

1.3.9. to provide assistance with a project structure, work plan and milestones, in conjunction with you and other supervisors,

1.3.10. to advise you on timing for the various stages of work and help to ensure that your thesis is submitted within the required time period,

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 11 -

1.3.11. to assist you in the self-assessment of personal and professional skills,

1.3.12. to request written or creative work regularly and arrange for presentations of work and provide constructive criticism and feedback normally within 20 working days of receipt (unless previously negotiated with you),

1.3.13. to ensure that you are aware of what is expected of you as a student and to ensure that you are informed as to whether you are attaining the standard expected, and where progress is not of the required standard to provide support and assistance to improve performance,

1.3.14. to assist in ensuring that the intellectual property rights and copyright of written works are protected and that any period of confidentiality of the thesis is requested as required,

1.3.15. to advise on University regulations and deadlines, 1.3.16. where links with a collaborating organisation exist, to

encourage the development of a mutually beneficial relationship between you and the organisation,

1.3.17. to provide close and regular monitoring and to ensure that annual monitoring reports are completed,

1.3.18. to propose an appropriate examination team 4 months in advance of you submitting your thesis for examination, and

1.3.19. to organise and arrange your oral (viva voce) examination, liaising with you, the examiners, the Doctoral College, and the chair where appointed.

1.4. The responsibilities of your second supervisor and any other supervisors are as follows: 1.4.1. to maintain active involvement with your project and keep in

regular communication with you and your Director of Studies, 1.4.2. to provide primary support on a temporary basis, in the

absence of your Director of Studies. 1.4.3. to become acting Director of Studies if the Director of Studies

ceases employment as an academic staff of the University or as an approved member of staff at a Node until a replacement supervisory team is formally approved,

1.4.4. to provide you with additional, often specialist, guidance, support and feedback (as agreed and negotiated), and to assist in your progression where possible,

1.4.5. to maintain an awareness of the status of your progress and to ‘sign off’ progression milestones (e.g. Project Approval and Confirmation of Route) in a timely fashion on GradBook,

1.4.6. to attend the minimum number of regular meetings with you and your Director of Studies (4 for full time and 3 for part time

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 12 -

students), and to ‘sign off’ these interactions on GradBook, and

1.4.7. to act as a mentor for Directors of Studies who have not previously supervised a research degree to completion at this level.

1.5. There is a Deputy Director of the Doctoral College for each of the three Faculties of the University. They are responsible for leading the development and implementation of the strategy for postgraduate research (PGR) in their Faculty in accordance with the University’s overall strategy, and for providing leadership to academic and administrative colleagues in the furtherance of the strategy (see also ‘Faculty Activities and Expectations’ section in this Handbook). They work closely with relevant School PGR Co-ordinators, the Faculty’s Associate Dean Research, the Director of the University’s Doctoral College and with external partners (for instance, in the development and management of UKRI Doctoral Training Partnerships [DTPs] and PGR Nodes) to deliver the Faculty’s goals. As a core member of the University’s Doctoral College Board, they also play a significant role in the development of doctoral education (and associated research masters provision and support for ECRs on fixed term contracts) across the University. For further details, see ‘Faculty and School-level Responsibilities for Postgraduate Research Degrees’ document in this Handbook.

1.6. School PGR Coordinators are responsible for individual research student matters and ensure that Minimum Resources for research students are met and that all research students are offered a high-quality research environment, appropriate discipline-specific skills training, cohort development opportunities and access to appropriate facilities and resources (see also ‘School-level Activities and Expectations’ in this Handbook). They are responsible in the first instance for admission and selection procedures, supervision team nomination, quality assurance, annual monitoring, Project Approval, Confirmation of Route (if appropriate) and examinations. If you have any concerns about your programme of study that your DoS is unable to deal with, or you have a concern about your relationship with your supervisors, please contact your School PGR Coordinator in the first instance. For further details, see ‘Faculty and School-level Responsibilities for Postgraduate Research Degrees’ section of this Handbook.

2. Research Degree Terms 2.1. This Handbook is for students registered on one of the following

research degree programmes:

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 13 -

2.1.1. ResM – Research Masters An 18 month full-time (including 6 months writing up period) or 3 year part-time (including a 1 year writing up period) programme that also includes the compulsory completion of 40 credits of taught modules at Level 7. The latter must include a research methods module, appropriate to the discipline, and taught credits applicable to the subject area. There are progression possibilities for ResM candidates, who can exceptionally apply to continue directly into the PhD programme upon the successful completion of the Confirmation of Route process and transfer to PhD. If this is the case, the maximum period of registration for a PhD will apply. However, if you transfer and continue to PhD then the ResM degree will not be awarded.

2.1.2. MPhil – Master of Philosophy A 3 year full-time or 4 year part-time research degree (including a 1 year writing up period).

2.1.3. MPhil/PhD – Master of Philosophy with transfer opportunity to Doctor of Philosophy A 4 year full-time (including an 1 year writing up period) or 6 year part-time (including 2 years writing up period) research degree if you successfully transfer to PhD status. If you transfer and continue to PhD then the MPhil degree will not be awarded.

2.1.4. PhD – Doctor of Philosophy A 4 year full-time (including a 1 year writing up period) or 6 year part-time (including 2 years writing up period) research degree once successfully transferred to PhD.

2.1.5. Integrated PhD A 5 year full-time (including a 1 year writing up period) or 8 year part-time (including 2 years writing up period) research degree if you successfully transfer to PhD status, including an integrated set of taught level 7 modules.

2.1.6. MD – Doctor of Medicine A 3 year full-time (including a 1 year writing up period) or 4 year part-time (including a 1 year writing up period) research degree at doctoral level available in the Faculty of Health for qualified doctors registered with the GMC and working in a clinical setting within the UK. There are progression possibilities for MD candidates, who can exceptionally apply to continue directly into a PhD programme upon the successful completion of the Confirmation of Route process and transfer to PhD status. If this is the case, the maximum period of registration for a PhD

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 14 -

will apply. However, if you transfer and continue to PhD then the MD degree will not be awarded.

2.1.7. PhD on the Basis of Prior Published Works. A 12 month programme. Separate regulations and guidelines exist for this degree.

2.2. If your research forms part of a wider group project working under a Principal Investigator (PI), you may each register for a research degree to be submitted individually for examination; these theses must be distinguishable for the purposes of assessment.

2.3. All research degrees are assessed by means of a thesis and an oral defence (viva voce examination) at minimum.

2.4. If you are not awarded a research degree or withdraw prior to submitting a thesis for examination, then you may be awarded either a PgCert or PgDip if you have satisfactorily completed either 60 or 120 Level 7 credits respectively.

2.5. You may undertake a programme of research in which creative and/or professional work forms a significant part of the intellectual enquiry. In such cases, the thesis may comprise both written and practice elements which are examined together as a whole. The form of the latter and its documentation/inclusion within the final version of the thesis must be approved in advance by your approved thesis examiners.

2.6. You may undertake a programme of research of which the principal focus is the preparation of a scholarly edition of a text or texts, musical or choreographic work or other original artefacts. In such cases, examination may include a presentation in addition to the other elements of assessment (that is, in addition to the written element of the thesis, submitted supplementary materials and viva voce examination).

2.7. For collaboratively produced co-authored theses, both candidates will be examined together and must, separately and together, meet the criteria of the relevant degree qualification. In such cases, you are additionally expected to submit Project Approval (RDC.1) and, if relevant, Confirmation of Route (RDC.2) materials separately but at the same time for consideration.

2.8. You must undertake a programme of related studies as deemed necessary by your DoS and/or Research Degree Management Unit, in order to gain competence in appropriate research methods and related knowledge of the subject of the thesis. In some cases, this includes passing credit-rated modules. If these modules, or other training requirements, are identified in your Offer Letter, then you will be required to withdraw from your programme of study if they are not achieved, regardless of your progress in other areas.

2.9. You are required to engage with, record your progress, and submit for assessed milestones such as Project Approval and Confirmation of

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 15 -

Route on GradBook, which is the University’s online platform for PGR monitoring and progression.

2.10. Full time research degree students are entitled to 8 weeks leave per year, including public holidays. Part-time students are entitled to pro-rata number of days based on 0.5 FTE. Students in the writing up phase of their research degrees are entitled to pro-rata number of days based on 0.1 FTE. You need to agree periods of annual leave with your supervisory team and record this on GradBook.

2.11. Full-time students are expected to devote at least 37 hours per week to their studies. Part-time students are expected to devote at least 18.5 hours per week on average to their studies. We do not identify a minimum number of engagement hours for ‘writing up’ periods; you are expected to submit your thesis prior to the end of your ‘writing up’ period, which is the final deadline for your thesis, and to negotiate your commitment accordingly.

2.12. If you are an overseas student on a Tier 4 General Student visa, you must fulfil and adhere to the regulations given by the UK Visa and Immigration (UKVI) office and document regular (monthly) interactions with your supervisors on GradBook. You are also obliged to comply with your responsibilities with the University as a Tier 4 General Student visa-holder, as outlined in the relevant web pages of the International Students Advice (ISA). The University has produced leaflets for PGR students on Tier 4 visas and their supervisors which are available from the Doctoral College, the International Students Advice and the UKVI Compliance Team.

2.13. The University’s Equality & Diversity and related policies are available from the main Student regulations, policies and procedures webpage.

3. Enrolment 3.1. All research degree candidates are referred to as postgraduate

research (PGR) students and are recorded in the University student records system (UNIT-e).

3.2. You are required to enrol on your first day of study for a research degree. You should contact the Doctoral College for details of when and where enrolment will take place if you have not received information by email. Online enrolment is possible for most research students.

3.3. At enrolment you will normally be required to: 3.3.1. produce confirmation of award or sponsorship arrangements

or confirmation that payment for fees has been made (the Finance department or the Doctoral College should be contacted if you or your sponsors have any questions concerning the payment of tuition fees),

3.3.2. for international students based at Plymouth (i.e. those not registered for research carried out mainly overseas or in a

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 16 -

partnership ‘node’), you must have your relevant documents scanned by the International Students Advice (ISA),

3.3.3. for international students not based at Plymouth (i.e., those registered for research carried out mainly overseas or in a partnership ‘node’), you must have your relevant documents scanned by the International Students Advice (ISA) each time your visit the University of Plymouth,

3.3.4. for students assessed as Home or EU for fee paying purposes with a non-EU nationality, you must have your relevant documents scanned, and

3.3.5. complete and sign an enrolment form or complete online enrolment process.

3.4. You will normally receive an ID/student card at initial enrolment only - this card enables you to access the library, Students’ Union, and certain buildings and offices and sports facilities (after payment of a joining fee where appropriate).

3.5. If you have been appointed to work on a project conceived by the University which forms all or part of your research degree programme, and you have been funded by the University (e.g. through a studentship), you may be required to assign any IP (Intellectual Property) Rights to the University or to an external partner. In such cases, you will need to sign an IP Agreement with the University (and/or the partner organisation) prior to enrolling on your programme of study (or as soon as possible thereafter). Please see the University’s Intellectual Property Policy for further details and contact your Director of Studies and/or School PGR Coordinator at the earliest opportunity to discuss.

3.6. You must re-enrol at the beginning of each academic year for the duration of your programme of study. You are not entitled to re-enrol unless the prescribed fees for the previous academic year or any other outstanding academic debt with the University have been paid.

3.7. If you have not enrolled for the current academic year, and have not applied for a formal interruption, approved by the Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee, you will have your registration automatically terminated and your status will be recorded as withdrawn. The University will always try to contact you before terminating your registration. It is your responsibility to notify the University, via the Doctoral College, of any change to your contact details.

4. Induction 4.1. University-wide Induction events will be run at least twice a year by the

Doctoral College for all research degree candidates, and additionally at least twice online if you are unable to attend in person.

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 17 -

4.2. Attending a University Induction Event is mandatory for PGR students. You will be unable to complete Project Approval until you have either attended an Induction event, an online induction webinar or viewed the recorded online induction and passed a short quiz.

4.3. Your Research Degree Management Unit (normally at School or Faculty level) will also provide you with essential and useful information. This will vary according to local procedures but will normally be provided through an induction workshop, event or programme, as well as a supplement to this handbook.

4.4. Induction events aim to ensure that you are: 4.4.1. informed of the local research degree management structure,

staff and procedures, the formal and informal channels of communication at local and University level,

4.4.2. introduced to the library, computing, facilities, resources and services available to you,

4.4.3. made aware of your responsibilities as a research degree candidate and the responsibilities of their supervisors to you,

4.4.4. informed of the purposes, roles and responsibilities of the Doctoral College,

4.4.5. introduced to the extent of research training available and/or required,

4.4.6. informed of University health and safety procedures (where appropriate, specific local guidelines will be provided and you may be required to sign a statement to confirm that you have read and agree to these procedures),

4.4.7. informed of the University research ethics and integrity policy, particularly in those areas where research involves human and/or animal participants,

4.4.8. informed of the University policy on ownership of copyright of theses and intellectual property rights arising from your work,

4.4.9. made fully aware of the timescale for completion of your research degree including the normal minimum and maximum periods for registration, the liability of payment of fees and the structure of amount of fees to be paid,

4.4.10. informed of normal expectations for progress, probationary periods and the annual monitoring process,

4.4.11. informed of the systems and procedures in place to monitor the use of the electronic system for research degree students (GradBook), how to view and record your progress, and of your responsibilities,

4.4.12. informed of pastoral support, health & wellbeing and counselling services available and encouraged to make use of the support network for personal and work-related matters when needed, and

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 18 -

4.4.13. made aware of opportunities to voice views and input into local and university-level decision-making.

5. Your Responsibilities 5.1. As a research student, you are expected to:

5.1.1. contribute positively to the development and maintenance of an effective working relationship with your Director of Studies and other supervisors,

5.1.2. pursue your research project with a commitment, taking full advantage of the resources and facilities offered,

5.1.3. maintain a record of the minimum number of formal supervisory sessions each year on, and upload documents as required to, GradBook,

5.1.4. submit written or creative research work to your supervisory team regularly and provide oral presentations of work in seminars, as required,

5.1.5. agree a schedule of regular meetings with your supervisors, meeting the minimum number required for your programme of study,

5.1.6. take initiative in raising problems and difficulties, 5.1.7. maintain progress in accordance with the schedule agreed

your supervisors, 5.1.8. engage in self-assessment of personal and professional skills

development and appropriate skills training, ensuring that your supervisors are aware of areas where training may be necessary,

5.1.9. provide an annual report of progress via GradBook, 5.1.10. negotiate with your Director of Studies the amount of time

devoted to your research and the timing of vacations and leave of absence,

5.1.11. make the ultimate decision to submit your thesis (while your Director of Studies' advice should be taken as to when the thesis is ready for submission, this cannot be taken as a guarantee that the examiners will find the thesis acceptable for the award of a degree),

5.1.12. be responsible for the preparation of your thesis and its submission and any corrections required post-examination and to ensure that the content is complete, accurate and your own work (except where clearly indicated),

5.1.13. attend a mandatory Doctoral College Induction event, either in person or online, and complete the University’s mandatory online Health & Safety training,

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 19 -

5.1.14. ensure that the University, via the Doctoral College, has up-to-date contact details for you and that you regularly check your University email account for communications,

5.1.15. follow the University’s ethical guidelines and codes of good practice, as well as complying with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR),

5.1.16. enrol every year and to ensure that all tuition fees are paid, as appropriate, and

5.1.17. adhere to the commitments outlined in the University’s Student Charter as appropriate.

5.2. All University researchers are expected to embrace the principles of open research. By practicing open research, you can demonstrate the value, rigour and integrity of your work. You are encouraged to make your research data openly available for reuse at the end of your project, within legal and ethical constraints and dependent on its context (e.g. as part of a funded ongoing project). Additional information can be found via the University’s Research Support website, the Library’s guide on Open Research or by contacting the Open Research Team. The University has produced Open Access and Research Data Guidelines for PGR Students which aim to clarify its expectations with regards to open access research and RDM. The University’s Open Research Team also runs sessions for PGRs as part of the Researcher Development Programme.

5.3. You are responsible for exercising good practice in research data management. All PGR students commencing on or after 1st August 2019 are required to submit a Data Management Plan as part of the Project Approval (RDC.1) process. PGRs who began their programmes prior to this date, but who are submitting applications for ethical approval, will also require Data Management Plans.

5.4. All postgraduate researchers are required to adhere to the University’s Code of Good Research Practice. You can read more about the University’s ethical approval processes as well as information about each Faculty Research Ethics & Integrity Committee on the Research Ethics Policy webpages. You are expected to work with your supervisory team to apply for ethical approval for your project at the earliest opportunity. Your application must be approved by your Director of Studies prior to submission.

6. Registration Period 6.1. The first six months of registration for full-time students and 12 months

for part-time students are considered a probationary period and registration may be terminated by the University if you do not make

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 20 -

sufficient progress during this time (normally indicated by not successfully completing the Project Approval RDC.1 milestone).

6.2. The normal maximum and minimum periods of supervised study and registration prior to submission of a thesis for examination are:

Registration type Mode of

attendance Minimum Maximum

ResM full-time 12 months 18 months part-time 24 months 36 months

MPhil full-time 12 months 36 months part-time 24 months 48 months

PhD (from first enrolment as MPhil/PhD or ResM if relevant) Integrated PhD add 12/24 months (FT/PT)

full-time 24 months 48 months

part-time 36 months 72 months

MD full-time 12 months 36 months part-time 24 months 48 months

6.3. Your thesis (or its written element if your thesis also includes creative or professional practice) must be submitted for examination before the end of the maximum periods of registration outlined above.

6.4. If you wish to submit your thesis earlier than the minimum registration period indicated above, you will need to obtain prior approval for an exemption to the minimum period from the Doctoral College Quality Sub-committee. Additionally, you will have to pay fees up to the minimum registration period.

6.5. The Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee may permit a candidate who has started a programme of study and research at another university to complete it as a registered candidate of the University of Plymouth. In such cases, the Doctoral College shall determine the minimum and maximum periods of registration on a case by case basis in consultation with your previous institution.

Extension to registration 6.6. In exceptional cases, and on the recommendation of your Director of

Studies (or other nominated supervisor), your registration may be extended by the Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee. Applications must be made via GradBook.

6.7. If you submit your thesis after your deadline, you will be responsible for paying extension fees at the appropriate level (See Item 7 below, as well as the section entitled ‘Fee Amendments for Withdrawing, Extending and Suspending Registration, and for Deregistration’ in this Handbook).

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 21 -

6.8. Extensions may be granted for a maximum of 12 months at any one time. Thereafter, you may apply to extend your registration for a maximum period of 24 months.

6.9. The period by which the total registration of a student may be extended (including all extensions and interruptions granted) will not normally exceed a total of 24 months.

6.10. If your maximum period of registration has ended, and you have not been granted a further extension, your registration may be deemed by the Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee to have lapsed and, as a result, you will be withdrawn from your programme of study.

Interruption to registration 6.11. Where you can show good reason for not making progress with your

research programme, you may apply via GradBook to have your registration interrupted for a period of not normally less than one month and not more than 12 months. In exceptional circumstances, you may renew the interruption of registration once, for a further period of 12 months maximum.

6.12. The period by which the total registration of a student may be extended (including all extensions and interruptions granted) will not normally exceed a total of 24 months.

6.13. Interruptions of registration are usually requested as a result of illness, maternity/paternity leave, severe personal problems or commitments unrelated to the research project, but not for trivial matters.

6.14. Approval by the local Research Degree Management Unit and by Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee is required.

6.15. Periods of interruption shall not count towards the maximum period of registration.

6.16. Please see the section entitled ‘Fee Amendments for Withdrawing, Extending and Interrupting Registration, and for Deregistration’ in this Handbook. You should then pay any remaining amount owed as soon as possible. The Student Accounts team will contact you if you have not done so. If you have overpaid your fees the surplus funds can either be retained and applied to your fees on resumption of your studies or refunded to you at your request. Please note that students will not be reimbursed for fees paid prior to the current year of registration. Please email studentaccountsteam@plymouth.ac.uk if you require a refund.

6.17. The University is obliged to follow the guidelines issued by UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) when dealing with requests for interruptions from overseas students under a Tier 4 General Student visa.

6.18. During the period of interruption, the University has the right to suspend access to laboratories, Student Services, office or other workspace and to the library since you may no longer be covered by the University’s insurance. However, the University will normally

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 22 -

attempt to keep access to the library and on-line accounts live during the period of interruption.

6.19. During a period of interruption, your supervisory team is not able to engage with you about the progress of your project, although it is recommended that ‘keeping in touch’ meetings are held every 3 months during a period of interruption, either in person or by video conference. Please note that this is not intended to discuss or further the content of your research project.

6.20. Retrospective interruptions with a start date more than 2 months from date of request are not normally allowed; you and/or your Director of Studies are encouraged to raise these requests at the time of the events happening whenever possible.

6.21. Immediately following an interruption of 6 months or longer, you should have a ‘re-integration’ meeting with your Director of Studies to recalibrate your project, schedule of work and your support needs.

Amendments to registration (mode of study) 6.22. If you wish to change your mode of study (that is, from full time to part

time or vice versa), this request must be made via GradBook. 6.23. As the maximum period of study varies according to mode of study and

your award aim, you total remaining registration period and tuition fee status will therefore be affected by any such changes. These will be recalculated by the Doctoral College.

6.24. Requests for changes must be approved by the local Research Degree Management Unit and then Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee.

6.25. You are not allowed to change your mode of study once you have entered your ‘writing up’ period.

Withdrawal from registration 6.26. If you decide to withdraw from your programme of study, then you

should notify the University of the reason for withdrawal and date of departure, preferably via GradBook. Your withdrawal will be reported to the Doctoral College Quality Sub-committee.

6.27. If you do not do this via GradBook, then written confirmation must be sent to the Doctoral College as soon as possible to ensure that your enrolment and registration are cancelled and you are no longer liable for fees.

6.28. Please see the section entitled ‘Fee Amendments for Withdrawing, Extending and Suspending Registration, and for Deregistration’ in this Handbook.

6.29. The University is obliged to follow the guidelines issued by UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) when dealing with withdrawals of overseas students under a Tier 4 General Student visa.

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 23 -

Termination of registration 6.30. The University reserves the right to terminate your registration if:

6.30.1. it is determined that it has discharged all its responsibilities towards you, and

6.30.2. you have received adequate and formal warning of inadequate progress, have not improved and show no likelihood of improvement, or

6.30.3. you have not achieved mandatory milestones, requirements or taught modules within specified timeframes or numbers of attempts, or

6.30.4. it is demonstrated that you have committed an academic offence or research misconduct, or

6.30.5. you have not kept in contact with the University, or 6.30.6. you fail to enrol for the current academic year without a formal

agreed interruption. 6.31. Please also see ‘Failure to Progress’ (Item 11 below) as well as ‘Lack

of academic progress’ in the Guidelines for Supervisors section of this Handbook.

7. Fee Paying Structure 7.1. The fee you are responsible for paying depends on your year of

registration and mode of attendance (full-time or part-time), according to the table below.

Mode of attendance

PhD MPhil ResM MD

Full-time

3 years FT fees

2 years FT fees

1 year FT fees 2 years FT fees

Plus 1 year of writing up (reduced fee)

Plus 1 year of writing up (reduced fee)

Plus 0.5 years of writing up (reduced fee)

Plus 1 year of writing up (reduced fee)

Part-time

4 years PT fees

3 years PT fees

2 years PT fees

3 years PT fees

Plus 2 years of writing up (reduced fee)

Plus 1 year of writing up (reduced fee)

Plus 1 year of writing up (reduced fee)

Plus 1 year of writing up (reduced fee)

7.2. If you are sponsored and your sponsorship covers periods of full time

longer than those in the table above, these will be adjusted to coincide with your sponsorship details.

7.3. Further information on standard tuition fees is available at the Fees and Funding webpage.

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 24 -

7.4. If you began your programme of study after 1 September 2018 and need to resubmit your thesis for a second examination following your viva voce examination, you will need to pay a Resubmission Fee whether or not a second oral examination is waived.

7.5. If you are in receipt of a University Research Studentship (URS), information about payments during Maternity, Adoption, Ordinary Paternity, Shared Parental Leave and other interruptions to study (including illness), can be found in the ‘University Research Studentship Guidelines’ on this page.

8. Project Approval 8.1. Project Approval stage is compulsory if you are registered for the

degrees of MPhil, MPhil/PhD, ResM or MD. 8.2. As part of this process, you must do the following via GradBook:

8.2.1. complete the Project approval (RDC.1) form; this includes an abstract of your project and details of training completed and forthcoming,

8.2.2. submit a schedule of work leading to the submission of your thesis,

8.2.3. submit a Data Management Plan, and 8.2.4. evidence that you have attended a mandatory Induction

Event, and 8.2.5. submit any other materials specified by your local Research

Degree Management Units (in School supplements to the Research Degrees Handbook).

8.3. Your project is reviewed by an ‘expert commentator’ from outside of your supervisory team. The assessment of your project for approval includes: 8.3.1. consideration of the academic content and quality of your

proposed programme of work to ensure that it is set at the appropriate level and achievable within the limits of the research programme and according to the submitted schedule of work,

8.3.2. consideration of whether your Data Management Plan is realistic and appropriate to your project and adheres to ethical and legal guidelines,

8.3.3. consideration of the appropriate level of study and programme and thus the route of study and qualification aim,

8.3.4. consideration of the availability of project resources, research training, supervision for the duration of your programme,

8.3.5. consideration of the extent of the relationship with any collaborating establishment and the protection of intellectual property rights and copyright of the final thesis,

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 25 -

8.3.6. consideration of your qualifications/experience and potential to fulfil your proposed project,

8.3.7. assurance that you and your proposed research degree project meet University Regulations,

8.3.8. approval of any request for collaborative or jointly-authored submission of final thesis materials (including practice), and

8.3.9. ethical considerations and/or approval if appropriate and not considered before.

8.4. You must submit the materials listed under 8.2 above for Project Approval via GradBook by not earlier than 3 months and not later than 5 months from your official start date if you are a full time student. If you are a part time student, this must occur not earlier than 6 months and not later than 10 months from your official start date. These periods will be extended by approved periods of interruption.

8.5. If you are not able to submit your Project Approval materials by the dates above, for personal reasons beyond your control, then you should follow the Extenuating Circumstances process to request an extension to your deadline. Extensions following an approved request via the Extenuating Circumstances will be granted for a maximum of 1 month for full time students and 2 months for part time students.

8.6. Your Director of Studies can submit a request for an extension to the above deadlines for methodological reasons. 8.6.1. This request must be made prior to the original deadline. 8.6.2. It must be approved at either School or Faculty level

(depending on local processes and procedures as per their supplementary handbook) with all requests and decisions uploaded to your GradBook page.

8.6.3. Extensions to the submission for the Project Approval for methodological reasons will be granted by not more than 1 month for full time students and 2 months for part time students.

8.7. If your Data Management Plan (DMP) does not meet the requirements to pass but the rest of your Project Approval application is satisfactory, then your project may be still approved with a note from your supervisor or expert commentator on GradBook stating that it requires further development and/or amendments which will be monitored.

8.8. If your project is not approved at first attempt (including non-submission by the deadline without an approved extension), you are allowed a second attempt. 8.8.1. The deadline for submission for the second attempt will be 3

months from the official notification, via GradBook, of not having succeeded in the first attempt.

8.8.2. If you have not completed a mandatory induction, then you will not be able to submit your Project Approval materials on

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 26 -

GradBook. If this is the case and your deadline passes, it will be considered an ‘attempt’ and you will be deemed to have failed this milestone.

8.9. If you do not successfully complete Project Approval within a) two attempts, or else b) within 9 months full time or 15 months part time (whichever is longest), you will be required to withdraw from your programme unless there are valid extenuating circumstances or your submission is under consideration for approval.

9. Confirmation of Route 9.1. If you are registered as an MPhil/PhD student, the Confirmation of

Route process is compulsory. If you do not successfully complete this process, or do not wish to transfer to a PhD route, you will be confirmed on an MPhil award route.

9.2. Transfer to PhD status is also possible from the following research degree registrations: ResM, MD and MPhil.

9.3. The transfer to PhD is retrospective to your date of initial registration. 9.4. The Confirmation of Route process is:

9.4.1. a significant milestone toward your final doctoral level award, 9.4.2. a gauge of your current level of progress and a check that you

are on target for successful completion, and 9.4.3. an important stage in the written development of your final

thesis. 9.5. As part of this process, you must complete the Confirmation of Route

(RDC.2) form and additionally submit the following via GradBook: 9.5.1. if you are intending to stay registered on an MPhil route, a

report that confirms this intention and includes your plan for the same level of study,

9.5.2. if you are intending to transfer to PhD, a transfer report that includes your plan for a higher level of study differentiating between masters level and doctoral level of work, including the originality and contribution to knowledge that the project will make (normally up to 3000 words),

9.5.3. if you are intending to pursue a jointly-authored submission, a statement outlining the nature and extent of the collaboration and how this will be represented in the final thesis submission,

9.5.4. a statement of progress against the schedule of work at Project Approval stage,

9.5.5. an updated Data Management Plan, if appropriate, 9.5.6. the equivalent of at least one thesis chapter, normally up to

8000 words (e.g. literature review and description of methods; draft research paper), and

9.5.7. any other materials or processes (e.g. presentation or viva voce examination) specified by your local Research Degrees

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 27 -

Management Units (please see your Faculty/School supplements to this Research Degrees Handbook).

9.6. In assessing the outcome of the Confirmation of Route process, the following is taken into consideration: 9.6.1. confirmation from your Director of Studies and other

supervisors that you are making satisfactory progress, 9.6.2. the research training you have undertaken to date and details

of planned training and skills development, 9.6.3. issues related to data management, collaboration, ethical

protocol, copyright and intellectual property rights (as relevant),

9.6.4. the recommendation by your supervisory team that you should either remain on a masters level programme or transfer to PhD/doctoral level status,

9.6.5. a review of your project by an expert commentator from outside your supervisory team, confirming that you have evidenced satisfactory progress in your research programme to date; that there is evidence that the research provides the basis for a PhD (in the case of transfers to PhD); and recommending that you should either remain on a masters level programme or transfer to PhD status, and

9.6.6. the recommendations of your supervisory team and expert commentator by the local Research Degree Management Unit.

9.7. You are required to submit the materials listed under 9.5 above by not earlier than 12 months and not later than 15 if you are a full time student, and not earlier than 18 months and not later than 21 months if you are a part time student. If you are on an Integrated PhD programme, you may add 12 months if full-time or 24 months if part-time to these time periods.

9.8. If, for personal reasons beyond your control, you are not able to submit for Confirmation of Route via GradBook by the dates above, you should follow the Extenuating Circumstances process to request an extension to your deadline. Extensions following an approved request via the Extenuating Circumstances will be granted for a maximum of 3 months for both full time and part time students.

9.9. Your Director of Studies can submit a request for an extension to the above deadlines for methodological reasons. 9.9.1. This request must be made prior to your deadline. 9.9.2. It must be approved at either School or Faculty level

(depending on local processes and procedures as per their supplementary handbook) with all requests and decisions uploaded to the student’s GradBook page.

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 28 -

9.9.3. Extensions to the submission of the Confirmation of Route for methodological reasons will be granted by not more than 3 months for full time and part time students.

9.10. If you do not succeed at your first attempt, you are allowed a second attempt. The deadline for submission for your second attempt will be 3 months from the official notification, via GradBook, of the outcome in the first attempt. If you do not submit by your deadline, this will be considered an ‘attempt’ unless extenuating circumstances have been granted.

9.11. If you do not successfully transfer to PhD within 18 months of effective full time registration, or 24 months of effective part time registration (that is, taking into account any approved periods of interruption), you will be deemed to stay registered on the masters level degree programme, unless you have valid extenuating circumstances or have a submission under consideration.

9.12. You may choose to submit your thesis for a lower award than that for which you are registered (for example, a PhD candidate may submit their thesis for a MPhil); this decision does not have to be made until submission of the Nomination of Examiners (RDC.3) form by your Director of Studies. Examiners may also choose to award a degree at a higher level than that for which you have submitted, although this is a rare occurrence.

10. Research Training 10.1. The University aims:

10.1.1. to provide high quality and professional training in research and other skills that lead to career development, tailored to the individual needs and aspirations of each research candidate,

10.1.2. to supply this training partly through the individual attention of a well-trained, professional Director of Studies and supervisory team, who will meet regularly with the candidate at agreed times and for set periods in an atmosphere of support, encouragement, constructive criticism and debate,

10.1.3. to provide access to a selection of short training workshops and courses, comprising both specialist and non-specialist topics,

10.1.4. to support students and supervisor(s) through clear and established processes and expectations for regular monitoring, reporting, feedback and peer review of the candidate’s progress,

10.1.5. to provide adequate opportunity for regular presentations by research degree candidates to a range of audiences within the University, and

10.1.6. to support attendance and delivery of research results by candidates at appropriate external venues e.g. via conference attendance.

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 29 -

10.2. The Doctoral College’s Researcher Development Programme offers over 150 sessions each year to help you develop and broaden your research and transferable skills. These include both classroom sessions and webinars. They are listed on these pages (which are updated regularly) and are categorised according to Vitae’s Researcher Development Framework. The framework is structured in four domains, which encompass what researchers need to know to do research, how to be effective in their approach to research, when working with others, and in contributing to the wider environment.

10.3. Many resources related to the University’s Researcher Development Programme are available on our Moodle page. These include videos of webinars and session handouts, Library and Induction information, GradBook guides and more. To access these resources you can self-enrol on Moodle using your University of Plymouth email address or send an email to researchskills@plymouth.ac.uk.

10.4. Due to the diverse research training requirements of the University’s PGR students, Faculties and Schools are expected to identify and deliver appropriate discipline-specific training and career development opportunities in addition to those offered by the Doctoral College through its Researcher Development Programme.

10.5. If you are required to complete any compulsory individual training, this will be confirmed to you prior to enrolment or soon after at the beginning of your programme of study. If your offer letter indicates that you must pass a module or complete a specific type of training (including those related to English language skills), then this is a mandatory requirement of your programme of study and you will not be allowed to progress or be awarded a degree without its successful completion. There is no ‘compensation’ available for compulsory modules. Regulations related to Accreditation of Prior Learning (APL) are available in ‘Section A – Admissions’ which can be downloaded from this page.

10.6. You may complete further credits at the University, beyond any specified compulsory requirement, up to a total maximum of 120 (these can include up to 30 credits of level 6 modules).

10.7. These optional credits are determined by you and your supervisor depending on your previous experience and the needs of your proposed research project element. They may be chosen from a variety of existing taught programmes and can span disciplines. In some cases, it may also be possible to register on an ‘attendance only’ basis.

10.8. Please note that registration on optional modules is subject to the approval of your DoS, the availability of these modules and at the discretion of the module leader.

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 30 -

11. Monitoring of Progress 11.1. If you are a full time student, a minimum of 4 meetings must be held

with your supervisory team each year (3 times per year, if you are a part time student), with documentation and outcomes of these meetings recorded in GradBook. You are expected to work together with your Director of Studies to maintain and complete these mandatory interactions on GradBook.

11.2. Both you and your Director of Studies are required to complete annual monitoring forms, via GradBook, up to the point of completion of your degree.

11.3. The Research Degree Management Unit, normally at School level, is responsible for monitoring and reviewing the progress of all research students towards their award aim.

Failure to progress 11.4. If you fail to make satisfactory progress in your programme of study,

your School may recommend to the Doctoral College Quality Sub-committee that your registration should be terminated. As part of this process, the University is committed to: 11.4.1. ensuring that you are offered the opportunity to demonstrate

progression, 11.4.2. dealing with the matter in a sensitive manner, 11.4.3. providing the opportunity for both you and your supervisors to

report separately and in confidence, and 11.4.4. where necessary, assisting you and your supervision team to

bring the programme back on schedule at the earliest opportunity.

11.5. The University reserves the right to terminate the registration of a research student in the case of persistent unacceptable progress. Please also see ‘Termination of Registration’ (Item 6 above). You will not be required to withdraw from the University without having first received a formal written warning. For further information about this process, please see the ‘Lack of academic progress’ section in the ‘Guidelines for Supervisors’ in this Handbook.

11.6. Where appropriate, the University Study and Wellbeing Review Policy and Procedure will be followed.

12. Amendments, Changes and Transfers 12.1. If there is a change to your source of funding, please report this by

email to the Doctoral College so your records can be updated. 12.2. If there is a need to change the members of your supervisory team (or

an individual’s role on your team), this must be done via GradBook by a current supervisor and approved by your School PGR Coordinator on behalf of your Head of School.

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 31 -

12.3. If, due to a change in circumstances, e.g. redeployment of your supervisor, you wish to transfer registration to another institution, the University has the right to refuse and, in such a case, an explanation will be offered. This is likely to have to do with Intellectual Property Rights.

12.4. If an external candidate wishes to transfer to University of Plymouth, the institution from which they are transferring must provide written confirmation that they are willing to accept the transfer of the registration for the candidate.

12.5. The University is obliged to follow the guidelines issued by UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) when dealing with transfers between institutions for overseas students under a Tier 4 General Student visa.

13. Your Thesis 13.1. Your thesis as a whole must be framed as a single coherent research

project and meet the relevant QAA Framework for Higher Education criteria for qualifications at Level 7 (Masters) or Level 8 (Doctoral) as appropriate to the degree. Please see the section at the end of this Handbook.

13.2. Your thesis may include non-written forms of research presentation (e.g. creative or professional practice) or else research outputs, including articles, published or made public during the course of the degree registration. In such cases: 13.2.1. the nature and form of the thesis must be approved by your

examiners prior to submission, 13.2.2. the thesis should include an introduction (outlining research

aims, enquiry, methodology and defining key terms as well as positioning within one or more fields of study) and conclusion (including a clear statement of the contribution to knowledge, in the case of a doctorate),

13.2.3. it may be necessary for examiners to engage in some elements of the thesis (e.g. performance or exhibition) some time prior to the submission of the written element or the viva voce examination. Please note that examiners may not discuss this work with you – except in general and non-critical ways which do not represent formative feedback – prior to the viva voce examination meeting,

13.2.4. where individual elements of the thesis are co-authored and/or co-produced, your specific role as a researcher within these elements must be clearly indicated within the thesis and it must be explained how this contributes to the overarching methodology of your research project as represented by the thesis as a whole. Normally it would be expected that you are the named first author (or disciplinary equivalent) of any publication included as part of the thesis and that a statement is provided by each co-author confirming your contribution, and

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 32 -

13.2.5. it is only possible to include Open Access publications or ‘green’ final manuscript versions of articles or papers within theses for copyright reasons. Please refer to the Open Access and Research Data Guidelines for Postgraduate Research (PGR) Students.

13.3. Your thesis must be written in English. Any exception to this condition must be sought in writing to the Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee prior to submitting the thesis for examination.

13.4. The University accepts that some postgraduate research students may wish to have their work proofread or edited by a third-party (that is, neither the student nor a member of their supervisory team) prior to submission and examination. 13.4.1. If this is the case, then such a process may not compromise

the authorship of the submitted work – for example, there may be no factual changes or additions or amendments to the argument.

13.4.2. The use of a proofreader must be acknowledged in the thesis. A copy of the thesis prior to proofreading must also be uploaded to GradBook and this may be made available to the examiners upon request, so it is possible to ascertain what changes were made.

13.4.3. In cases where changes to the thesis due to proofreading are so extensive that it can no longer be fairly said that the work is that of the student, or where the original version of the thesis is not made available upon request, then either academic offences procedures or PGR Student Research Misconduct procedures should be followed (as appropriate).

13.5. Papers that you have published during your research registration period, and that are not being included as examined elements of the thesis itself, should be listed either in the Author’s Declaration or else in an Appendix at the end of the thesis, including their DOI.

13.6. The requirements and guidelines for the presentation of your thesis are detailed in the ‘Thesis Presentation’ section at the end of this Handbook. Citation practice should be agreed with your Director of Studies as appropriate for your discipline(s).

13.7. The main text of your thesis must normally be below the following limits (excluding ancillary data, appendices, bibliography, etc.): 13.7.1. for ResM: 25,000 words 13.7.2. for MD: 60,000 words 13.7.3. for MPhil: 40,000 words 13.7.4. for PhD: 80,000 words

13.8. Where your thesis includes material other than that which is written or the research involves creative writing or the preparation of a scholarly

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 33 -

edition, then the written contextual/critical element of thesis should normally be shorter than the above limits.

13.9. All theses that include practical outcomes must also include a written element which, in the case of a PhD, substantiates and contextualises its contribution to knowledge.

13.10. In the instance of a collaboratively produced co-authored thesis, it is expected that any written element will exceed the standard maximum word count by no more than double. For example, if the maximum length of a PhD thesis is 80,000 words, then a collaborative submission should be no more than 160,000 words. In the case of a collaboratively produced co-authored thesis that contains practice, it would be expected that the written element is shorter, and submitted alongside a significant piece of practice and substantive documentation thereof.

13.11. In the case of practice-research degrees, the examiners must approve the form and format of the thesis. Please see guidelines in the relevant Faculty/School Supplement for details of this process.

13.12. The anticipated form of the final submission should have been outlined at Project Approval and/or Confirmation of Route stages, and approved by the Local Research Degree Management Unit.

13.13. In agreeing to such a request, the candidate, Director of Studies and Local Research Degrees Management Unit shall ensure that the proposed form and format of the thesis: 13.13.1. will be legible and accessible to the examiners and peer

community, 13.13.2. will include a satisfactory record of the ‘practice’ element, 13.13.3. is able to contextualise the practice intellectually, 13.13.4. is able to clearly demonstrate its contribution to knowledge (in

the case of a PhD), 13.13.5. will be of a scale and form which can be reasonably stored in

an electronic repository, 13.13.6. will be archive stable for a reasonable length of time, and 13.13.7. makes clear what is being examined.

13.14. You must include a statement at the front of your thesis with the word count of your thesis. It will not be accepted by the Doctoral College unless the word count is noted and is below the above limits. The only exceptions to this rule are 1) if the greater word count has been agreed in writing by all the examiners prior to submission, and 2) in the case of a collaboratively produced co-authored thesis (see 13.10 above).

14. Submission of Your Thesis 14.1. You must submit copies of your thesis, by your deadline (i.e. the end of

your ‘writing up’ period or any approved extension) for examination to the Doctoral College office. One copy must be submitted for each examiner and (if appointed) the non-examining independent Chair.

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 34 -

14.2. Your thesis is your own work. Although it is always advisable to heed the guidance of your supervisory team, it is up to you to decide when you consider it is ready for submission. You will be required to submit a signed copy of the declaration of submission form (RDC.3S) with your thesis to certify that you are choosing to submit the thesis yourself.

14.3. Work submitted for a research degree at the University of Plymouth may not form part of any other degree you have undertaken at the University or at another establishment. Contravention of this condition will mean that your degree will be revoked by the University. Exceptions apply if you are studying as part of a collaborative arrangement with another institution and a joint or dual degree has been formally agreed between two higher education institutions.

14.4. Theses should be submitted for examination in a temporary bound form such as ‘perfect binding’ or comb binding. A loose leaf copy in a ring folder will not be accepted. A thesis submitted in a temporary bound form must be in its final form in all respects save the final binding. Please see the ‘Thesis Presentation’ section at the end of this Handbook.

14.5. The final title of your thesis needs to be indicated on the RDC.3 form that your Director of Studies submits to nominate your examination team to the University.

14.6. If your examination team requests a change to your thesis title following your viva voce examination, no further approval is required and this will be part of your required corrections/amendments to your thesis.

15. The Examination of Your Thesis 15.1. It is your Director of Studies’ responsibility to nominate your examiners

at least 4 months prior to the submission of your thesis (or the examination of any part of it – for example, creative practice elements such as a performance or exhibition). This means that you must keep your DoS informed of your progress and intentions, especially in the run up to submission. It sometimes takes many months to approve an examination team and your examination will be delayed if this has not occurred prior to the submission of your thesis. Your DoS should consult you about examiners but is not obliged to take up your suggestions. Under no circumstances should you approach examiners yourself. For more information about the criteria for and appointment of examiners, please see the ‘Guidelines for Supervisors’ section of this Handbook.

15.2. If both of your examiners are of a different gender to your own, then you will be asked whether you would like to have an independent non-examining Chair of your own gender at your viva voce examination (please see the section on ‘Roles and Responsibilities of Independent Chairs’ in this Handbook). This is entirely up to you and is meant to

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 35 -

ensure that you feel comfortable during your examination. Please note that the Doctoral College will try not to make assumptions about your gender and apologise in advance if you are accidentally mis-identified.

15.3. You will receive an email from the Doctoral College: 15.3.1. confirming that copies of your thesis have been sent to the

examiners, 15.3.2. indicating any amendments required to the presentation of the

thesis which have been identified by the Doctoral College, 15.3.3. asking you to contact Disability Services (DS) if appropriate,

and 15.3.4. outlining the general procedures regarding your examination

and the possible outcomes. 15.4. Prior your viva voce examination, each of your examiners will complete

an independent report. A copy of these pre-viva reports will be held in your student file; these remain confidential throughout the duration of the examination. Should a copy be requested under the Data Protection Act 2018, it will only be provided within the extended timescales allowed under the Act.

The viva voce (oral) examination 15.5. Viva voce examinations are required for all candidates who submit

theses. The only exception is in the case of resubmitted theses where both examiners agree in advance that the examination will result in either a ‘pass’ or ‘corrections’ outcome.

15.6. The Doctoral College runs workshops on preparing for your viva voce examination at least three times each year. Please see the Researcher Development Programme or email researchskills@plymouth.ac.uk for further details. You should also ask your examination team to run a ‘mock viva’ with you a few weeks before your real one.

15.7. Your viva voce (oral) examination will be organised by your Director of Studies. This should be scheduled no sooner than 6 weeks and no later than 3 months from the date your thesis is sent to your examination team by the Doctoral College. You will be consulted on the date of your viva voce examination but please remember that it is often difficult to find a convenient date for both you and your entire examination team; your flexibility is much appreciated.

15.8. Your viva voce examination will normally be held at the University of Plymouth, but it is recognised that sometimes it is necessary to meet elsewhere. This must be approved in advance by the Director of the Doctoral College (or delegate).

15.9. The Director of the Doctoral College (or delegate) must also approve in advance any viva voce examination which takes place via video

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 36 -

conferencing or Skype. This option may only be considered as the last resort when all other possibilities have been exhausted.

15.10. If you have a disability, please contact Disability Services to discuss whether special procedures for or adjustments to the oral examination of the thesis are appropriate. Please notify the Doctoral College as soon as possible of any requirements. An independent non-examining Chair will be appointed to your examination team if this is the case to ensure that these requirements are adhered to and you are not disadvantaged.

15.11. Your examiners can request that you make a brief presentation at your viva voce examination; if this is the case, they must give you at least 10 working days’ notice. You can also request to make a presentation at your viva voce examination, but this must be requested via your Director of Studies and approved by all examiners at least 10 working days in advance of the viva voce examination. Please note that examiners are not obliged to approve this request.

15.12. You may invite one of your supervisors to attend your viva voce examination. They should confirm your request with either the Internal Examiner, Chair or Doctoral College in advance. Your supervisor may only contribute to or participate in the discussion if explicitly requested by one of the examiners. Please note that they might be asked questions by the examiners without you present.

15.13. At the end of the viva voce examination, you should be asked whether there is anything you would like to say or add that hasn’t been raised already. This is your opportunity to tell your examiners of any circumstances that you feel may have affected your thesis or performance during your oral examination. If you are not explicitly asked, but have something you want your examiners to know, do not hesitate to offer this.

15.14. For more information about how a viva voce examination is run, the responsibilities and roles of your examination team, and the procedures and paperwork involved, please see the ‘Notes of Guidance for Examiners’ and ‘Role and Responsibilities of Independent Chairs’ (if relevant) in this Handbook.

Examination outcomes and award of your degree 15.15. Following your oral examination, your examiners must make one of the

following recommendations based on the QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ) at the relevant level (please note that the extract for masters and doctoral level are also available in this Handbook): 15.15.1. pass: the degree be awarded. Your examining team may

provide advisory guidance on editorial corrections to the thesis, such as minor typographical or grammatical errors, or

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 37 -

15.15.2. corrections: the thesis is satisfactory in substance, but the examiners have identified shortcomings in the shaping or articulation of the research. Corrections will need to be made to the satisfaction of one or all of your examiners by six months from the date of the formal notification of the outcome of the examination, or

15.15.3. defer: resubmission allowed. The thesis is unsatisfactory in substance, with shortcomings in the presentation and/or content, and may require further research. You are permitted to resubmit for the degree (with detailed advice) and be re-examined on one further occasion by twelve months from the date of the formal notification of the outcome of the examination, or

15.15.4. compensatory award: the degree for which you have been examined is not to be awarded but a lower level degree (MPhil, ResM, PgCert or PgDip) may be awarded subject to the presentation of the thesis being amended to the satisfaction of the examiners by one month from the date of the formal notification of the outcome of the examination, or

15.15.5. fail: the degree not to be awarded and you are not permitted to be re-examined.

15.16. The recommendation of the examiners will be verbally confirmed to you informally at the end of the viva voce examination, following deliberations by the examination team. Formal written confirmation of the outcome of the examination, including the corrections or further research required (as relevant), will be sent to you by the Doctoral College as soon as possible. Please note that this cannot be issued until the examiners send their paperwork to the Doctoral College and that they have two weeks from the date of the viva voce examination to do so.

15.17. In the unlikely event that your examiners’ recommendations are not unanimous, they are required to report separately to the Doctoral College. The Director of the Doctoral College will then seek a resolution. This may involve the appointment of another external examiner who will read the thesis. You will be informed of progress and be informed of the outcome at the earliest opportunity.

15.18. Please see the ‘PGR Examination Outcomes Flowchart’ at the end of the ‘Notes of Guidance for Examiners’ section of this Handbook.

15.19. If the outcome of your examination is Pass, you must submit an electronic copy of the thesis for the University’s electronic repository, PEARL, within 60 days of the formal notification of your examination outcome. 15.19.1. If you are awarded a pass degree and your examiners also

supply a list of minor editorial corrections, these are considered advisory. While it is assumed that you will want to do so, you are not required to respond to them prior to

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 38 -

supplying the final version of your thesis for the award of your degree.

15.19.2. You should also supply your Director of Studies and any collaborating establishments with a hardcopy of your thesis if requested to do so.

15.19.3. Failure to submit the electronic copy of your thesis within 60 days of the official notification of the outcome may result in your degree not being awarded. You cannot receive your award until the electronic copy of your thesis has been submitted and approved by the Doctoral College and any outstanding academic debts to the University have been paid.

15.20. If the outcome of your examination is that Corrections are required, you must address all of the corrections on the list you receive from the Doctoral College. 15.20.1. These must be submitted to the Doctoral College within six

months of the formal notification of the outcome. Failure to submit by the required date will normally result in failure of the award.

15.20.2. If you are unable to meet this deadline, you must request an extension in writing to the Doctoral College. This will need to be supported by your DoS and the local Research Management team, who will obtain the approval of the examiners before deciding on the period of extension.

15.20.3. Corrections are not an iterative process between you and your examiners and they are not expected to act as mentors or advisors during this process. If you have any questions about what is required of you, ask your Director of Studies or other supervisor to liaise with the examiners on your behalf for the purposes of clarification. If this isn't possible, please contact either the Chair of your viva voce examination (if there was one) or the Doctoral College.

15.20.4. If your corrections are approved, your degree will be awarded when the electronic copy of the final corrected thesis has been submitted to the University repository (PEARL), the submission been approved by the Doctoral College and any outstanding academic debts to the University have been paid. 15.20.4.1. You should also supply your Director of Studies

and any collaborating establishments with a hardcopy of your thesis if requested to do so.

15.20.4.2. Failure to submit the electronic copy of your thesis within 60 days of the official notification of the outcome may result in your degree not being awarded. Your award cannot be given until the electronic copy of the thesis has been submitted and approved by the Doctoral College and any

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 39 -

outstanding academic debts to the University have been paid.

15.20.5. If your corrections are not approved, and these have been submitted for the first time for a thesis that had not been resubmitted as the result of a deferral, then you are entitled to a ‘2nd attempt’ (please see the attached ‘Flowchart of PGR Examination Outcomes’). It will be explained why your corrections were deficient and you will receive a list the corrections that are still required; in this case, the protocol described in 15.20.1-15.20.4 above will be followed again.

15.20.6. In the event that your corrections are not approved, and these have been submitted either for the second time or to a thesis that had been resubmitted as the result of a deferral, then your examiners will recommend either: 15.20.6.1. that you receive a compensatory lower award: that

is, the degree for which you have been examined is not to be awarded but a lower level degree (MPhil, ResM, PgCert or PgDip) be awarded instead. In this case, you must make amendments to references to the level of the degree and your examiners may provide a list of recommended typographical corrections which you may choose to attend to, or

15.20.6.2. that you fail: the degree is not to be awarded and you are not permitted to be re-examined.

15.21. If the outcome of your examination is a Deferral – that is, that you are permitted to resubmit for re-examination for the award on one further occasion – your examination team will provide you with details of further research requirements following your viva voce examination. 15.21.1. You must submit sufficient copies of the revised thesis to the

Doctoral College office within 12 months of the formal notification of the outcome of your examination. Failure to resubmit by this date will normally be regarded as failure of the examination.

15.21.2. If you are unable to meet this deadline, you must request an extension in writing to the Doctoral College. This will need to be supported by your DoS and the local Research Degree Management team, who will obtain the approval of the examiners before deciding on the period of extension.

15.21.3. The preparation of a resubmitted thesis is not an iterative process between you and your examiners and they are not expected to act as mentors or advisors during this process. If you have any queries, ask your Director of Studies or other supervisor to liaise with the examiners on your behalf.

15.21.4. A resubmitted thesis is normally examined by the same examination team. Sometimes, however, your original

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 40 -

examiners are not available and a new examination team (in whole or part) must be nominated and approved by the Doctoral College Quality Sub-committee.

15.21.5. The examination for a resubmitted thesis is run as for the first time, with the following exceptions: 15.21.5.1. the examination outcome ‘Deferral –

resubmission’ is not available for resubmitted theses.

15.21.5.2. if, having read the resubmitted thesis, the examiners agree that the outcome of the examination will be either ‘pass’ or ‘corrections’, they have the discretion to waive the requirement to hold a second viva voce examination.

15.21.5.3. if the examination outcome is ‘Corrections’, and these are not made to the satisfaction of your examiner(s), then you are not entitled to a second attempt (please see 15.20.6. above).

15.21.6. In the case of a waived second viva voce examination, your examiners must inform the Doctoral College no later than 10 working days prior to the scheduled viva voce examination and you will be informed as soon as possible thereafter. Please see the ‘PGR Examination Outcomes Flowchart’ in this Handbook.

15.21.7. Please note that if you began your programme of study after 1 September 2018, you will be required to pay a resubmission fee to be re-examined, whether or not the viva voce examination is waived.

15.22. If the outcome of your examination is that you should be offered a Compensatory Award and your thesis does not require any corrections, you need to submit an electronic copy of the thesis to the University’s repository within 60 days of the formal notification of the outcome. 15.22.1. You must still amend the title of the degree on the cover page

as well as any references to the level of the degree throughout the thesis. These are not considered ‘corrections’ and do not need to be approved by a member of the examination team.

15.22.2. If your examiners require further corrections to your thesis in order to meet the criteria for a lower award, these will be outlined informally at the end of your oral examination and formally in your outcome letter from the Doctoral College. 15.22.2.1. These corrections must be made and submitted to

the Doctoral College within one month of the formal notification of the examination outcome.

15.22.2.2. Failure to submit by the due date will normally result in failure of the award.

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 41 -

15.22.2.3. If you are unable to meet this deadline, you must request an extension in writing to the Doctoral College. This will need to be supported by your DoS and the local Research Management team, who will obtain the approval of the examiners before deciding on the period of extension.

15.22.2.4. Corrections are not an iterative process between you and your examiners and they are not expected to act as mentors or advisors during this process. If you have any questions about what is required of you, ask your Director of Studies or other supervisor to liaise with the examiners on your behalf for the purposes of clarification. If this isn't possible, please contact either the Chair of your viva voce examination (if there was one) or the Doctoral College.

15.22.2.5. If your corrections are approved, your degree will be awarded when the electronic copy of the final corrected thesis has been submitted to the University repository (PEARL), the submission been approved by the Doctoral College and any outstanding academic debts to the University have been paid.

15.22.2.6. If the corrections are not approved, then the outcome of the examination is a fail; you will not receive an award and no re-examination is permitted. Please see the ‘Flowchart of PGR Examination Outcomes’.

15.23. Following receipt and approval of your electronic thesis submission, you will receive a congratulations letter from the Office of the Vice-Chancellor and will be invited to the next award ceremony. Your degree certificate and diploma supplement will normally be issued at the ceremony, or in advance if requested. It normally takes 5-6 weeks to receive your certificate following successful submission to PEARL.

16. Teaching as a Postgraduate Researcher 16.1. The University values the contribution of PGR students who teach.

This can be a very beneficial activity for both you and for the university, enabling: 16.1.1. you to develop valuable experience for a future academic

career; 16.1.2. Undergraduate students to benefit from being taught by

someone who may be closer to their experience of being a student;

16.1.3. Increased support for research-led teaching across the institution.

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 42 -

There are a range of academic roles which PGR students may have in the university, including core academic staff who are also undertaking a PhD; staff in combined teaching and studentship roles; and PGR students who undertake small amounts of teaching. The University’s ‘Policy for Postgraduate Research Students Who Teach’ is for the final category only and is available on this page.

16.2. While the University is unable to guarantee any paid teaching practice, it is usually possible to lead workshops or sessions to gain experience. Discuss this with your Director of Studies or School PGR Coordinator, so that you are clear about how to put yourself forward for teaching opportunities.

16.3. SALT is a one-day workshop designed primarily for those who have limited engagement in supporting assessment, learning and teaching. This includes activities such as: developing interactive learning activities that enhance student engagement; articulating clear Learning Outcomes and design constructive alignment; engaging in marking and providing effective feedback. It is free for all University of Plymouth PGR students. For more information, please visit this page.

16.4. The Introduction to Teaching and Learning (ITL) module is a professional development module offering 20 credits at M level and Associate Fellowship of Advance HE. It aims to critically engage participants with the UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF) and a range of approaches to teaching and learning informed by underpinning pedagogic research. This module is only available for those PGR students who have a contractual obligation to complete it. Participants must have a minimum of 15 hours engagement in teaching, learning and assessment related activity between the start and assessment submission date for the module. For more information, please visit this page.

17. Problems and Questions 17.1. It is not uncommon to face practical, professional or personal

difficulties which may affect your work. If problems arise, whether related to health, finances, academic progress, work or personal matters please highlight them to staff as soon as possible, so that delays or disruptions to work will be sympathetically received. In most cases, your Director of Studies will be the most appropriate person to approach. All requests for confidentiality will be respected.

17.2. If there is anything you would prefer not to share with your Director of Studies (perhaps because it is about the nature or quality of your supervision), then please contact your School PGR Coordinator, who will treat your comments with confidence and will work with you to find a solution. If you would prefer not to contact your School Coordinator, then please email doctoralcollege@plymouth.ac.uk.

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 43 -

17.3. One of the following members of staff may also be available to provide practical, confidential advice and support: 17.3.1. your other supervisors, 17.3.2. Deputy Director of the Doctoral College (for your Faculty), 17.3.3. Doctoral College administrators and professional staff, 17.3.4. if relevant, your ‘node’ director or academic liaison at a partner

institution, or 17.3.5. the University’s Pastoral and Spiritual Care Coordinator.

17.4. Please see Item 6 above on interrupting your studies if necessary. 17.5. The University’s Student Wellbeing Services are available to all

postgraduate research students. We understand that undertaking research degrees can be stressful and worrying for many postgraduate researchers and we encourage you to access the support available. This is not a sign of weakness! 17.5.1. If you are based on the campus, you can make one-to-one

appointments and join group sessions. 17.5.2. If you are based away from the campus, an e-counselling

service is available. 17.5.3. You may also benefit from a wide range of online resources

including: 17.5.3.1. self-help guides for managing stress and worry;

understanding depression and panic attacks; overcoming sleep problems and, how to be more assertive,

17.5.3.2. audio downloads including a variety of relaxation exercises, or

17.5.3.3. SHINE online resources and information about mental health and well-being.

17.5.4. The Doctoral College has been working with the Student Wellbeing Services and the School of Psychology to better understand your needs and to develop peer support for PGR student wellbeing. As a result, the Researcher Toolkit has been developed. This is introduced at induction events and sessions (which include webinars) are advertised throughout the year. There is also the opportunity for PGR students to become (paid) workshop leaders to facilitate the Toolkit.

17.6. You may also raise issues via your Annual Monitoring report. As this is shared with your supervisors, there is a reminder that you can email the Doctoral College at any time if there is something you would like to discuss with somebody from outside your supervisory team.

17.7. If there is something that you believe impacts upon a wider cohort of researchers, then you can raise this via your representatives at your Faculty Doctoral Committee (if it is local to your Faculty) or else

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 44 -

Doctoral College Board (if it is relevant to PGR students from across the University). If that seems like a long time to wait or you would like more privacy, contact your School Postgraduate Research Coordinator or the Doctoral College.

17.8. We understand that problems and ‘bugs’ often arise in the use of GradBook. These, however, are usually solved quickly. Please contact the Doctoral College as soon as possible if GradBook isn’t working for you as expected or required, attaching a screenshot that demonstrates the problem, and they will try to find a solution with the University IT services.

18. Complaints Procedure 18.1. The University’s Student Complaints Procedure (and proforma to

complete) is available on the University webpages. 18.2. Issues that can be considered under the Complaints Procedure include

any aspect of your supervision and training as a research degrees student, facilities and university-managed accommodation.

18.3. Issues that cannot be considered under the Complaints Procedure include admissions, complaints about bullying or harassment and academic decisions (for the latter, see the section below about Appeals).

18.4. If your complaint relates to bullying and harassment by another student, then the matter will be investigated using the Student Code of Conduct and Disciplinary Procedure, which can be found here or by emailing studentconduct@plymouth.ac.uk.

18.5. If your complaint relates to bullying and harassment in relation to a member of staff then the matter will be investigated using the Anti-Bullying and Anti-Harassment Policy. Further information on the University’s approach to Bullying and Harassment can be found here or by emailing equality@plymouth.ac.uk.

18.6. Complaints submitted more than 40 working days after the issue(s) occurred will be considered only in exceptional circumstances. Exceptional circumstances are those in which you are able to demonstrate good reason for not submitting the complaint earlier. The decision on whether or not to accept a late complaint is taken by the Complaints and Appeals Office and is the final decision of the University.

18.7. You should always try to informally resolve your problem or issue by discussing it with the member of staff most directly concerned. This might be your supervisor(s), School PGR Coordinator, or a person responsible for a particular service. Many complaints can be dealt with through discussion and explanation. If you are not sure to whom you should make your complaint, you can ask UPSU Advice or the Doctoral College for guidance.

18.8. Occasionally it is not possible to resolve a complaint to your satisfaction; in this instance, you are able to ask the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA) to review your

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 45 -

complaint and the way in which it has been handled by the University. You can only refer your complaint to the OIA when you have exhausted the University’s complaints procedure. At that point, you will be sent a letter by the University confirming that the institution’s procedure has concluded; this will contain information on how to contact the OIA. Further information is available at www.oiahe.org.uk

18.9. For further information about making a complaint, please visit this page.

19. Appeals Against Academic Decisions 19.1. You have the right to appeal against academic decisions affecting your

progression. Such academic decisions include, but are not restricted to: 19.1.1. the decision to withdraw you from the research degree due to

lack of academic progress (including during your probationary period),

19.1.2. the decision to withdraw you from the research degree due to lack of contact with the University (including during your probationary period),

19.1.3. decisions made by the Research Programmes Taught Components Award Board related to taught modules,

19.1.4. the decision to withdraw you from the research degree following the Project Approval process,

19.1.5. the decision to require you to remain on a masters path following the Confirmation of Route process, or

19.1.6. the decision, as a result of a recommendation of the examiners, not to award you the degree for which you were registered, and not to permit you to submit a revised thesis for the same degree.

19.2. You must make your appeal within ten working days of the formal notification of the academic decision.

19.3. Please note that appeals cannot be made against the academic or professional judgement of examiners, unless there is evidence of a material irregularity related to assessment.

19.4. The regulations and procedure related to appeals against the decision of an award assessment board or academic decision (taught and research) are available from the Academic appeals webpage.

19.5. If you are not satisfied with the way the University has handled your appeal, you are able to ask the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA) to review this. You can only refer your appeal to the OIA when you have exhausted the University’s Academic Appeals Procedure. At that point, you will be sent a letter by the University confirming that the institution’s procedure has concluded; this will contain information on how to contact the OIA. Further information is available at www.oiahe.org.uk

UoP PGR programme of study information 2019 Edition

- 46 -

19.6. If you have any questions about making an appeal, please email appeals@plymouth.ac.uk

20. Alumni Research Fellow Scheme 20.1. As well as all of the other benefits of the alumni community, students

who graduate with a PhD, MD or professional doctorate are eligible to apply to become an Alumni Research Fellow. As a successful applicant, you will be granted assistance and continuity to support you at the start of your academic or other research career.

20.2. As an Alumni Research Fellow you will be granted: 20.2.1. continued access to a University of Plymouth email address, 20.2.2. library borrowing rights, 20.2.3. institutional affiliation, and 20.2.4. up to 5 hours of mentoring support post-graduation to support

your development 20.3. Please note that this is an unpaid position and no remuneration or

other financial benefits will be provided for Alumni Research Fellows. 20.4. Each Alumni Research Fellow is expected to volunteer 10 hours during

their period of appointment. This could take the form of contributing to career events, research seminars, peer support, mentorship, outreach events, etc. Exact details of such volunteering must be negotiated and agreed with the relevant school/faculty.

20.5. To find out more and to apply, download the Application Form and read the Guidance Notes and Terms & Conditions from the Alumni Research Fellows webpage.

2019 Edition

- 47 -

NOTES FOR SUPERVISORS

1. Appointment of Supervisors and Responsibilities 1.1. The Research Degree Management Unit (normally at School level) will

ensure that supervisors: 1.1.1. are appropriately experienced and qualified for supervision –

that is, are together able to provide supervision in the subject area and at the appropriate level,

1.1.2. are not registered for a research degree themselves, 1.1.3. complete the University’s mandatory supervisory training

and/or refresher sessions, 1.1.4. normally supervise no more than 8 FTE students in total, and

are members of no greater than 15 supervisory teams, at any one time. The role of Director of Studies is equivalent to 1.0 FTE, the role of second supervisor is normally equivalent to 0.5 FTE and the role of third (or further) supervisor is normally equivalent to 0.3 FTE).

1.2. Students must always have at least two supervisors and usually no more than three. One supervisor will be the Director of Studies (DoS). 1.2.1. The DoS will be either a member of the academic staff of the

University of Plymouth (that is, with a UoP contract of employment), an approved member of the NHS who holds an associated University of Plymouth contract, or an approved member of staff at a partnership Node.

1.2.2. An Emeritus Professor can act as a member of a supervisory team but not normally as Director of Studies.

1.2.3. Second or third supervisors may be external to the university (that is, not UoP employees). 1.2.3.1. If this is the case, they will be provided with a

discretionary email account which will be used for all communication about the student as well as to log into GradBook.

1.2.3.2. External supervisors must fulfil all the minimum responsibilities of any UoP supervisors (including the use of GradBook) and must to confirm in writing that they are willing to do so.

1.2.3.3. External supervisors must fulfil the University’s training/refresher requirements; a ‘light touch’ option has been developed, which comprises watching a video of no longer than 1 hour in length.

1.2.4. Wherever possible, the Director of Studies should have previous successful UK supervision experience (i.e. to

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 48 -

completion) of the degree for which the candidate is registered. 1.2.4.1. Where this is not possible, then the 2nd supervisor

must have previously supervised to successful completion at the level of the degree for which the candidate is registered and will undertake to act as Mentor to the Director of Studies.

1.2.4.2. Inexperienced Directors of Studies will have to fulfil all other criteria as experienced staff.

1.3. If the Director of Studies ceases employment as an academic member of staff of the University or as an approved member of the NHS who holds an associated University of Plymouth contract or as an approved member of staff at a Node, the 2nd supervisor will immediately move to acting Director of Studies until a replacement supervisory team has been formally approved. The student will remain registered in the same programme during this period of time.

1.4. Requests for changes to a supervisory team must be made using the candidate’s GradBook page, by a current supervisor. Please email the Doctoral College if this is proving difficult. 1.4.1. Changes to supervision usually occur as a result of the

change in direction of the project or departure of a supervisor from the University. A request for the removal/addition of a supervisor may affect the total supervision experience of the team, or the role of supervisors within the team.

1.4.2. Any changes of supervision will require approval by the local Research Degree Management Unit and reporting to Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee.

1.4.3. The Research Degrees Management Unit may appoint a replacement or additional supervisor at any time if it deems this to be necessary and shall do so if there is a sole University-based supervisor (e.g. for a student working with a partner institution) who ceases to be a member of staff of the University or is on extended leave of absence, study leave or sabbatical.

1.5. Supervisors are responsible for guiding the design and progress of the candidate’s research project and for providing academic advice to the candidate.

1.6. For a full list of responsibilities of Directors of Studies and other supervisors, please see Section 1 of the ‘Your Programme of Study’ section of this Research Degrees Handbook.

1.7. The responsibilities of research students are listed in Section 5 of the ‘Your Programme of Study’ section of this Research Degrees Handbook.

1.8. Supervisors should provide constructive criticism and feedback of materials/writing normally within 20 working days of receipt (unless

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 49 -

previously negotiated with the student). If the student did not tell you that they would be submitting this writing to you and it is not possible to respond within this timeframe, you must tell them when to expect your feedback and what they should be doing in the meantime to progress their project.

1.9. Directors of Studies are responsible for ensuring that all members of the supervisory team are invited well in advance to mandatory tutorials – that is, every three months for full time students and every four months for part time students.

1.10. Unless explicitly negotiated to the contrary with their Head of School, supervisors are expected to fulfil their responsibilities during sabbaticals and periods of research leave. These may need to be carried out at a distance.

2. The Programme of Study Overview, concerns and questions

2.1. Please read the section entitled ‘Your Programme of Study’ in this Handbook. Although this has been written for your students, most of the information you require is available here. Where a process requires specific actions by a supervisor, these are indicated below.

2.2. Please also consult any School, Faculty or ‘node’ supplements to this Handbook, which will also include discipline-specific requirements. Some have also produced local guidelines and help sheets for supervisors and run supervisor training events that are designed to complement the mandatory training provided by the Doctoral College.

2.3. Your School PGR Coordinator is normally responsible in the first instance for monitoring and oversight for admission and selection procedures, supervision team nomination, quality assurance, annual monitoring, Project Approval, Confirmation of Route (if appropriate) and examinations.

2.4. If you have any questions or concerns about any of your students or the supervisory process, please contact your School PGR Coordinator or Deputy Director of the Doctoral College for your Faculty.

2.5. The Deputy Director for your Faculty on Doctoral College Board is able to take forward any issues or feedback you may have that are relevant to this forum (Please see ‘The Doctoral College’ section of this Handbook). It is likely, however, that it would be more appropriate to raise issues via Faculty Doctoral Committees or school-level committees first.

The start of the programme 2.6. Your students will attend a number of Induction events, including a

mandatory one at University level (run by the Doctoral College) and also at Faculty/ School, node or departmental level, to cover discipline-specific processes and procedures. However, Directors of Studies need to ensure that their students are introduced to the local environment, resources and other researchers.

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 50 -

2.7. If your student has been appointed to work on a project that you have conceived and which forms all or part of their research degree programme, and has been funded by the University from internal or external funds or a mix of both (e.g. through a University Research Studentship), they will need to sign an IP Agreement with the University (and/or other partner organisation) prior to enrolling on your programme of study (or as soon as possible thereafter). Discuss this with your School PGR Coordinator at the earliest opportunity.

2.8. Supervisors are expected to assist their students in the self-assessment of skills and career development – including discussion of a research skills audit, training, and how/when to access. 2.8.1. Help your students to negotiate teaching opportunities if

possible – N.B.: do not sign forms confirming availability of teaching for the Introduction to Teaching and Learning (ITL) module if you are not positive this is available and confirmed (as students will be unable to fulfil assessment).

2.8.2. Be aware of mandatory modules in their offer letters and fulfil tasks related to these as required. Please note that a student who does not successfully complete any compulsory training may be required to withdraw from the programme.

2.8.3. Be aware of ‘bench fees’ attached to student, how they can be used and your role in these processes.

2.8.4. Be aware of other funding (e.g. University, School, Faculty levels) available to attend conferences, training and how/when students may access it.

2.8.5. Upon completion, students are asked to identify training that they undertook during their programme of study. This form needs to be signed off by their Director of Studies and the information is used on the supplement received along with their graduation certificate.

2.9. The initial supervisory meeting is incredibly important and should be attended by the entire supervisory team if possible. Use this meeting to: 2.9.1. discuss mutual expectations of the supervision process, 2.9.2. agree the nature of your meetings including frequency, timing

and length, the type of preparation, guidance, comments and feedback to be expected,

2.9.3. discuss the practical arrangements for meetings including organising and cancelling them, setting the agenda, ad hoc vs 'formal' meetings, record keeping on GradBook, etc.,

2.9.4. agree normal mechanisms for contact and emergency contacts, and

2.9.5. look ahead so your student knows when you are unlikely to be available throughout the year.

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 51 -

2.10. You are expected to work with your student to help them to apply for ethical approval for their project at the earliest opportunity. You must approve their application to the Faculty Research Ethics and Integrity Committee.

The registration period 2.11. In exceptional cases, a student’s registration may be extended by the

Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee beyond the ‘writing up’ period. Applications must be made via GradBook and these must be recommended by the student’s Director of Studies prior to approval. Please note that extensions are subject to additional fees and this should be discussed with your student prior to application.

2.12. Students may request periods of interruption if they are unable to make progress with their research project for reasons beyond their control. Applications must be made via GradBook and these must be supported by the student’s Director of Studies prior to approval. 2.12.1. Retrospective interruptions with a start date more than 2

months from date of request are not normally allowed; you are encouraged to work with your students to raise these requests at the time of the events happening whenever possible.

2.12.2. While it is possible for supervisors to request interruptions on behalf of the student on GradBook, Doctoral College Quality Sub-committee will normally require an indication from the student that they approve of this action (e.g. an uploaded email).

2.12.3. Doctoral College Quality Sub-committee often requests evidence that a workplan is in place for when the student resumes studies; this is often the case if a milestone or thesis deadline is close to the date of resumption.

2.12.4. If the interruption is a result of a Study and Wellbeing Review process, it may be necessary to organise a Stage 4 meeting prior to a student resuming studies.

2.13. During a period of interruption, supervisors should not engage with students toward the progress of their project. 2.13.1. It is strongly recommended, however, that you organise

‘keeping in touch’ meetings every 3 months with students who have interrupted their studies for periods of 4 months or more. It has been demonstrated that when supervisors make an effort to stay informed of circumstances, students are more likely to resume and complete their studies. These meetings can take place via phone or Skype.

2.13.2. For students who have interrupted for six months or more, Directors of Studies should organise a ‘re-integration meeting’ to re-calibrate the project, negotiate timescales and any new or different requirements or support mechanisms.

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 52 -

2.14. If your student confirms in writing to you that they are withdrawing from the programme, please tell the Doctoral College immediately, attaching their message.

2.15. If you are aware of a change to your student’s source of funding, and the student has not done so, please report this by email to the Doctoral College so their records can be updated.

Monitoring your student’s progress 2.16. As a supervisor, you are required to use GradBook. Its key feature is

that it provides a clear overall record of the candidate’s journey. It records key supervision meetings, annual monitoring, RDC forms, extension and interruption requests, and (for international students) monitoring for UKVI purposes. 2.16.1. It also provides useful highlighting of Outstanding Actions, and

each student listed on your main dashboard is accompanied by a traffic-light indicator to show whether their profile is up-to-date (viewing the profile then shows indicators beside each stage, so that you can easily identify items that are missing).

2.16.2. We know that GradBook isn’t perfect. For supervisors, there are various things that can be frustrating with GradBook’s workflows - for example, when a candidate submits something, the supporting supervisors have to sign it off before the Director of Studies is able to see it on the system. And there is no way for the DoS to directly override things if another supervisor is unavailable and has not signed something off. If you are aware of things falling into limbo in this manner, please contact the Doctoral College to let them know. Most problems with GradBook can be solved quickly, especially if you send a screenshot that demonstrates where you’ve run into trouble. Your patience is much appreciated.

2.16.3. Please emphasise to your students that the use of GradBook is a natural part of their projects. Their experience of it is likely to be less fraught than supervisors’, not least because they will not be dealing with multiple students.

2.17. If you are the DoS of an overseas student on a Tier 4 General Student visa, you must fulfil and adhere to the regulations given by the UK Visa and Immigration (UKVI) office and ensure that regular (monthly) interactions proving academic progress are documented and signed off on GradBook. The University has produced leaflets for PGR students on Tier 4 visas and their supervisors which are available from the Doctoral College and the International Students Advice (ISA) unit.

2.18. Directors of Studies are required to complete an Annual Monitoring form on GradBook for each of their students each summer, up to the completion of their degree. This report will be shared with the student and scrutinised at School level.

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 53 -

Lack of academic progress 2.19. Supervisory teams should raise concerns about their students’

progress to their School PGR Co-ordinator at the earliest opportunity (i.e. it is not necessary to wait until the annual monitoring report is due). Whenever such concerns are raised, it is recommended that an independent third party reviews the student’s progress and that this process includes an interview with the student whenever possible.

2.20. Concerns about progress – which may include failure to meet deadlines, failure to produce work or provide work of a suitable standard or failure to attend supervisory meetings – should be identified as early as possible in order that corrective measures can be taken. A Director of Studies or supervisor who has concerns about the progress of a research degree candidate should: 2.20.1. make those concerns known to the candidate, 2.20.2. if the concerns arise due to suspected health issues, students

need to be told that this meeting is part of the Study and Wellbeing Review policy as Stage 1 (and as per the policy, please contact the Doctoral College if this is the case),

2.20.3. give the candidate the opportunity to discuss any difficulties they may have encountered in their research or outside the project environment which may be affecting performance and progress,

2.20.4. agree with the candidate a written plan for improvement of progress with appropriate milestones, targets and review dates, which should be uploaded to GradBook,

2.20.5. ensure that the second supervisor(s), the School PGR Coordinator and Management Unit are kept informed and if necessary become involved, and

2.20.6. formally review progress as identified in the plan. Annual monitoring is one opportunity for consideration of progress; however review is not limited to these occasions.

2.21. Supervisors may not be able to help with all the problems that a candidate may encounter. The Local/School Research Degree Coordinator, Doctoral College Deputy Director, Doctoral College staff and other University staff members (e.g. with experience in matters related to health and well-being) are also available to provide support and advice for candidates and supervisors as required.

2.22. If, following review, academic performance has not improved to an appropriate level: 2.22.1. the Director of Studies on behalf of the supervisory team

should inform the candidate in writing of their concerns, the agreed course of action to address those concerns and the period identified for improvement;

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 54 -

2.22.2. escalate the process where appropriate to a Stage 2 under the Study and Wellbeing Review (contact the Doctoral College if this is the case); and

2.22.3. the School/Local Research Degree Coordinator and Management Unit should be kept informed and if necessary become involved.

2.23. If, after the period identified, the Director of Studies, the rest of the supervisory team and School/Local Research Degree Management Unit remain concerned about the academic progress of the candidate, they are advised to consult the Doctoral College, if not done so before. 2.23.1. The University Student and Wellbeing Review Policy will be

instigated in appropriate cases of lack of progress. 2.23.2. The University may terminate the registration of a research

student in the case of persistent unacceptable progress. 2.23.3. However, a student’s registration cannot be terminated

without them having first received a formal written warning about their academic progress and without having had the opportunity to improve their performance within a reasonable period of time. The latter depends on individual circumstances but normally will be a period of months rather than weeks.

Loss of contact with a candidate 2.24. The principles set out above will also apply if a candidate fails to keep

in contact with their supervisory team. 2.25. The supervisory team, School/Local Research Degree Coordinator,

and Doctoral College should work together to make every effort to: 2.25.1. contact the candidate, 2.25.2. identify any obstacles to progress, 2.25.3. agree a plan for improvement, and 2.25.4. continue to monitor and review the plan.

2.26. Following failure to re-establish contact, the candidate should be issued with a formal written warning that registration will be terminated unless the candidate re-establishes contact with their Director of Studies or other supervisor within a set period of time. If the candidate fails to respond, the termination procedure should follow.

Project approval 2.27. You are expected to support your student in their development of a

robust submission by the deadline indicated on GradBook. 2.28. Remind your student of the requirement to submit a Data Management

Plan (DMP) and encourage further development via the training available and other free materials as required by the nature of the project.

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 55 -

2.28.1. You should be open to discussions with your student around data management strategies and solutions that are appropriate to the discipline, research methods and project.

2.28.2. If the project details change in a way that will affect the data management or data ethics considerations of the project significantly, then you should encourage your student to revise the DMP as appropriate.

2.28.3. You can find additional training and support for your student via the Research Data Management library guide and should refer to the Expert Commentator’s guidance below to familiarise yourself with the criteria for the DMP.

2.29. Directors of Studies can submit a request for an extension to a student’s deadline for methodological reasons by contacting the Doctoral College (students who are unable to meet the deadline for personal reasons must apply for extenuating circumstances). 2.29.1. The request must be made prior to the original due date,

according to GradBook. 2.29.2. It must approved at either School or Faculty level (depending

on local processes and procedures as per their supplementary handbook) with all requests and decisions uploaded to the student’s GradBook page.

2.29.3. Extensions to the Project Approval submission for methodological reasons will be granted by not more than 1 month for full time students and 2 months for part time students.

2.30. Supervisors should note on GradBook whether they recommend approval of the project in its current, commenting on any particular strengths and weaknesses to be taken into account by the Expert Commentator.

2.31. When all supervisors have commented upon the project approval on GradBook, the Director of Studies must nominate an ‘Expert Commentator’ to review the submission. 2.31.1. Please contact potential Expert Commentators prior to

identifying them on GradBook to ensure they are willing and able to review the submission.

2.31.2. The Expert Commentator cannot be a member of the supervisory team and must have the expertise and/or experience to be able to confirm the appropriateness and feasibility of the research project. Expert Commentators are usually staff members of the University but do not need to be. There is no remuneration for Expert Commentators.

2.31.3. It is the Expert Commentator’s academic decision whether or not the submission passes the milestone. If you believe that it should not, ensure that you have indicated this and evidenced why in your comments on GradBook prior to passing it to the

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 56 -

Expert Commentator. Do not simply refuse to identify an Expert Commentator or to ‘submit’ it for the next step.

2.31.4. Please refer the Expert Commentator to the Guidance Notes in this Handbook, and to any relevant information in School supplements.

2.31.5. In the case of a second attempt, the same Expert Commentator may be used, but this is not a requirement.

2.32. Ideally, the assessment of a Project Approval should take place within 20 working days as for any other assignment. It is understood that this may not be possible. In which case, Directors of Studies should keep the student informed of progress and when they might expect an outcome.

2.33. If a project is not approved by the Expert Commentator following a second attempt, the student will be told that the University is obliged to withdraw them from their programme of study. As DoS, you will be copied into this message. Students are able to appeal this decision.

Confirmation of route 2.34. The DoS may request an extension to the deadline for methodological

reasons only (students who are unable to meet the deadline for personal reasons must apply for extenuating circumstances). 2.34.1. If successful, students will be given an extension of 3 months

whether full time or part time. 2.34.2. The form is available via Doctoral College and must be

approved by the relevant School PGR Coordinator. 2.35. Following the student’s submission of materials and completion of the

RDC.2 form on GradBook, all supervisors need to confirm whether or not the student is making satisfactory progress. All members of the supervisory team must also recommend whether or not the student should either remain on a masters level programme or transfer to PhD/doctoral level status.

2.36. After all other supervisors have commented on and ‘signed off’ the submission, the Director of Studies nominates an Expert Commentator from outside the supervisory team to review the project on GradBook. 2.36.1. Please contact potential Expert Commentators prior to

identifying them on GradBook to ensure they are willing and able to review the submission.

2.36.2. The Expert Commentator must have the expertise and/or experience to be able to confirm the appropriateness and feasibility of the research project. The same Expert Commentator for the student’s Project Approval may be used; however, it should be noted that students benefit from a range of insights and perspectives at various stages of their project, and also that Expert Commentating is useful career development for colleagues.

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 57 -

2.36.3. Expert Commentators are usually staff members of the University but do not need to be. There is no remuneration for Expert Commentators.

2.36.4. It is the Expert Commentator’s academic decision whether or not the submission passes the milestone. If you believe that it should not, ensure that you have indicated this and evidenced why in your comments on GradBook prior to passing it to the Expert Commentator. Do not simply refuse to identify an Expert Commentator or to ‘submit’ it for the next step.

2.36.5. The Expert Commentator should be asked to provide feedback explaining their decision and to confirm their recommendation on GradBook within 20 working days. If this is not possible, Directors of Studies should keep the student informed of progress and when they might expect an outcome.

2.36.6. In the case of a second attempt, the same Expert Commentator may be used, but this is not a requirement.

2.36.7. Please note that many Schools do not allow the RDC.2 Expert Commentator to then be appointed as the student’s Internal Examiner (this will be included in the relevant School supplement).

2.37. Students who do not succeed at first attempt (including those who did not submit without extenuating circumstances approval) are entitled to a second attempt; the deadline for their second attempt is 3 months from notification of the failure of the first attempt via GradBook.

2.38. Students who do not successfully transfer to PhD within 18 months of effective full time registration, or 24 months of effective part time registration, will be deemed to stay registered in the MPhil/ResM/MS degree, unless they have valid extenuating circumstances or assessment is in progress – the final due date of their masters level thesis will stand.

2.39. ResM students who transfer to PhD must submit within same total time period of registration (and will be eligible for same ‘writing up’ periods) as for a student who initially registered as MPhil/PhD.

Submission of the thesis 2.40. It is always the student’s decision to submit their thesis. Although the

best case scenario is that you are able to advise that the thesis is ready to submit, they do not require your approval to do so.

2.41. A research degree may be awarded posthumously or to candidates whose ill health precludes them participating in an oral examination, if the thesis is ready for submission for examination of if the research was at its final stages. Please see the section on ‘Posthumous Research Degrees and Aegrotat Awards’ in this Handbook.

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 58 -

Academic Offences/Research Misconduct 2.42. If you have reason to suspect plagiarism or any other form of academic

dishonesty, please contact the Doctoral College immediately. 2.43. In general, if an academic dishonesty allegation relates to a Project

Approval submission (RDC.1), Confirmation of Route submission (RDC.2) or a thesis submitted for assessment, then it is treated as an Academic Offence.

2.44. If an academic dishonesty allegation relates to any work (e.g. written coursework to the supervisory team prior to submission, or a draft journal paper, etc.) then it is treated as Research Misconduct. It may be more appropriate to discuss this matter with your student, to recommend training and to monitor the situation, than to make a formal allegation in the first instance. Please discuss this with your School PGR Coordinator or Deputy Director of the Doctoral College at the earliest opportunity.

2.45. The University’s ‘Assessment Offences and Research Misconduct Procedure’ can be found on this page.

3. Nomination and Appointment of the Examination Team 3.1. It is the Director of Studies’ responsibility to nominate the examination

team via GradBook. This should take place at least 4 months before the student is due to submit their thesis for examination, and always at least 4 months before their final deadline as indicated on GradBook.

3.2. The proposal of the examination team involves the following stages: 3.2.1. discussion between the supervisors, the student, and possibly

other members of the local Research Degree Management Unit to consider the most appropriate examination team,

3.2.2. the Director of Studies contacts the proposed examiners to determine whether they are able and willing to examine the thesis; If the thesis is in non-traditional form (e.g. includes creative practice), they should also confirm that the proposed examiners are happy to approve this,

3.2.3. completion by the Director of Studies of the examination arrangements form RDC.3 on GradBook together with the submission of a brief CV for the proposed External Examiner(s) as well as numbers of PGR examinations and details of any past or current association with the University, its staff or students,

3.2.4. following approval at School level, the Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee formally considers the submission, followed by

3.2.5. confirmation via GradBook of the outcome. The Doctoral College will communicate these matters to the examination team.

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 59 -

3.3. The regulations relating to the examination of PGR theses require that: 3.3.1. two examiners are appointed for each research student, 3.3.2. one of these examiners will be external to the University (the

external examiner) and the other will be internal and independent of the research student and their project (the internal examiner),

3.3.3. if the candidate is a member of academic or research staff of the University, then two external examiners and one chair are required,

3.3.4. the research student must not have been formally advised or supervised or had any close association with the examiners although the internal examiner may have acted as the independent assessor for the student for annual review, project approval or confirmation of route processes, and

3.3.5. in the case of collaboratively produced joint theses, candidates will be examined together by the same internal and external examiner with a non-examining chair (except if one or both candidates are academic or research staff – in which case two externals will be appointed and supported by a chair), normally at the same viva voce examination.

3.4. The examiners should normally have at least experience in a total of 3 UK examinations between them at the level of the examination. 3.4.1. At least one examiner must have experience of examining UK

Research Degree candidates. In an examination for PhD, at least one examiner must have experience of PhD examining.

3.4.2. Where an external examiner is nominated with no previous experience of examining a UK research degree, reasons for this nomination need to be submitted by the Director of Studies.

3.4.3. External examiners must be actively involved in research and with substantial/significant research experience in the subject. Recently retired distinguished researchers or Emeritus Professors are acceptable as external examiners but must commit to being available and contactable until the examination is complete.

3.5. The Doctoral College will determine and pay fees and expenses to external examiners, following receipt of all required paperwork. Where examiners are based outside of the UK, the candidate’s school may be required to pay for the examiner’s travel up to point of entry into the UK. A list of the current levels of honoraria is available from the Doctoral College if this is required.

3.6. It is a requirement that external examiners present their passports. Directors of Studies should confirm that examiners have the right to work in the United Kingdom prior to formally proposing them.

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 60 -

3.7. The following criteria are used in selecting the examination team for research degree examinations: 3.7.1. The internal examiner:

3.7.1.1. should not be registered for a research degree, 3.7.1.2. should not have supervised the candidate or had

any formal advisory or supervisory relationship with the candidate (other than having acted as the independent assessor for the student for annual review, Project Approval or Confirmation of Route1),

3.7.1.3. should have appropriate knowledge in the field and/or examining experience,

3.7.1.4. must have a current University of Plymouth contract of employment that extends at least beyond a candidate’s potential ‘Corrections’ period (i.e. 8 months following proposed viva voce examination),

3.7.1.5. must complete mandatory Internal Examiners training and/or ‘refreshing’ prior to the viva voce examination (according to their experience and expertise), and

3.7.1.6. must be present at the viva voce examination. 3.7.2. The external examiner(s):

3.7.2.1. must not be registered for a research degree, 3.7.2.2. should have experience of examining UK research

degree candidates at the same level or higher, 3.7.2.3. should not normally have held any appointment

with the University during the period in which the candidate has been registered for the degree,

3.7.2.4. must be eligible to work in the UK and at the University of Plymouth,

3.7.2.5. should not have supervised the candidate or had any formal advisory or supervisory relationship with the candidate and should be independent of the supervision team and/or any collaborating establishment, and should not be an imminent employer of the research student, and

3.7.2.6. must be present at the viva voce examination.

1 Subject to local guidelines; in some Faculties, internal examiners are not permitted to have acted as expert commentator for the Confirmation of Route process.

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 61 -

3.7.3. The Chair (if appointed, see Item 3.8 below): 3.7.3.1. should not be registered for a research degree, 3.7.3.2. must be University of Plymouth staff member, 3.7.3.3. must have examined at least two degrees at the

level of the examination, 3.7.3.4. must have examined at least two postgraduate

research degrees at the level of the examination with at least one for the University,

3.7.3.5. must be familiar with the University’s regulations, guidelines and procedures. They need to attend an Internal Examiners and Chairs Briefing session or refresher run by the University within the past 3 years prior to the oral examination,

3.7.3.6. should not have supervised the candidate or had any formal advisory or supervisory relationship with the candidate and should be independent of the supervision team and/or any collaborating establishment, and

3.7.3.7. must be present at the viva voce examination. 3.8. An independent non-examining Chair is appointed in the following

exceptional circumstances: 3.8.1. the student being examined is also a member of academic or

research staff at the University, 3.8.2. the internal examiner has no PGR examining experience at

the University of Plymouth, 3.8.3. the examination team as a whole does not have experience in

a total of three UK examinations at the level of the examination,

3.8.4. the viva voce examination is being conducted via video-conference,

3.8.5. 'reasonable adjustments' have been made or disability has been taken into account in viva voce examination arrangements or conduct,

3.8.6. the thesis is collaboratively co-authored by two students being examined together,

3.8.7. issue(s) have been raised by either the internal or external examiner(s) in their pre-viva reports – and, in particular, if both examiners have ticked the box on the RDC.4P (or RDC.4PR in the case of a resubmission) form indicating that they believe the thesis to be seriously flawed and not on target to merit consideration for the degree to be awarded, or

3.8.8. the student has requested a Chair due to issues related to equality and diversity.

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 62 -

3.9. Please note that an examination team in which both b and c in 3.8 above are the case is unlikely to be approved by Doctoral College Quality Sub-committee, even with an experienced Chair in place.

3.10. The DoS must ask their student if they would like a Chair of their own gender appointed if both their examiners are a different gender to their own (although they are free to decline this offer). 3.10.1. Confirmation of their wishes must be uploaded to GradBook

on the RDC.3 page. 3.10.2. Please note under no circumstances may a candidate have

two examiners and a Chair of a different gender to their own (e.g. a female-identifying candidate with two male examiners and a male chair). In such circumstances, it is the candidate who identifies their own gender.

3.10.3. A Director of Studies may also propose a Chair (including on behalf of the student or one of the examiners) when one is not required.

3.10.4. It is strongly recommended that a Chair is appointed in cases where a second oral examination is required for a resubmitted thesis. If relevant and possible, this should be the same person who chaired the candidate’s first viva voce examination.

4. The Examination Process Documentation issued prior to the viva voce examination

4.1. The thesis and relevant paperwork (described below) will be sent out by the Doctoral College office to the examiners and Chair, if appointed, as soon as possible after submission.

4.2. The external examiner(s) will receive: 4.2.1. a copy of the thesis with a letter confirming that the Director of

Studies will be making the arrangements for the viva voce examination,

4.2.2. a link to the Research Degrees Handbook and to the Doctoral College website, which includes the University of Plymouth ‘Notes for guidance for research degree examiners’, an extract of the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ) for doctoral and masters level examinations and the ‘Roles and responsibilities of Chairs at viva voce examinations of research degrees’,

4.2.3. a copy of the pre-viva report (form RDC.4P or RDC.4PR in the case of resubmissions), and

4.2.4. expenses and honorarium claim forms and details of the limits for travel and expenses claims.

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 63 -

4.3. The internal examiner will receive: 4.3.1. a copy of the thesis with a memorandum confirming that the

Director of Studies will be making the arrangements for the viva voce examination,

4.3.2. a link to the Research Degrees Handbook and to the Doctoral College website, which includes the University of Plymouth ‘Notes for guidance for research degree examiners’, an extract of the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ) for doctoral and master examinations and the ‘Roles and responsibilities of Chairs at viva voce examinations of research degrees’,

4.3.3. a copy of the pre-viva report (form RDC.4P or RDC.4PR in the case of resubmissions), and

4.3.4. if a Chair has not been appointed, the examiners’ report form RDC.4 (or in the case of a resubmission report form RDC.4R) to be completed jointly; it is the responsibility of the internal examiner to arrange for the post-viva report to be filled in and sent to the Doctoral College as soon as possible after the examination.

4.4. If a Chair has been appointed, they will receive: 4.4.1. a copy of the thesis with a letter confirming that the Director of

Studies will be making the arrangements for the viva voce examination,

4.4.2. a link to the Research Degrees Handbook and to the Doctoral College website, which includes an extract of the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ) for doctoral and master examinations and the ‘Roles and responsibilities of Chairs at viva voce examinations of research degrees’,

4.4.3. a copy of the pre-viva report (form RDC.4P or RDC.4PR in the case of resubmissions) for their information only, and

4.4.4. the examiners’ report form RDC.4 (or in the case of a resubmission report form RDC.4R) to be completed jointly by the examiners and the Chair at the end of the viva voce examination. It is the Chair’s responsibility to arrange for this form to be filled in, signed and sent to the Doctoral College within two weeks of the examination.

4.5. The Director of Studies will receive a memorandum: 4.5.1. confirming that copies of the thesis have been sent to the

examiners and chair (if appropriate), 4.5.2. indicating any amendments required to the presentation of the

thesis which have been identified by the Doctoral College, and 4.5.3. asking to arrange for the viva voce examination, liaising with

candidate and Disability Services (DS) if there are any special

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 64 -

needs and notify the Doctoral College as soon as this date is known.

4.6. The candidate will receive an email: 4.6.1. confirming that copies of the thesis have been sent to the

examiners, 4.6.2. indicating any amendments required to the presentation of the

thesis which have been identified by the Doctoral College, 4.6.3. confirming that their Director of Studies will make the

necessary arrangements for the viva voce examination, 4.6.4. asking them to contact Disability Services (DS) if appropriate,

and 4.6.5. outlining the general procedures with regard to the exam and

the possible outcomes. The viva voce (oral) examination

4.7. Supervisors should offer their students a ‘mock viva’ to help them prepare.

4.8. The viva voce (oral) examination must be organised by the candidate’s Director of Studies. This should be scheduled no sooner than 6 weeks and no later than 3 months from the date that the thesis is sent to the examination team by the Doctoral College.

4.9. The Director of Studies is expected to: 4.9.1. arrange the viva voce examination date, time and location with

the examiners, the research student and the Doctoral College after the thesis has been sent out to the examination team by the Doctoral College,

4.9.2. notify the Doctoral College of the date, time and venue for the oral examination,

4.9.3. check whether the candidate wants one of their supervisors to be present at the examination, and pass this information to the internal examiner or the chair if one has been appointed,

4.9.4. ensure that accommodation and travel for the external examiner(s) has/have been booked (usually by the Doctoral College), and

4.9.5. book an appropriate quiet room for the duration of the examination (normally 3 or 4 hours) taking into account any requirements from Disability Services where appropriate and arrange for refreshments during this period.

4.10. When, due to exceptional circumstances, a viva voce examination is to be conducted via videoconferencing, prior approval by the Director of the Doctoral College is required. 4.10.1. This option should only be considered as the last resort when

all other possibilities have been exhausted.

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 65 -

4.10.2. The videoconference facility must be a secure link with adequate bandwidth to ensure an uninterrupted oral examination.

4.11. Students can request to make a presentation at the viva voce examination, but this must be requested via the Director of Studies and approved by all examiners at least 10 working days in advance of the viva voce examination. Please note that examiners are not obliged to approve this request.

4.12. A (single) supervisor (normally the DoS) may, if requested by and with the consent of the candidate, attend the oral examination as an observer. They may not participate in the discussion unless invited by the examiners. 4.12.1. Exceptionally the examiners may request a discussion in

private with the supervisor prior to making their final decision. 4.12.2. The supervisor must withdraw with the research student prior

to the deliberations of the examiners on the outcome of the examination.

4.13. If the Director of Studies (or other supervisor) is not present during the viva voce examination then they should leave instructions as to how to be contacted by the examiners in case they are needed. They are expected to accompany the research student to hear the decision of the examiners at the end of the examination.

4.14. It is recommended that supervisors read the ‘Notes of Guidance for Examiners’ and ‘Roles and Responsibilities of Independent Chairs’, both in this Handbook, to familiarise themselves further with the examination process.

Following the viva voce examination 4.15. Directors of Studies (and other supervisors where necessary) are

expected to support their students up to the completion of their programme of study.

4.16. If you are the DoS of an overseas student on a Tier 4 General Student visa, you must fulfil and adhere to the regulations given by the UK Visa and Immigration (UKVI) office and ensure that regular (monthly) interactions are documented and signed off on GradBook as proof of academic progress up to the moment of completion (i.e. the submission of the final approved thesis to PEARL).

4.17. If your student needs to make corrections to their thesis or to prepare a resubmitted thesis, this is not to be an iterative process between the student and their examiners. If the student has any questions about what is required or expected, they should ask their Director of Studies or other supervisor to liaise with the examiners on their behalf.

4.18. Only the student concerned is able to appeal an academic decision or examination outcome. If, as a supervisor, you are concerned about the running of a viva voce examination or any aspect of the examination,

UoP notes for supervisors 2019 Edition

- 66 -

please contact either the Director of the Doctoral College or Deputy Director for your Faculty for a confidential discussion.

5. Alumni Research Fellowship Scheme 5.1. The University’s Alumni Research Fellowship scheme is for individuals

who graduate from the University with a doctoral level degree. 5.2. As part of the application process, their Director of Studies must

support the application and confirm that to the best of their knowledge, the applicant has successfully completed their doctoral project and uploaded the final approved version of their thesis to the University’s PEARL repository and that the applicant is likely to act in a manner that upholds the values and reputation of the University.

5.3. The DoS must also agree to mentor and offer support to the applicant for a total of 5 hours over the period of the appointment (maximum of two years) or else recommend a colleague who is in a position to do so.

2019 Edition

- 67 -

GUIDANCE NOTES FOR ‘EXPERT COMMENTATORS’ (PROJECT APPROVAL & CONFIRMATION OF ROUTE)

1. General

1.1. The role of an Expert Commentator is an incredibly important one in the student journey. It is your responsibility to use your expert judgement to determine whether the submission you review demonstrates that the student is on target to achieve their research degree.

1.2. The University uses Expert Commentators for two assessed ‘milestone’ processes: 1) Project Approval, and 2) Confirmation of Route. In both cases, it is the Expert Commentator who determines whether the student ‘passes’. Although the requirements and purposes of these assessed milestones are very different, they share characteristics which will be discussed in this section.

1.3. The student’s Director of Studies (DoS) will nominate you to be Expert Commentator. This does not have to be approved at School, Faculty or University level. As soon as the DoS nominates you, you will receive a link to the student’s submission on GradBook.

1.4. You will need to use GradBook to access the submission and also to submit your response. Your response will trigger an outcome notification to the student, the Doctoral College and the Director of Studies.

1.5. Each submission will comprise material written on a proforma directly on GradBook, as well as uploaded documents, as required. Please note that while there are minimum requirements across the University for these documents, different Schools have different requirements for their students (for example, the School of Humanities & Performing Arts requires a 3000 word ‘prospectus’ as part of Project Approval stage; Peninsula School of Medicine requires a viva voce presentation at Confirmation of Route stage). You will need to confirm via the DoS, this Handbook and any relevant supplement what is required of the student.

1.6. You must review all of the submitted material and make a judgement based on all of them together.

1.7. Please review the submitted material and submit your response within 20 working days of receiving notification on GradBook. If this is not possible, please contact the DoS, letting them know when you will be submitting your response, so they are able to keep their student informed of progress.

1.8. All of the members of the supervisory team will have indicated that they have seen the submission and have the opportunity to add any comments prior to you receiving it. These can be read on the GradBook page. You may take into account their comments when making your decision. You are also welcome to contact the supervisors

UoP guidance notes for expert commentators 2019 Edition

- 68 -

or the student for a discussion, in order to clarify any points, prior to making your decision.

1.9. Should you decide not to ‘pass’ the assignment, it is very important that you give clear and concise reasons why. The student has an opportunity to submit as a second and final attempt and your feedback will be invaluable to them. You will not necessarily be the Expert Commentator for the second attempt (for example, if you are not available, if the project changes direction, etc.); this is up to the Director of Studies.

1.10. Should you suspect or identify plagiarism or academic dishonesty in your role as Expert Commentator, please contact the Doctoral College (doctoralcollege@plymouth.ac.uk) immediately. An academic dishonesty allegation that relates to a Project Approval (RDC.1) or Confirmation of Route (RDC.2) submission is treated as an Academic Offence. The University’s ‘Assessment Offences and Research Misconduct Procedure’ can be found on this page.

1.11. If you ‘pass’ the submission, please supply up to one page of constructive comments to the candidate, identifying areas of good practice, exciting opportunities, and recommending possible directions and sources. It is also possible to offer specific critiques and/or recommendations to improve aspects of the project without ‘failing’ the submission. While these are not ‘conditions’, they can be monitored by the supervisory team as the project progresses.

2. Project Approval (RDC.1) 2.1. As Expert Commentator, you are asked to confirm the following:

2.1.1. that the academic content and quality of the proposed programme of work is at the appropriate level, meets disciplinary expectations, and is achievable within the limits of the research programme and according to the submitted schedule of work,

2.1.2. whether the Data Management Plan is realistic and appropriate to your project and adheres to ethical and legal guidelines (see below),

2.1.3. whether the project can be supported in terms of resources, research training and supervision for the duration of the programme.

2.2. You must explain your decision and supply constructive comments for the candidate in a brief report either directly on the form or in an uploaded document to GradBook. Full feedback must be provided to the student explaining what needs to be improved.

Guidance for reviewing the Data Management Plan 2.3. The Expert Commentator is responsible for reviewing the DMP at the

appropriate stage/s (i.e. Project Approval or, if it has changed in the meantime, at Confirmation of Route) and advising the student of areas of concern or recommendations for improvement. They hold the

UoP guidance notes for expert commentators 2019 Edition

- 69 -

discretion to approve or reject the DMP based on their level of satisfaction with the DMP for the individual project. As different projects will require very different DMPs, the role of Expert Commentator is crucial to ensure that disciplinary differences and needs are considered within the DMPs.

2.4. When assessing the DMP, you consider the following qualities: 2.4.1. The plan looks realistic and appropriate to the project. 2.4.2. The plan demonstrates awareness of all relevant policy,

ethical and legal requirements, and indicates how the student will comply with them. Relevant requirements include:

• Legal and ethical requirements in respect of personal/confidential data

• Any funder requirements around data sharing/publication and how the student plans to meet these

• Any contractual dispositions regarding IP ownership and publication – for example, industrial sponsorship or IP assignment.

2.4.3. The plan should identify any possible restrictions on data sharing, and demonstrate how the student will manage these and take measures to maximise possibilities for data sharing on the principle of “as open as possible, as closed as necessary”. Possible restrictions may pertain to personal or sensitive data, intellectual property or contractual obligations.

2.4.4. Any non-standard or additional support or resource requirements should be identified and justifiable – for example, funds for a training course, costs of additional bibliographic resources or if the use of experimental or national computing facilities is planned.

2.4.5. Where applicable, if sections are incomplete or lack specificity, the student demonstrates awareness that more information is needed and will be provided in future iterations of the plan.

2.5. The ultimate discretion of what makes a satisfactory DMP lies with the Expert Commentator, taking into consideration the extent to which it meets the critical points above. Different projects will have different requirements for data management and projects requiring no data collection or use of secondary data will have little to no planning required, so a longer DMP is not necessarily better than a shorter DMP.

2.6. The Expert Commentator has the discretion to deem a DMP unsatisfactory if little effort has been made to complete it, or if it demonstrates an obvious lack of understanding or preparation on the part of the student. They may also deem it unsatisfactory if the content implies that the PGR will contravene legal or ethical legislation or fail to

UoP guidance notes for expert commentators 2019 Edition

- 70 -

meet their funder’s requirements by carrying out the project as per the DMP.

2.7. If a DMP is deemed unsatisfactory then revisions can be requested through the Project Approval (RDC.1) feedback process, without necessarily rejecting the project as a whole.

3. Confirmation of Route (RDC.2) 3.1. Please read Section 9 of the ‘Your Programme of Study as a Research

Degree Candidate’ section of this Handbook. 3.2. As Expert Commentator, you are asked to:

3.2.1. confirm that that the student has evidenced satisfactory progress in their research programme to date; that the project meets disciplinary expectations in terms of methodology and engagement with current discourse and practice; and that there is evidence that the research provides the basis for a PhD (in the case of transfers to PhD);

3.2.2. recommend whether the student should either remain on a masters level programme or transfer to PhD/doctoral level status.

3.3. You must explain your decision and supply constructive comments for the candidate in a brief report either directly on the form or in an uploaded document (one page of A4) to GradBook. Full feedback must be provided to the student explaining what needs to be improved.

2019 Edition

- 71 -

MINIMUM RESOURCES FOR POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDENTS

1. Purpose of Minimum Benchmarking The University’s postgraduate research (PGR) provision is based on the expectations of the QAA UK Quality Code for Higher Education: that is, that the University offers a “research environment that provides secure academic standards for doing research and learning about research approaches, methods, procedures and protocols. This environment offers students quality of opportunities and the support they need to achieve successful academic, personal and professional outcomes from their research degrees.” PGR students can be enrolled in full-time (FT) or part-time (PT) modes and may be based at a campus of the University or a remote site (i.e. distance mode). The University is committed to providing equality of opportunity to all PGR students, irrespective of the group or groups to which they belong (based on, for example, a declared disability, specific cultural background, location or age). PGR students have different needs and requirements depending on the subject of study, discipline, methodology and nature of their research programme. Despite these differences, the University has identified certain minimum requirements which it is committed to providing all PGR students (through a combination of the Doctoral College, Schools, Faculties, external partners and/or ‘Node’). 2. Provision of all PGR Students All PGR students will be provided with the following:

• a suitably qualified supervision team that encourages the development and successful pursuit of their programme of research,

• access to the University’s IT and online systems including email, software and digital learning environment,

• access to the University’s Library resources through Primo, the gateway to print and electronic collections such as books, e-books, journals, digital maps, British Standards, e-newspapers and more. The majority of electronic resources are available off-campus. An overview of subject resources is available via online LibGuides,

• access to GradBook, • access to a suitable programme of research-related skills and development

opportunities that contribute to their ability to successfully complete their programme of study,

• access to and support for a range of development opportunities that contribute to their ability to develop personal and, where pertinent, employment-related skills,

• guidance on the ethical pursuit of research and the avoidance of research misconduct,

• mechanisms for addressing their feedback both as individuals and collectively,

• the opportunity to raise complaints or to appeal,

UoP minimum resources for PGR students 2019 Edition

- 72 -

All PGR students located at a campus of the University of Plymouth will additionally be provided with the following:

• a work-space with the following minimum attributes: o a desk and/or workbench, which may be shared or “hot-desked”, o a lockable space for personal items, o access to a computer, which may be shared or “hot-desked”, o access to printing facilities, which may require payment,

• access to appropriate facilities to conduct their research, agreed at admission and/or project approval stages,

• access to photocopying to an agreed maximum, • library access (including to its electronic holdings) and an entitlement to a

defined quantity of Inter-library loans, • access to all student-focused resources listed in the University’s Student

Handbook (except for those identified explicitly for undergraduates and postgraduates on ‘taught’ programmes only),

• access to at least one subject-relevant taught postgraduate module run by the University.

Please note that this represents the University’s minimum commitment for any student based at a University of Plymouth campus (whether full time, part time or in ‘writing up’ mode) and will be exceeded in many departments, especially for full time students. Information on disciplinary-specific resource expectations should be discussed at interview stage and made available in local research degree handbooks. 3. Distance Students Distance PGR students include those who are not located at a campus of the University, who are undertaking a low residency programme of study, as well as those based at co-operating institutions remote from a University campus or one of its partner Institutions. When PGR students are based either FT or PT at a co-operating institution, then it is expected that the Institution will provide facilities in line with those outlined above. Distance students can expect good access to their supervisory team by email, Skype, and/or telephone and a number of face-to-face meetings at pre-determined intervals. Access to appropriate research facilities by distance students must be determined prior to enrolment on the programme of study. Additional library support services are available for part-time students, students living more than 25 miles from the University and for students with disabilities. The SCONUL Access Scheme provides borrowing privileges at most other higher education libraries in the UK and Ireland for University of Plymouth postgraduate research students. This scheme does not normally include access to IT or electronic library services.

APPROVED December 2005, November 2012 and June 2017

2019 Edition

- 73 -

SCHOOL AND FACULTY ACTIVITIES AND EXPECTATIONS

FOR POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH DEGREES

1. Faculty-level Most activities to be undertaken by Deputy Director of the Doctoral College for the Faculty (i.e. Faculty PGR Co-ordinator) unless explicitly delegated or otherwise noted. Activities Comments 1. Represent the Faculty, and all elements of its PGR

constituency and business, as a core member of the Doctoral College Board and its working groups

Identify deputy for times when not available

2. Represent the Faculty as a core member of Doctoral College Quality Sub-committee and its working groups or sub-committees (including those which review RDC.3 Examination Approvals, revision of regulations, etc.)

Identify deputy for times when not available

3. Chair a Faculty Doctoral Committee, meeting at least 3 each year, which includes & responds to student representation

4. Facilitate student representation on Doctoral College Board

5. Represent the Faculty at the Research Programmes Taught Components Award Board

Identify deputy for times when not available

6. Report to Faculty executive/senior management group on PGR issues and cascade issues related to PGR and postdoc ECR throughout Faculty for implementation and information as required

7. Prepare Faculty Annual Monitoring Report, based on review of School PGR annual monitoring processes and outcomes (to be submitted to Doctoral College Board)

8. Prepare and monitor the Faculty’s PGR Action Plan (to be submitted to Doctoral College Board)

9. Respond formally to PRES and other mechanisms of student feedback, following up actions and efficacy

Working with Schools *

10. Train and support School PGR Coordinators in all elements of their roles

11. Ensure that there is appropriately resourced high-quality discipline-specific training and career development opportunities for all PGR students and postdoctoral ECRs in their Faculties (including at nodes)

Working with Schools and Institutes *

12. Organise and run discipline-specific training for supervisors and examiners (including ‘refreshers’ or up-

Working with Schools and Researcher Development

UoP School and Faculty PGR activities and expectations 2019 Edition

- 74 -

dates), where necessary, that complements the general provision offered by the Doctoral College

Manager in Doctoral College *

13. Deputise for Director of Doctoral College where necessary (e.g. at meetings, committees, induction events, etc.)

14. Contribute to and participate in PGR Complaints and Appeals processes that are referred to the Doctoral College

15. Support Schools in resolving PGR problems, first stage complaints, student-supervisor breakdowns, etc. and in interpreting/implementing regulations

16. Provide clear expectations throughout Faculty about the raising and use of ‘bench fees’ and ensuring this is communicated to students and supervisors;

Working with finance business partner and Doctoral College *

17. Manage and promote studentship opportunities within their disciplines, ensuring transparent selection processes and procedures

Working with Research Groups, Marketing, Schools, etc. *

18. Lead on, develop and manage doctoral training partnerships, consortia, and external funding opportunities for postgraduate research, etc. in their research areas;

Working with Schools, Research Groups *

19. Lead on the development, sustainability (including financial) and quality assurance of PGR nodes/partnerships in their Faculties

Working with Schools, Academic Partnerships, Doctoral College *

20. Organise and participate in local/Faculty-level inductions that supplement and complement those of the Doctoral College (including at ‘nodes’)

Working with Doctoral College Administrators, Schools & Research Groups *

21. Ensure and monitor production of School research student handbooks that supplement and complement those of the Doctoral College, as well as Handbooks for Professional Doctorate programmes in their Faculty

Working with Doctoral College Administrators, Professional Doctorate Programme leads, Schools & Research Groups *

22. Enhance and develop opportunities for PGR recruitment and visibility through the University website, external events, running webinars, etc.

Working with Create Digital, Doctoral College, Alumni Unit and Schools, Institutes *

23. Sign off/approve RDC milestones/proforma as necessary

24. Support the preparation of REF environment statements related to PGR and postdoc ECRs

Working with UoA Coordinators, ADRs *

25. Embed Research Integrity and Ethics processes and Data Management Planning, understanding and training for PGRs and postdoc ECRs, and their supervisors, throughout Faculty

Working with R&I, FREICs and Schools *

UoP School and Faculty PGR activities and expectations 2019 Edition

- 75 -

2. School-level Most activities to be undertaken by School PGR Co-ordinator/Lead (or equivalent e.g. Associate Head of School for Graduate Affairs) unless explicitly delegated or otherwise noted. Note that School PGR Co-ordinators are not responsible for students on Professional Doctorate programmes (for which Programme Leads are appointed, with similar expectations and responsibilities for those students). Activities Comments 1. Work closely with the Faculty’s Deputy Director of the

Doctoral College on activities above marked * Taking lead as and when appropriate for specific project or elements within

2. Deputise for Faculty’s Deputy Director of Doctoral College where necessary (e.g. at meetings, committees, induction events, etc.)

3. Represent School on Faculty Doctoral Committee, disseminating information to colleagues in their respective areas and feeding back from colleagues to FDC

4. Develop and put in place School/local initiatives and structures to enhance the quality of postgraduate and postdoctoral early career researcher experience, both as cohorts and individually

5. Act as first point of contact for potential applicant enquiries

6. Complete and sign off Admissions Proforma, assigning appropriate supervisory teams and taking into account the workloads of colleagues

HoS must also approve & sign all admissions proforma or else delegate

7. Manage and approve individual student milestones (RDC.1, RDC.2) and recommend approval of proposed examination teams (RDC.3) via GradBook

Working closely with Doctoral College Administrators

8. Ensure parity of opportunity for all postgraduate researchers in their area, and that all are offered a voice at appropriate levels (e.g. school, programme, node, etc.)

9. Liaise with students and supervisors (individually or separately) to come to a resolution in the event that the supervisory team cannot resolve a student issue or concern, or when there has been a breakdown of communication

Work with Deputy Director of Doctoral College for Faculty or Head of School as appropriate

10. Support students and Directors of Study when there has been a ‘failure to progress’ and ensure due processes are followed, including participation in Fitness to Study processes where appropriate

11. Ensure regulatory compliance of supervisors and examiners in their areas (including UKVI interactions, the timely completion of RDC processes, annual monitoring, etc.)

Work with Doctoral College Director and Deputy Director for Faculty. In serious cases, the Head of School will be involved.

UoP School and Faculty PGR activities and expectations 2019 Edition

- 76 -

12. Recommend the approval of interruptions and extensions via GradBook

Work with Doctoral College Administrators

13. Approve changes to supervisory teams Consult with Head of School where there might be workload management or resourcing issues

14. Review Annual Monitoring Reports for School/area (student and DoS), compiling or contributing to School-level Annual Monitoring report (including list of actions that have been taken or required)

Work with Doctoral College Administrators

15. Maintain oversight all aspects of validating, organising, resourcing and assessing taught elements of research degree programmes (with exception of Professional Doctorates)

May be led by named ‘programme leader’, working with ADT&L or School T&L lead

16. Respond to and resolve individual student concerns and queries related to their fees, funding and resourcing in their school

Confer with Doctoral College and HoS as necessary

17. Embed and monitor the University’s Equality & Diversity policy in all areas of the School’s PGR and postdoctoral ECR provision (including supervision, examining, training, etc.)

Work with School and/or Faculty Equality & Diversity leads

18. Ensure that the University’s Minimum Resource Requirements are fulfilled for all PGRs (except Professional Doctorates) in School (including students working at a distance)

19. Respond to and carry out initial investigation of complaints made by PGR students within their School (related to teaching, supervision and resourcing), resolving if possible, following the University’s standard complaint procedure

See Complaints and Appeals procedures.

2019 Edition

- 77 -

NOTES OF GUIDANCE FOR EXAMINERS OF THE DEGREES

RESEARCH MASTERS,

MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY, DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY,

DOCTOR OF MEDICINE, AND PROFESSIONAL DOCTORATES

1. Appointment of Examiners

1.1. Candidates are usually examined by one internal and one external examiner. If the candidate is a member of academic or research staff of the University, then two external examiners and one non-examining Chair are required.

1.2. Examiners are approached in the first instance by the candidate’s Director of Studies (DoS), at least four months before the intended submission of the thesis (or any part thereof if it includes practice). The School in which the candidate is located then formally nominates all examiners and examination teams to the University’s Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee, which is responsible for approving all nominations.

1.3. Requirements of examiners: 1.3.1. no examiner will have acted as supervisor or advisor to the

candidate during this research degree (other than, for internal examiners, in the course of annual monitoring processes, or as expert commentator for project approval [RDC.1] or Confirmation of Route [RDC.2] milestones2),

1.3.2. an external examiner will not normally have held any appointment with the University during the period in which the candidate has been registered for the degree, nor had any formal supervisory or advisory relationship with the candidate,

1.3.3. at least one examiner must have experience of examining UK Research Degree candidates. In an examination for PhD, at least one examiner must have experience of PhD examining,

1.3.4. no person who is registered for a research degree may act as an examiner,

1.3.5. the selection of external examiners is subject to the University’s general requirements. Details of any past or

2 Subject to local guidelines; in some Faculties, internal examiners are not permitted to have acted as expert commentator for the RDC2 process.

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 78 -

current association with the University, its staff or students must be declared at the time the examination arrangements are considered, and

1.3.6. internal examiners must fulfil the current training requirements set by the Doctoral College, at least 4 weeks prior to the viva voce examination.

1.4. For full details about the appointment of examiners and the requirements of the examination team (including the appointment of Chairs and their roles), please see the Research Degrees Handbook.

2. The Role of the Examiners Prior to Oral Examination 2.1. Examiners must agree to attend the viva voce (oral) examination in

person, as well as any elements of the thesis which must be examined in situ (e.g. in the case of creative or professional practice).

2.2. Prior to the viva voce examination, the Examiners must: 2.2.1. read the thesis carefully and engage with any non-written

elements if relevant; 2.2.2. identify shortcomings in the thesis/research and notify the

Doctoral College immediately should they suspect academic dishonesty or plagiarism;

2.2.3. submit an individual pre-viva report form (RDC.4P) at least 10 working days prior to the viva voce oral examination (see 7.4 below);

2.2.4. prepare appropriate questions with which to challenge the candidate and enable them to demonstrate the fulfilment of the assessment criteria; and

2.2.5. identify any editorial/presentational corrections needed to improve the final version of the thesis. The marked up version of the thesis may be given to the candidate at the close of the examination and noted in the formal notification of the examination outcome (i.e. list of corrections).

2.3. Examiners may not discuss any element of the thesis with either the candidate or supervisor(s) prior to the oral examination. They also must not discuss any elements of the thesis with the other examiner until after both pre-viva reports are submitted. It is permissible to raise issues in advance with the Chair of the viva voce examination where one has been appointed, who should consult with the Doctoral College if required.

3. Submission of the Thesis 3.1. The written element of the thesis must be presented in English. Its

presentation is expected to be of a high standard in line with the University of Plymouth’s Research Degrees Handbook. Any amendments required to the presentation of the thesis will be detailed to the candidate by the Doctoral College for inclusion in the final electronic version of the thesis, following the viva voce examination. In

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 79 -

some cases in which presentation requirements are not met or material is missing, the Doctoral College may require amendments prior to the thesis being sent to the examination team.

3.2. Sufficient copies, for distribution to each examiner (and Chair where appropriate), must be submitted to the Doctoral College office in a “perfect” temporary or permanently bound form.

3.3. It is entirely the candidate’s decision to submit their thesis for examination; they do not require their Director of Studies’ approval to do so.

3.4. Work submitted for another degree may not form part of the submission for the research degree (except in the case of a collaboratively produced co-authored thesis examined simultaneously or co-authored elements within a thesis which may potentially appear in another person’s degree submission).

3.5. The thesis may include non-written forms of research presentation (e.g. creative or professional practice) or else research outputs, including articles, published or made public during the course of the degree registration. 3.5.1. In such cases, the nature and form of the thesis must be

approved by the examiners prior to submission. Please note that there is always an expectation that in addition to these outputs, the thesis will include an introduction (outlining research aims, enquiry, methodology and defining key terms as well as positioning within one or more fields of study) and conclusion (including a clear statement of the contribution to knowledge, in the case of a doctorate).

3.5.2. It may be necessary for examiners to engage in some elements of the thesis (e.g. performance or exhibition) some time prior to the submission of the written element or the viva voce examination. If this is the case, the examiners may not discuss this work with the candidate – except in general and non-critical ways which do not represent formative feedback – prior to the viva voce examination meeting.

3.5.3. In cases where individual elements of the thesis are co-authored and/or co-produced, the candidate’s specific role as a researcher within these elements must be clearly indicated within the thesis and it must be explained how this contributes to the overarching methodology of their research project as represented by the thesis as a whole. Normally it would be expected that the candidate is the named first author (or disciplinary equivalent) of any publication included as part of the thesis and that a statement is provided by each co-author confirming the candidate’s contribution.

3.5.4. It is only possible to include Open Access publications or ‘green’ final manuscript versions of articles or papers within theses for copyright reasons.

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 80 -

3.5.5. The thesis as a whole must be framed as a single coherent research project and meet the relevant QAA Framework for Higher Education criteria for qualifications at Masters (Level 7) or Doctoral (Level 8) level (as appropriate to the degree).

4. Preparation for the Oral (Viva Voce) Examination 4.1. The Director of Studies, with the support of the Doctoral College,

normally organises the time, date, location and arrangements for the examination in conjunction with the examiners and the candidate.

4.2. The candidate should let their Director of Studies know whether they would like one of their supervisors to be present at the viva voce examination. The candidate’s wishes should be passed on to the Internal Examiner prior to the viva voce examination.

4.3. The viva voce examination should normally be scheduled no sooner than 6 weeks from the date the thesis is posted to the examiners and no later than 3 months thereafter. DoSs should not confirm the date of the viva voce examination until after the Doctoral College has sent the thesis to the examiners.

4.4. The viva voce examination should be held at University of Plymouth whenever possible, but it is sometimes necessary to meet elsewhere. This must be approved by the Director of the Doctoral College (or delegate) as for any viva voce examination which needs to take place via video conferencing or Skype. These options should only be considered as the last resort when all other possibilities have been exhausted.

4.5. It is important that the viva voce examination: 4.5.1. be held in an accessible room that is quiet and not subject to

telephone or other interruptions; 4.5.2. takes into account any requirements for students or examiners

with special needs; 4.5.3. uses a table large enough to accommodate the required

number of theses, papers, diagrams, etc.; 4.5.4. has drinking water available; 4.5.5. has sufficient time allowed (at least 2 hours), although

candidates should not have to face an excessively long examination without good reason; and

4.5.6. has available a waiting area for the candidate and supervisor to use that is not within hearing range of the examination room.

4.6. When a non-examining Independent Chair has not been appointed, the Internal Examiner will act as Chair for the viva voce examination.

4.7. The University is committed to making reasonable adjustments to the oral examination for candidates who require them. These should be organised as far in advance as possible. In such cases, a non-

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 81 -

examining Chair will be appointed to the examination team to support all participants.

5. The Oral Examination 5.1. Viva voce examinations are required for all candidates who submit

theses. The only exception is in the case of resubmitted theses where both examiners agree, having read the resubmitted thesis, that a second viva voce examination may be waived. (Please see 10.3 below).

5.2. Immediately prior to the viva voce examination, the examiners and Chair (if one has been appointed) will meet to develop an agenda or plan of questioning that takes into account their pre-viva reports (RDC.4Ps or RDC.4PRs in the case of a resubmitted thesis). This meeting is usually scheduled to take place in the hour prior to the scheduled viva voce examination. No members of the candidate’s supervisory team may be present at this meeting.

5.3. All examiners and the Chair (if appointed) shall be present at the viva voce examination. 5.3.1. Supervisors may, if requested by the candidate, attend the

oral examination. They may only contribute to or participate in the discussion if explicitly requested by one of the examiners, and must withdraw prior to the deliberations of the examiners on the outcome of the examination.

5.3.2. Notes should be taken throughout by one or both examiners (or the Chair, if one has been appointed) to record the progress and key moments of the examination. Chairs must submit their notes to the Doctoral College following the viva voce examination (with form identified in 5.3c below). Please note that students have the right to request to see notes made by chairs and examiners during the viva voce; examiners are therefore requested to send these to the Doctoral College.

5.3.3. Following the viva voce examination, the external examiner and Chair are asked to complete a brief form for the Doctoral College, reflecting on the conduct of the examination and offering any feedback on the process.

5.4. Either the Director of Studies or Chair will inform the examiners, before the recommended outcome of the examination is determined, of any exceptional circumstances which might have affected the candidate’s performance adversely (should these be known).

5.5. After the viva voce examination, the examiners will, where they are in agreement, jointly report on the thesis and examination using a RDC.4 (or RDC.4R in the case of a resubmission) form. This must be signed by all parties and returned to the Doctoral College office as soon as possible and always within 14 days. Where the examiners are not in agreement, separate reports and recommendations must be submitted to the Doctoral College (See 6.5 and 7.14 below).

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 82 -

5.6. In the case of collaboratively produced co-authored theses, the candidates will be examined together by the same internal and external examiner with a non-examining Chair (except if one or both candidates are staff – in which case two externals will be appointed and supported by a Chair), normally at the same viva voce examination. 5.6.1. A single RDC.4/4R form is to be completed and the same

outcome must be recommended for both candidates. 5.6.2. The examining team must also use the form to record whether

the oral examination has demonstrated that the candidates, separately and together, have met the criteria of the relevant degree qualification (providing evidence as necessary).

6. Examination Outcomes 6.1. Recipients of ResM or MPhil degrees must meet the QAA Framework

for Higher Education criteria for qualifications at Level 7 at (at least) threshold level. Level 7 research degrees should include the results of an appropriate research programme or a critical analysis of existing knowledge in a defined field.

6.2. Recipients of PhD, MD or Professional Doctorate degrees must meet the QAA Framework for Higher Education criteria for qualifications at Level 8 at (at least) threshold level. The thesis should include a distinct contribution to the current knowledge of the subject(s) identified, demonstrate systematic study and independent, critical and original powers and should be suitable for publication in whole or in part.

6.3. Following the viva voce examination, the examiners must recommend one of the following outcomes, based on the QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ) at the relevant level: 6.3.1. Pass: the degree be awarded. The examining team may

provide advisory guidance on editorial corrections to the thesis, such as minor typographical or grammatical errors; or

6.3.2. Corrections: the thesis is satisfactory in substance, but the examiners have identified shortcomings in the shaping or articulation of the research. Corrections to be made to the satisfaction of one or all of the examiners by six months from the date of the formal notification of the outcome of the examination; or

6.3.3. Defer – resubmission allowed. The thesis is unsatisfactory in substance, with shortcomings in the presentation and/or content, and may require further research. The candidate is permitted to resubmit for the degree (with detailed advice) and be re-examined on one further occasion by twelve months from the date of the formal notification of the outcome of the examination; or

6.3.4. Compensatory award: the degree for which the research student is examined is not to be awarded but a lower level degree (MPhil, ResM, PgCert or PgDip) or, in the case of Professional Doctorates, and where the individual regulations

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 83 -

for each Professional Doctorate allow, an appropriate master level degree be awarded subject to the presentation of the thesis being amended to the satisfaction of the examiners by one month from the date of the formal notification of the outcome of the examination; or

6.3.5. Fail: the degree not to be awarded and the candidate not be permitted to be re-examined.

6.4. No outcome may be suggested to the student or their supervisors prior to the viva voce examination or until the questioning and discussion with the candidate is completed.

6.5. Where the examiners’ recommendations are not unanimous, individual report forms (RDC.4 or RDC.4R) will be issued for the decisions to be reported separately. The Doctoral College: 6.5.1. will normally appoint an additional external examiner to

arbitrate and shall consider the reports of all examiners before reaching a decision; or

6.5.2. may exceptionally accept the recommendation of the external examiner(s).

7. Examination of Thesis: Procedure & Outcome Recommendations 7.1. The Doctoral College will distribute copies of the thesis to each

examiner (and Chair, if appointed) as soon as possible on receipt, together with these Notes of Guidance for Examiners, Pre-viva Report Form (RDC.4P/4PR), Recommendation of Examiners Form (RDC.4/4R) and expenses claim and honorarium forms, as appropriate.

7.2. The Director of Studies will make arrangements for the viva voce examination and keep the internal and external examiners, the Chair (if relevant), the candidate and the Doctoral College informed of the date and schedule for the examination.

7.3. It is the responsibility of the Doctoral College to determine and pay fees and expenses to external examiners, following receipt of all required paperwork. It is a requirement that external examiners present their passports and other relevant documentation so that the University is able to confirm that they have the right to work in the United Kingdom.

7.4. At least 10 working days in advance of the viva voce examination, each examiner must submit a pre-viva report (RDC.4P or RDC.4PR in the case of resubmitted theses) to the Doctoral College. These reports will be exchanged between examiners and a copy given to the Chair if appointed. 7.4.1. At this stage, examiners may also request that the candidate

make a brief presentation at the viva voce examination, to be prepared in advance. [Students can also request to make a presentation at the viva voce examination, but this must be requested via the Director of Studies and approved by both

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 84 -

examiners at least 10 working days in advance of the viva voce examination.]

7.4.2. Copies of the pre-viva reports are held by the Doctoral College in the student’s file; these remain confidential throughout the duration of the examination. Should a copy be requested under the Data Protection Act 2018, it will only be provided within the extended timescales allowed under the Act. If examiners wish their comments to remain confidential, they should advise the University when they submit them and explain the issues which give rise to their concern.

7.5. It is the responsibility of the Internal Examiner – and the principal duty of the Chair if one is appointed – to ensure that the examination is conducted fairly and professionally, and in accordance with University regulations.

7.6. After the completion of the oral examination, either: 7.6.1. the examiners may inform the candidate of the outcome and

that they require a few minutes to complete the paperwork (at which point the candidate and, if relevant, supervisor must withdraw); or

7.6.2. the examiners ask that the candidate and, if relevant, supervisor withdraw while they reach a decision and complete the paperwork. In exceptional circumstances, the supervisor may be asked to withdraw and the candidate asked further questions (where it is thought that student/supervisor relationships may have affected the thesis/research). There may also be a situation where the candidate is asked to withdraw and the supervisor is asked further questions. This may be the case, for instance, if it appears that the student has failed to heed advice given or else has encountered difficulties along their research journey (e.g. changes to the supervisory team, etc.).

7.7. Once the decision is agreed, the candidate and supervisor should be invited back into the examination room for a statement of the outcome. If this is not 'good news' then it should be offered with as much tact, clarity and sensitivity as possible.

7.8. The Recommendation of Examiners Form (RDC.4 or RDC.4R in the case of a resubmission), which is sent to the Internal Examiner or the Chair when one has been appointed, should be completed as soon as possible after the viva voce examination, in consultation with the external examiner(s). 7.8.1. It is the Internal Examiner’s (or Chair’s, if one has been

appointed) responsibility to arrange for the post-viva report to be filled in and sent to the Doctoral College.

7.8.2. The form must be completed, signed by all members of the examination team, and returned to the Doctoral College office as soon as possible after the examination and within 14 days

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 85 -

at the latest. Lists of specific corrections for the candidate may follow within 2 weeks of the viva voce examination and should not hold up the completion and submission of the RDC.4/4R.

7.9. The RDC.4/4R form indicates the nature of the response required for many of the questions but the examiners must pay particular attention to the appropriateness of their recommended outcome. Note that a Pass (6.3a above) should be awarded when the examiners are happy to approve the thesis with no further amendments. Any minor editorial corrections listed and supplied to the candidate with this outcome are purely advisory; the candidate is not required to respond to them prior to supplying the final version of their thesis for the award of their degree.

7.10. In the case of recommendation 6.3b above (‘Corrections’), it must be agreed and noted on the RDC.4/4R who will check the final version of the thesis (Internal Examiner or External Examiner or both) to ensure that all required corrections are made. The candidate should be told the general nature of the corrections before leaving the examination room. This must be followed up with a clear list in writing (to the Doctoral College within 2 weeks). It is also possible to give the student an annotated copy of the thesis that indicates some or all of the corrections required (this should be noted both on the RDC.4/4R form and on any supplementary correction lists or documents). Please note that examiners cannot request additional corrections after submitting these requirements to the Doctoral College and the candidate’s fulfilment of these requirements will be judged solely on their response to the original corrections identified by the examiners in writing.

7.11. In the case of recommendation 6.3c above (Deferral - Resubmission), the examiners must be explicit about the nature of the work to be done for the candidate to meet the threshold criteria of the degree. In addition to the full completion of the RDC.4 form, the examiners must provide a separate document (no briefer than 1 side of A4) describing this work to the Doctoral College. This document will be forwarded to the candidate. Please note that candidates must have clear and unambiguous instructions, as they will be judged solely on their response to those instructions at the time of resubmission. This is to ensure that examiners do not ask for further modifications at that time, except for those that arise from the revision itself.

7.12. In the case of recommendation 6.3d above (Compensatory lower degree awarded), the examiners must clearly indicate in Section 3 of the RDC.4/4R why the candidate did not meet the threshold criteria for the degree. They may also supply a list of required corrections for the award of the lower degree. These corrections, to be submitted within one month of the formal notification of the outcome of the viva voce examination, must be checked by the Internal Examiner (or Chair if there is no Internal Examiner). Additionally, all references to the higher degree must be amended to that of the lower degree to be awarded.

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 86 -

Examiners must indicate which degree they recommend be awarded; advice is available from the Doctoral College if required.

7.13. In the case of recommendation 6.3e above (Fail – no degree awarded), Section 3 of the RDC.4/4R form and any supporting documents must be very clear about the grounds for rejection of the thesis, which should align with the QAA Framework for Higher Education criteria for qualifications at the relevant level. Please note that a candidate may request to see any documentation related to their examination in the case of an appeal.

7.14. In the event of an outcome not being agreed by the examiners, each must present a separate report and RDC.4/4R form to the Doctoral College as soon as possible. In the event of a disagreement, the candidate should be told and it should be explained to them that individual reports are being lodged with the Doctoral College which will write to them as soon as possible. If there is a disagreement, it is always possible to telephone the Doctoral College and, if available, either the Director or relevant Deputy Director of the Doctoral College may be able to come to the examination room or give advice to the examination team by telephone.

7.15. If there are any doubts about the completion of the RDC.4 (or RDC.4R in the case of resubmissions), please contact the Doctoral College.

7.16. It must be remembered that the main grounds for appeal against a result are related to either the conduct of the examination and/or lack of clarity about the requirements of corrections or a resubmitted thesis in the formal notification document provided to the candidate.

7.17. Please note that the University’s regulations related to PGR Examination Outcomes were updated for all theses submitted on or after 1 September 2018. If you are examining a thesis that was submitted prior to this date – or else a resubmitted thesis that was first submitted prior to this date – then 2017-18 regulations must be followed (please refer to the Notes of Guidance for PGR Examiners document produced in October 2017 instead).

8. Award of a ‘Pass’ Degree: Procedure 8.1. On agreement by the examiners that the candidate has passed and the

degree be awarded (recommendation 6.3a above), the candidate will be asked to submit an electronic copy of the thesis to the University’s repository. The expectation is for the candidate to submit this electronic copy of the thesis within 60 days of the formal notification of the outcome by the Doctoral College.

8.2. Examiners may provide a list of editorial corrections comprising minor typographical or grammatical errors to the candidate, either at the close of the viva voce examination or else within two weeks via the Doctoral College (to be sent with the formal examination outcome letter). Please note that it is the candidate’s decision whether to make these recommended amendments to their thesis and this will not be checked or monitored.

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 87 -

8.3. The award will not be given until the electronic copy of the thesis has been submitted to the University repository (PEARL) and the submission been approved by the Doctoral College and any outstanding academic debts to the University have been paid. Please note that students are entitled to request an embargo period for their thesis.

8.4. The Doctoral College will arrange for the certificate to be produced and will notify the Exams and Awards Office that the candidate is eligible to attend the next Graduation Ceremony.

9. Corrections to the Thesis: Procedure 9.1. On agreement of the examiners that the thesis is satisfactory in

substance, but that there are shortcomings in the shaping or articulation of the research (recommendation 6.3b above), the student must be informed of the corrections required to the thesis and the date by which these should be made at the end of the oral examination. If not submitted with the RDC.4/4R form, the list of corrections must be sent to the Doctoral College, to be forwarded to the candidate, within 2 weeks of the viva voce examination. Corrections are to be approved by the internal and/or the external examiner(s) and not the Chair. The candidate should be told by the examiners the form in which to submit the corrections; normally an electronic copy with the changes/corrections tracked, highlighted or tagged is preferred, with a cover sheet indicating where each correction can be found.

9.2. The corrections must be made and submitted to the Doctoral College to send to the Internal Examiner and/or the External Examiner (as indicated on the RDC.4/4R) within six months of the formal notification of the outcome. If a candidate is unable to meet this deadline, they may request an extension; all extensions must be approved by the examiners.

9.3. Corrections are not an iterative process between the candidate and examiners and examiners are not expected to act as mentors or advisors during this process. If a candidate has any queries, they should ask their Director of Studies or other supervisor to liaise with the examiners on their behalf.

9.4. In the case of corrections arising from a first viva voce examination, the examiner(s) must complete Corrections Report Form COR.1 and return it to the Doctoral College within 20 working days of receiving the corrections. If for any reason they are unable to consider these corrections and respond within 20 working days, the Doctoral College should be notified so the candidate may be informed of the delay. Please see 9.5. If the corrections are submitted either for the second time or else to a thesis that had been resubmitted as the result of a deferral, the examiners must complete Corrections Report Form COR.2 and return it to the Doctoral College within 20 days of receiving the corrections. Please see 9.6.

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 88 -

9.5. Please remember that examiners may not expect or require the candidate to make any corrections that were not on the List of Corrections sent to them by the Doctoral College with the formal notification of their examination outcome. If the corrections are not approved, and these have been submitted for the first time for a thesis that had not been resubmitted as the result of a deferral, then the candidate is entitled to a ‘2nd attempt’. Please see the attached ‘Flowchart of PGR Examination Outcomes’. Examiners must use form COR.1 to identify the ways in which the corrections were deficient and also list the corrections that are still required; in this case, the protocol described in 9.2 – 9.4 above must be followed.

9.6. If the corrections are not approved, and these have been submitted either for the second time or to a thesis that had been resubmitted as the result of a deferral, then the examiners must use form COR.2 to recommend either: 9.6.1. that the candidate receives a compensatory lower award: that

is, the degree for which the student has been examined is not to be awarded but a lower level degree (MPhil, ResM, PgCert or PgDip) or in the case of Professional Doctorates and where the individual regulations for each Professional Doctorate allow, an appropriate master level degree be awarded. Please note that corrections that require approval by examiners are not permitted with this outcome (although the candidate must make amendments to references to the level of the degree and examiners may provide a list of recommended typographical corrections which the candidate may choose not to attend to), or

9.6.2. that the candidate fails: the degree not to be awarded and the candidate not be permitted to be re-examined.

Please see the attached ‘Flowchart of PGR Examination Outcomes’. 9.7. If the corrections are approved, or a compensatory lower award is

recommended, the degree will be awarded when the electronic copy of the final corrected thesis has been submitted to the University repository (PEARL), the submission been approved by the Doctoral College and any outstanding academic debts to the University have been paid. In the case of a lower degree being awarded, the candidate must amend the title of the degree on the cover page as well as any references to the level of the degree throughout the thesis.

9.8. The Doctoral College will arrange for the certificate to be produced and will notify the Exams and Awards Office that the candidate is eligible to attend the next Graduation Ceremony.

10. Resubmission following Deferral: Procedure 10.1. A thesis may be re-submitted (i.e. ‘re-examined’) on one occasion,

normally with a further viva voce examination. Details of any further research requirements must be submitted by the examination team to the Doctoral College who will then forward them to the research

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 89 -

student (see 7.11 above) following the first viva voce examination. Sufficient copies of the revised thesis must be resubmitted to the Doctoral College office by the deadline. Failure to resubmit by this date will normally be regarded as failure of the examination. However, if a candidate is unable to meet this deadline, they may request an extension, which must be approved by the examiners.

10.2. A resubmitted thesis is normally examined by the same examination team. Should either examiner be unavailable, or a (different) Chair required, the Director of Studies must nominate the entire examination team (via the RDC.3 form on GradBook), preferably four months prior to submission of the revised thesis, which must be approved by the Doctoral College Quality Sub-committee. It is strongly recommended that a Chair is appointed for the examination of a resubmitted thesis, even if one had not been appointed to the original examination team; please contact the Doctoral College to add a new RDC.3 to the GradBook record if this is the case.

10.3. If, having read the resubmitted thesis, the examiners agree that the outcome of the examination will be either ‘pass’ or ‘corrections’, they have the discretion to waive the requirement to hold a second viva voce examination. The examiners should tell the Doctoral College if this is the case no later than 10 working days prior to the scheduled viva voce examination (although preferably at least a month in advance so that the student may be told not to arrange travel, etc.). Before the examiners agree the outcome of ‘award of lower degree’, or ‘fail, no award’ for a resubmitted thesis, a second viva voce examination is mandatory. [Please note that this is not the case for outcome decisions following the submission of Corrections to a thesis].

10.4. The examination for a resubmitted thesis should be run as per Items 1-9 above, with the following exception: the examination outcome 6.3c (deferral – resubmission) is not available for resubmitted theses. Please see the attached ‘Flowchart of PGR Examination Outcomes’.

10.5. If the viva voce examination is waived for the resubmitted thesis, the examination team must return the RDC.4R form and any List of Corrections within either 3 months of the thesis having been sent to them by the Doctoral College or else within 2 weeks of the scheduled viva that had been waived (whichever comes first). The examination team (without the student or supervisor present) must hold a meeting (by Skype or videoconferencing if necessary) to discuss and agree the thesis and examination outcome. Normally the Chair, if one has been appointed, is responsible for completing the RDC.4R form and, if required, the examiners agree and complete the List of Corrections. The form needs to be printed and signed by all members of the examination team. It is possible for the form to be scanned and emailed to the Doctoral College, copied to all members of the examination team; those members with outstanding signatures can indicate their approval in a ‘reply all’ email in lieu of a signature.

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 90 -

10.6. Please note that candidates who begin their programme of study after 1 September 2018 will be required to pay a resubmission fee to be re-examined, whether or not the viva voce examination is waived.

11. Compensatory/lower award: Procedure 11.1. In the case of a compensatory or lower award (recommendation 6.3d),

when the thesis does not require any corrections, the candidate will be asked to submit an electronic copy of the thesis to the University’s repository within 60 days of the formal notification of the outcome. The candidate must amend the title of the degree on the cover page as well as any references to the level of the degree throughout the thesis. These are not considered ‘corrections’ and do not need to be approved by a member of the examination team. Please note that this also applies to compensatory awards recommended when corrections are not approved (see 9.6.a above).

11.2. On agreement of the examiners that the thesis requires further corrections in order to meet the criteria for a lower award, the student must be informed of the corrections required to the thesis and the date by which these should be made at the end of the oral examination. If not submitted with the RDC.4/4R form, the list of corrections must be sent to the Doctoral College, to be forwarded to the candidate, within 2 weeks of the viva voce examination. Corrections are to be approved by the Internal Examiner (or Chair if there is no internal examiner, who may liaise with one or both external examiners in making their decision). The candidate should be told by the examiners the form in which to submit the corrections; normally an electronic copy with the changes/corrections tracked, highlighted or tagged is preferred, with a cover sheet indicating where each correction can be found.

11.3. The corrections must be made and submitted to the Doctoral College to send to the Internal Examiner or Chair within one month of the formal notification of the outcome. If a candidate is unable to meet this deadline, they may request an extension; all extensions must be approved by the examiners.

11.4. Corrections are not an iterative process between the candidate and examiners and examiners are not expected to act as mentors or advisors during this process. If a candidate has any queries, they should ask their Director of Studies or other supervisor to liaise with the examiners on their behalf.

11.5. The Internal Examiner (or Chair) must complete a Corrections Report Form COR.3 and return it to the Doctoral College within 20 working days of receiving the corrections. If for any reason they are unable to consider these corrections and respond within 20 working days, the Doctoral College should be notified so the candidate may be informed of the delay.

11.6. If the corrections are approved, the degree will be awarded when the electronic copy of the final corrected thesis has been submitted to the University repository (PEARL), the submission been approved by the

UoP notes of guidance for PGR examiners 2019 Edition

- 91 -

Doctoral College and any outstanding academic debts to the University have been paid.

11.7. If the corrections are not approved, then the outcome of the examination is a fail; the candidate will not receive an award and no re-examination is permitted. Please see the attached ‘Flowchart of PGR Examination Outcomes’. The Internal Examiner (or Chair) must use form COR.3 to identify the ways in which the corrections were deficient. Please remember that examiners may not expect or require the candidate to make any corrections that were not on the List of Corrections sent to them by the Doctoral College with the formal notification of their examination outcome.

12. PhDs on the basis of Prior Published Works 12.1. The viva voce examination for a thesis submitted for the award of PhD

on the basis of Prior Published Works should be run as per Items 1-9 and 11 above, with the following exception: the examination outcome 6.3c (deferral – resubmission) is not available.

12.2. As the published works are already in the public domain, and cannot be revised following examination, examiners may only recommend Corrections that can be made to the Integrative Summary. Please see the Regulations and Guidance Notes for this award.

13. Appeals Against Academic Decisions 13.1. Details of the regulations on Appeals against academic decisions can

be found at https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/student-life/your-studies/essential-information/complaints-appeals.

14. Questions and Concerns 14.1. Please email any questions about regulatory matters, operational or

administrative processes to doctoralcollege@plymouth.ac.uk or telephone (+44) 01752 587640

14.2. If you wish to discuss any matter related to the conduct of the examination or wish to ask for advice or guidance about your role as an examiner in confidence, please contact the Director of the Doctoral College.

15. Flowchart of PGR Examination Outcomes See next page

UoP flowchart of PGR examination outcomes 2019 Edition

- 92 -

2019 Edition

- 93 -

THE ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF INDEPENDENT CHAIRS

AT VIVA VOCE EXAMINATIONS OF RESEARCH DEGREES

1. The appointment of a non-examining Independent Chair (from here on, ‘Chair’)

for a research degree (PGR) viva voce examination must be approved either by the Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee or, in exceptional cases of urgency, the Director of the Doctoral College on its behalf. The need to appoint a Chair should be exceptional, rather than the norm, for examination teams. If a Chair has not been appointed, the roles and responsibilities described in point 7 below should be undertaken by the Internal Examiner.

2. A non-examining Independent Chair must be appointed to the examination team in the following circumstances:

• the student being examined is also a member of academic or research staff at the University;

• the internal examiner has no PGR examining experience at the University of Plymouth;

• the examination team as a whole does not have experience in a total of three UK examinations at the level of the examination;

• the viva voce examination is being conducted via video-conference; • 'reasonable adjustments' have been made or disability has been taken into

account in viva voce examination arrangements or conduct; • the thesis is collaboratively co-authored by two students being examined

together; • issue(s) have been raised by either the internal or external examiner(s) in

their pre-viva reports – and, in particular, if both examiners have ticked the box on the RDC.4P (or RDC.4PR in the case of a resubmission) form indicating that they believe the thesis to be seriously flawed and not on target to merit consideration for the degree to be awarded;

• the student has requested a Chair due to issues related to equality and diversity (All students must be asked if they would like a Chair of their gender appointed if both their examiners are a different gender to their own, although they are free to decline this offer.)

Please note: under no circumstances may a candidate have two examiners and a Chair of a different gender to their own (e.g. a female-identifying candidate with two male examiners and a male chair). A Director of Studies may also propose a Chair (including on behalf of the student or one of the examiners) when one is not required. It is strongly recommended that a Chair is appointed in cases where a second oral examination is required for a resubmitted thesis. If relevant and possible,

UoP role and responsibility of chairs 2019 Edition

- 94 -

this should be the same person who chaired the candidate’s first viva voce examination.

3. The principal duty of the Chair is to ensure that the examination is conducted fairly and professionally, and in accordance with University regulations. It is therefore important that Chairs: are University of Plymouth staff members; have examined at least two degrees at the level of the examination; have examined at least one postgraduate research degree at the University; and are familiar with the University’s regulations, guidelines and procedures. They are expected to have attended an Internal Examiners’ or Chairs’ Briefing session or refresher run by the University within the 3 year period prior to the oral examination. Chairs are not examiners of the thesis and do not determine the outcome of the examination. However, they are likely to facilitate the examiners in making their decision together.

4. Prior to the oral examination, the Chair will be provided with:

• a letter of appointment, • notes of Guidance for Examiners of Research Degrees, • copies of the pre-viva reports (RDC.4P/4PR forms) from both examiners,

which must be submitted 10 working days prior to the oral examination, • a copy of the thesis. It is recommended that they read the abstract and

scan the thesis for familiarity and to note any gross irregularities, • details of ‘reasonable adjustments’ made to the form or content of the oral

examination, • a copy of the QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications Award

Descriptor for Masters and Doctorates. These descriptors should act as an aide memoire by which the examiners determine whether the candidate satisfies, or not, the UK criteria for the degree, and

• a ‘Chair’s Feedback’ form, which must be completed following the oral examination and returned to the Doctoral College.

5. The Chair is required to attend the meeting with the examiners prior to the oral examination and be present for the duration of the oral examination and post-viva discussions. When the thesis includes practice elements, it is desirable that the Chair is in attendance with the examiners.

6. At the pre-viva meeting, Chairs must ensure that both examiners understand the Chair’s role in the examining process and explain why they have been appointed (see point 2 above). Please note that, prior to the viva voce examination, students should not be told why the Chair has been appointed, except when this was due to gender balance at the student’s request.

7. Chairs must ensure that the University’s regulations and ‘Notes of Guidance for Examiners of Research Degrees’ are followed. In relation to these, and ensuring that good practice is adhered to, the Chair is normally responsible for the following:

UoP role and responsibility of chairs 2019 Edition

- 95 -

• Ensuring that during the pre-viva meeting, the examiners develop an agenda or plan of questioning for the oral examination that takes into account their pre-viva report forms (RDC.4P/4PR);

• When the thesis includes the assessment of live practice, screenings or an exhibition, ensuring that the examiners provide no formative feedback to the candidate prior to the viva voce examination;

• Setting up the room for the viva voce examination and seeking an alternative venue if the room assigned is unsuitable;

• Ensuring that, if the candidate’s supervisor attends the viva voce examination, the supervisor is not part of the examination process. The Chair may ask the supervisor to leave the room if they intervene inappropriately in the examination process. Supervisors can only contribute during the examination with the permission of the Chair after consultation with the examiners.

• Knowing how to contact the supervisor, if not present at the viva voce examination, or their nominee (phone extension, or mobile phone number), in case they are required;

• Welcoming the candidate into the examination room; introducing everybody; explaining the Chair’s role in the process (as per point 3 above); making sure that the candidate is ready to start and is comfortable;

• Giving the candidate an opportunity to relax into the viva voce examination at the start. It is appropriate for the Chair to ask an initial introductory question (e.g. ‘what did you really enjoy about your project?’, ‘what made you want to do this research?’) before handing over to the examiners;

• Offering a 5-10 minute break to the examiners and candidate, approximately 90 minutes into the viva voce examination, if it is likely to go much beyond this;

• Taking notes of the progress of the viva voce examination with a time line noted in the margin. These notes may be used in the case of a complaint or appeal. It is expected that that the Chair takes notes by hand, so as not to disturb the candidate or examiners with the sound of a typing on a keyboard.

• Intervening if they judge that an examiner’s questioning is too aggressive, or may be biased or discriminatory. If necessary, the Chair has the right to call a temporary break to discuss these concerns with the examiners.

• If the candidate is showing signs of extreme stress, suspending the viva voce examination and allowing the candidate a short break to compose themselves. In very extreme cases, the Chair has the right to suspend the viva voce examination indefinitely; in such a case, the Doctoral College must be informed immediately and the Chair referred to the Director of the Doctoral College for advice of how to proceed. If the latter is not available, then the Chair should use their judgement on how to proceed until advice can be sought.

UoP role and responsibility of chairs 2019 Edition

- 96 -

• At the end of the questioning period, asking whether both examiners are satisfied that they have enough information to come to an examination decision regarding the candidate. If they agree, then the Chair should ask the student whether they have any points they would like to raise. It is the Chair who then normally asks the candidate (and supervisor) to leave the room to allow the examiners to confer and come to a decision.

• During the period of conferring, bringing objectiveness to the discussion, by reflecting back on particular relevant issues that occurred in the viva voce examination. In the case of a ‘borderline’ student, the Chair may use their experience to suggest to the examiners how they felt the candidate had performed in the viva voce examination (e.g. using phraseology such as average, above average, below average). The Chair should go through the questions and prompts on the RDC.4 (or RDC.4R) one by one. If the examiners are not in agreement, the Chair should help them to come to a decision through discussion. The Chair should also discuss each of the options for the result of the examination with the examiners, helping them to rule out options one by one, based on QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications Award Descriptors. In the case of all decisions which require further work by the student (either corrections or that the thesis is referred for resubmission), the Chair must ensure that the examiners agree what needs to be done by the student; the extent of the further work; how the written list of corrections (or guidelines of what is required for a resubmitted thesis) will be produced; and which examiner(s) will consider corrections.

• Calling the candidate and their supervisor back into the examination room in order to deliver the verdict of the examination. Where this involves corrections or the thesis is referred for resubmission, this must include a summary of what the student needs to do next, the process and timescale. The Chair may explain these if agreed in advance by both examiners.

• Ensuring that all members of the examining team, including the Chair, sign the examiners’ joint report form RDC.4 (or RDC.4R if examining a resubmitted thesis) before leaving the examination room. It is appropriate for the Chair to complete the body of the form, should the Internal Examiner agree. The Chair must emphasise that a formal written identification of the corrections required (or notes for guidance if the thesis is referred for resubmission) must be submitted to the Doctoral College as soon after the end of the viva voce examination as possible (normally within a day or two and definitely within a two-week period from the date of the examination).

• When agreed with the examiners, corresponding with them following the oral examination about the precise form and content of the formal written version of the corrections (or notes for guidance if the thesis is referred for resubmission), and possibly sending the final agreed version to the Doctoral College.

UoP role and responsibility of chairs 2019 Edition

- 97 -

8. After the oral examination, the Chair is required to sign the examiners’ joint report (RDC.4 or RDC.4R) and ensure that it is returned to the Doctoral College as soon as possible. Together with the ‘Chair’s Feedback’ Form, they must also submit their notes taken during the viva voce examination and/or a brief report (using ‘Chair’s Feedback’ form) to the Doctoral College. This is very important in the case of a thesis that has been referred for resubmission or the award of a degree different to which the thesis was submitted for, as the student has the right to appeal against this decision and the University has a duty to provide evidence on the conduct of the examination.

Reviewed June 2008, November 2012, October 2014 and October 2017

2019 Edition

- 98 -

POSTHUMOUS RESEARCH DEGREES AND AEGROTAT AWARDS

1. A research degree may be awarded posthumously on the basis of a thesis

completed by a candidate which is ready for submission for examination. The degree can also be considered if the research was at its final stages. In this case, the supervisors will need to compile a thesis in readiness for examination.

2. The University may award an aegrotat degree to students who are unable to complete the oral examination in the usual way due to irreversible health problems.

3. In both cases the Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee shall seek evidence that the candidate would have been likely to have been successful had the oral examination taken place.

4. A request from the supervisors to the Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee to proceed with the examination will be required. A brief report explaining that the thesis and work carried out by the candidate are believed to be of sufficient quality for the research degree to be awarded should accompany the request.

5. If the research work was not concluded by the research student, the supervisors should include reasons as to why the work should be considered for examination, taking into account how far the research had advanced and the extent of understanding of the topic by the student, etc.

6. In the case of an aegrotat degree, the request should be made after all other avenues have been investigated and exhausted when appropriate, such as interruptions, change to part-time, termination at a lower degree level, etc.

7. Two examiners, at least one of them external, must assess the thesis and report independently on whether the degree should be awarded or whether a lower award is more appropriate (e.g. a ResM or an MPhil instead of a PhD). If the student was an academic or research staff member of the University, two external examiners will normally be required. Other requirements for examiners as in normal research degree regulations need also be fulfilled.

8. Outcomes of the examination should be as for normal degrees, excluding the possibility of corrections/amendments and resubmission.

9. Other forms of research outcomes may be included and/or considered in the examination, such as conference presentations, papers, annual reports, etc.

10. The electronic copy of the thesis must state it was submitted in partial fulfilment of a posthumous/aegrotat award and must be submitted to the University repository prior to conferment of the degree.

UoP PGR students fee amendments 2019 Edition

- 99 -

FEE AMENDMENTS FOR INTERRUPTIONS, WITHDRAWALS (INCLUDING

DE-REGISTRATION), EXTENSIONS TO REGISTRATION AND FOR SUBMISSION AND EARLY SUBMISSION OF

THESIS FOR EXAMINATION

This policy will come into effect on 1 August 2020 for all PGR students (except DClinPsy)

The University operates the following fee refund and payment policy for postgraduate research students who interrupts, withdraw, extend their registration or for early submission of thesis for examination. Fees for research degree students are charged per academic year and each academic year is split in two halves. Interruptions Interruptions of less than 4 months in a single academic year will not incur cancellation of fees. In the academic year of interruption, fees are payable as follows:

• Interruption period of 4 months or less: full fees are payable for that academic year

• Interruption period between 4 months and 1 day and 10 months: fees will be cancelled for half of the annual fee for that academic year

• Interruption period between 10 months and 1 day and 12 months: no fees payable for that academic year

Please note that this only applies to interruptions that have been formally approved by the University. Retrospective interruptions are not normally approved if the start date of the interruption is more than 2 months from the date of application. Fees overpaid as a result of interruption may be applied to subsequent years of study. Withdrawal A student who withdraws, or is required to withdraw, will not be reimbursed for any fees paid prior to the current year of registration. In the academic year of withdrawal, fees will be charged for registration periods shorter than a semester as follows:

• Registration periods of 2 months or less: no fees charged for that half of the annual fee

• Registration periods of 2 months and 1 day or above: fees will be charged for that half of the annual fee

UoP PGR students fee amendments 2019 Edition

- 100 -

These registration periods may be reduced to take into account interruptions in this or a prior academic year for which fees were paid. Extensions A student who submits their thesis after their due date, with or without an approved extension, will be charged extension fees as follows:

• Submission within 1 month of due date: no additional fees charged • Submission 1 month and 1 day or above after due date: additional

extension fees charged (pro-rata per month or part of month) from due date to date of thesis submission

These extension periods may be reduced to take into account interruptions in this or a prior academic year for which fees were paid3. Students will not be reimbursed for fees paid prior to the current year of registration. Candidates will not be awarded their degree if fees are outstanding. Early submissions of thesis: A student who submits their thesis after their minimum period of registration and before their due date will be charged fees as follows:

• Submission within 2 month after last period charged for: no additional fees charged

• Submission 2 months and 1 day or above after last period charged for: fees will be charged for that half of the annual fee

These charging periods may take into account interruptions in this or a prior academic year for which fees were paid3. Students will not be reimbursed for fees paid prior to the current year of registration. Candidates will not be awarded their degree if fees are outstanding.

3 For instance, a student who suspended for 2 months in total during previous academic years and payed full fees for those years, would not have to pay additional fees for a 2 month extension period.

2019 Edition

- 101 -

DESCRIPTORS OF HIGHER EDUCATION QUALIFICATIONS AT LEVEL 7 (MASTER’S DEGREE)

AND LEVEL 8 (DOCTORAL DEGREE)

Extract from QAA – UK QUALITY CODE FOR HIGHER EDUCATION Part A, October 2014

1. Master’s level (Descriptor for a higher education qualification at level 7 on the FHEQ and SCQF level 11 on the FQHEIS) The descriptor provided for this level of the framework is for any master's degree which should meet the descriptor in full. […] Master’s degrees are awarded to students who have demonstrated:

• a systematic understanding of knowledge, and a critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, much of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of their academic discipline, field of study, or area of professional practice

• a comprehensive understanding of techniques applicable to their own research or advanced scholarship

• originality in the application of knowledge, together with a practical understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline

• conceptual understanding that enables the student: o to evaluate critically current research and advanced scholarship in the

discipline o to evaluate methodologies and develop critiques of them and, where

appropriate, to propose new hypotheses. Typically, holders of the qualification will be able to:

• deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively, make sound judgements in the absence of complete data, and communicate their conclusions clearly to specialist and non-specialist audiences

• demonstrate self-direction and originality in tackling and solving problems, and act autonomously in planning and implementing tasks at a professional or equivalent level

• continue to advance their knowledge and understanding, and to develop new skills to a high level.

And holders will have:

• the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring: o the exercise of initiative and personal responsibility o decision-making in complex and unpredictable situations

Descriptors for Masters and Doctoral Level 2019 Edition

- 102 -

o the independent learning ability required for continuing professional development.

Much of the study undertaken for master's degrees is at, or informed by, the forefront of an academic or professional discipline. Successful students shown originality in the application of knowledge, and they understand how the boundaries of knowledge are advanced through research. They are able to deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively, and they show originality in tackling and solving problems. They have the qualities needed for employment in circumstances requiring sound judgement, personal responsibility and initiative in complex and unpredictable professional environments. Master's degrees are awarded after completion of taught courses, programmes of research or a mixture of both. Longer, research-based programmes may lead to the degree of MPhil. The learning outcomes of most master's degree courses are achieved on the basis of study equivalent to at least one full-time calendar year and are taken by graduates with a bachelor's degree with honours (or equivalent achievement). Master's degrees are often distinguished from other qualifications at this framework level (for example, advanced short courses, which often form parts of continuing professional development programmes and lead to postgraduate certificates and/or postgraduate diplomas) by an increased intensity, complexity and density of study. Master's degrees, in comparison to postgraduate certificates and postgraduate diplomas, typically include planned intellectual progression that often includes a synoptic/research or scholarly activity. […] 2. Doctoral level (Descriptor for a higher education qualification at level 8 on the FHEQ and SCQF level 12 on the FQHEIS) The descriptor provided for this level of the frameworks is for any doctoral degree which should meet the descriptor in full. […] Doctoral degrees are awarded to students who have demonstrated:

• the creation and interpretation of new knowledge, through original research or other advanced scholarship, of a quality to satisfy peer review, extend the forefront of the discipline, and merit publication

• a systematic acquisition and understanding of a substantial body of knowledge which is at the forefront of an academic discipline or area of professional practice

• the general ability to conceptualise, design and implement a project for the generation of new knowledge, applications or understanding at the forefront of the discipline, and to adjust the project design in the light of unforeseen problems

• a detailed understanding of applicable techniques for research and advanced academic enquiry.

Typically, holders of the qualification will be able to:

• make informed judgements on complex issues in specialist fields, often in the absence of complete data, and be able to communicate their ideas and

Descriptors for Masters and Doctoral Level 2019 Edition

- 103 -

conclusions clearly and effectively to specialist and non-specialist audiences

• continue to undertake pure and/or applied research and development at an advanced level, contributing substantially to the development of new techniques, ideas, or approaches.

And holders will have:

• the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring the exercise of personal responsibility and largely autonomous initiative in complex and unpredictable situations, in professional or equivalent environments.

Doctoral degrees are awarded for the creation and interpretation, construction and/or exposition of knowledge which extends the forefront of a discipline, usually through original research. Holders of doctoral degrees are able to conceptualise, design and implement projects for the generation of significant new knowledge and/or understanding. Holders of doctoral degrees will have the qualities needed for employment that require both the ability to make informed judgements on complex issues in specialist fields and an innovative approach to tackling and solving problems. Doctoral programmes that may have a substantial taught element in addition to the research component (for example, professional doctorates), lead usually to awards which include the name of the discipline in their title (for example, EdD for Doctor of Education or DClinPsy for Doctor of Clinical Psychology). Professional doctorates aim to develop an individual's professional practice and to support them in producing a contribution to (professional) knowledge. The titles PhD and DPhil are commonly used for doctoral degrees awarded on the basis of original research. Achievement of outcomes consistent with the qualification descriptor for the doctoral degree normally requires study equivalent to three full-time calendar years. Higher doctorates may be awarded in recognition of a substantial body of original research undertaken over the course of many years. Typically a portfolio of work that has been previously published in a peer-refereed context is submitted for assessment. Most degree awarding bodies restrict candidacy to graduates or their own academic staff of several years' standing. Note Honorary doctoral degrees are not academic qualifications.

2019 Edition

- 104 -

STUDENT REPRESENTATION ON DOCTORAL COLLEGE BOARD (DCB)

1. Student representatives (‘reps’) may be enrolled on any full or part time

University of Plymouth PGR programme (including ResM, MD, MPhil/PhD, PhD, professional doctorate). A student who formally completes or withdraws from their programme of study is not eligible to be a student representative on DCB.

2. Student reps should normally commit to being members of DCB for a 12 month period (this can start at any time of the year to include 3 scheduled meetings).

3. DCB meets 3 times per year (once per academic term). Appointed student

reps should attend at least 2 out of 3 meetings during their 12 month appointment period.

4. There are 3 student reps on DCB, one from each Faculty: Arts & Humanities;

Health; and Science & Engineering.

5. Student reps on DCB are likely to also be members of either a Faculty or School-level Doctoral Committee; however, this is not a pre-requisite.

6. Students who are formally interrupted on the day of a DCB meeting may not

attend. A student rep who is likely to miss more than one meeting, on the basis of interruption or suspension of studies, will be asked to step down (but will be welcome to become a rep when they resume, if appropriate).

7. Working with PGR students, it is up to the Faculty to agree and adopt an

appropriate mechanism for appointing their student rep to DCB, ensuring that this is a fair and transparent process. It is important that there is a parity of opportunity for all postgraduate researchers to put themselves forward and participate; whenever possible and appropriate, student reps should be elected by their peers, following a nomination process. It is the responsibility of the relevant Deputy Director of the Doctoral College to appoint their Faculty’s student representative after such a process.

8. ‘Student-led business’ is a standing item on the DCB agenda. Student reps on

DCB represent the views and interests of PGR students in their Faculty and the University at large. They primarily represent matters relating to the academic experience as well as the impact of the wider student experience on academic issues. Issues of relevance at individual/personal, departmental or School levels should always be raised in the first instance at the appropriate local level; these should only be raised at DCB if they are likely to impact upon or be of relevance to a wider body of students or if resolution at Faculty level (e.g. via Faculty Doctoral Committee) has not been possible.

9. The names and UoP email addresses of student reps will be made available to

all PGR students at the University, who will be encouraged to contact the

UoP student representation at DCB 2019 Edition

- 105 -

student representative for their Faculty should they wish to raise an issue at DCB. Student reps are expected to feedback to the students concerned following DCB. Student reps may choose to forward these issues to School or Faculty committees, or to the Deputy Director of the Doctoral College, instead of raising at DCB if more appropriate.

10. Student reps are entitled to receive training, resources and ongoing support

from UPSU’s Student Voice team; contact details will be shared with UPSU for this purpose. Student reps can also make use of 1:1 support and guidance to help them prepare for high level University committees such as DCB.

11. Student reps are full members of DCB and are welcome to speak and

comment on any matter under discussion. When decisions are to be taken, they have full voting rights. They will receive papers in advance of the meeting and are expected to read them and prepare as required.

2019 Edition

- 106 -

THESIS PRESENTATION

Except with the formal permission of the Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee, the thesis must be presented in English.

FORMAT Perfect/Temporary Binding Theses must be bound in a sufficiently secure way to guarantee that pages cannot be added or removed. This includes comb binding or perfect binding where all pages are glued together on the spine of the document. The University library offers a range of printing and binding services: https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/student-life/your-studies/library/library-printing-and-multimedia-services The University requires all theses, in their final form following examination, to be submitted as an electronic version of the thesis which will need to be uploaded in the University electronic repository. The award will not be given until the electronic copy of the thesis has been submitted to the University repository and the submission been approved by the Doctoral College and any outstanding academic debts to the University have been paid. Page Format

• Page size/type: A4 portrait; white or cream (70 to 100 g/m2) • Margins top/bottom: 20 mm • Page numbering: Arabic numerals located bottom centre, in

single sequence throughout, including pages that carry tables, figures, plates and appendices

• Chapter numbering: In sequence from start to finish of the thesis, not including Introduction and Conclusion

• Footnotes/endnotes: Single spaced • Printing: Double-sided (i.e. on both sides of the page)

Line Format • Justification: Left compulsory; right optional • Inside margin: 40 mm • Outside margin: 20 mm • Line length: 60 to 70 characters • Spacing: Text in double spacing; indented quotations in

single spacing The font throughout the main body of the text should be size 12. Other smaller fonts may be used in page numbering, footnotes, footers and headers. Alternative formats are possible but must be approved by their examiners. Students should discuss this with their Director of Studies in the first instance.

UoP PGR thesis presentation 2019 Edition

- 107 -

CONTENTS Sequence

• Copyright statement (see below) • Title page (see model that follows) • Acknowledgements • Signed author's declaration including word count (see model that

follows) • Abstract (including full name of candidate and title at the top) • List of contents with page numbers • List of tables, illustrations, etc. (if relevant) • Text, divided into chapters, sections, etc. • Bibliography/List of Sources • List of publications produced during period of study with DOIs (if

relevant) • Appendices (if relevant)

Copyright Statement The following statement should be placed on a single page on the first page of the thesis:

This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with its author and that no quotation from the thesis and no information derived from it may be published without the author's prior consent.

Acknowledgements This section normally includes acknowledgements of assistance including scholarships and grants, acknowledgements of assistance from supervisors and colleagues and thanks for support from friends, family, etc. Author's Signed Declaration A model declaration follows. The declaration page should be signed and dated by the candidate at the foot of the page and contain:

• a declaration that at no time during the registration for the research degree has the author been registered for any other University award, without prior agreement of the Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee,

• a declaration that no work submitted for a research degree at University of Plymouth may form part of any other degree for the candidate either at the University or at another establishment,

• details if the degree has been undertaken as part of an official agreement between University of Plymouth and another institution(s) (Joint or dual degree),

• if the study was part of a collaborative project then a clear indication of the individual contribution of the candidate and extent of collaboration,

UoP PGR thesis presentation 2019 Edition

- 108 -

• if the thesis has been proofread by a third party, confirming that a copy of the original thesis is available for inspection, and

• relevant aspects of research training undertaken such as courses completed, conferences attended, presentations of research and published or other forms of presentation of creative research work.

Abstract This should be approximately 300 words in length and should provide a synopsis of the thesis, stating the nature and scope of work undertaken and the contribution to knowledge in the subject. The abstract must be headed by:

• the candidate’s name in full (not initials), and • the title of thesis.

Illustrations Illustrations should appear near to the first reference made to them in the text. It may be desirable to group illustrations at the back of the thesis, as appendices, if they:

• need to be compared with one another, or • are referred to frequently in the text, or • need to be separate because of their size or character.

List of Illustrations

Every illustration in the thesis, including appendices and material that cannot be bound, should be included in the list of illustrations with page numbers or other identification. Legends and Labels

A short legend should be provided for each illustration detailing the title of the illustration and any other necessary information e.g. meaning of codes, size and source of item reproduced. Numbering

Illustrations should be numbered consecutively in a single sequence. Large Illustrations

If it is necessary to bind an illustration into the thesis which is greater than A4 in size, it should be produced on paper that can be folded to fit within the thesis or if too large, then it should be placed in a pocket attached to the inside back cover of the volume. Material that cannot be bound should be avoided if possible. Any such material that cannot be bound near to the related text should be:

• packaged in such a way that it can be bound with the thesis, or • stored in a pocket attached to the inside back cover, or • gathered into another volume and stored in a rigid container of the

same size as the bound thesis. Tables

UoP PGR thesis presentation 2019 Edition

- 109 -

If there are relatively few tables, each should appear near to the first reference made to them in the text. Each table should, if possible, appear complete on one page. It may be desirable to group tables at the back of the thesis, as appendices, if:

• they are referred to frequently in the text, or • there are many tables.

Number and Title

Each table should have a number and title. The number should precede the title and the title should describe the content of the table. Tables within the text should be numbered in a single sequence, separate from illustrations. Tables that are not the work of the author but that are reproduced in the thesis should be numbered and treated as illustrations. Tables in an appendix should have a separate sequence. If there is more than one sequence of tables, the different sequences should be identified. If a table occupies more than one page, its number should be given on each page, followed if necessary by 'continued'. The size of characters should be large enough to allow the table to be reproduced without risk to legibility. Numerical tables may require a larger character size than the main text. A series of tables should be consistent in character size, use of space, etc. Appendices Appendices may contain material of considerable length, lists, documents, commentaries, tables and other matters that if included in the thesis would interrupt the flow. The style should be consistent with the main text. If long appendices are divided into chapters these divisions should be detailed in the list of contents under the main heading of the appendix. Appendices should follow the main text of the thesis, possibly with a separate list of contents, particularly if the thesis is divided into more than one volume. Appendices may also take the form of CDs, DVDs, sketch/notebooks, etc. (in the case of creative/professional practice) and must be secured to the main body of the thesis. Appendices are not included in the thesis’s word count. Bibliography/List of Sources Full bibliographical references should be given for all works cited in the text and should follow one of the major accepted systems. A bibliography lists all works which have been read or consulted during the course of the research but will not necessarily be an exhaustive list of all material relevant to it. (Students whose bibliography includes non-textual sources may wish to call this a ‘List of Sources’ instead of Bibliography.) Alternatively (on the advice of one’s Director of Studies), a list of references (or ‘works cited’) may be included instead; this is likely to be the case only for PhDs on the Basis of Prior Published Works. Such a list is confined to only those sources mentioned in the thesis text.

UoP PGR thesis presentation 2019 Edition

- 110 -

The bibliography/list of sources does not count toward the thesis’s word length. Publications Students are encouraged to publish and/or present their research material in advance of the thesis submission (although this is not a requirement), thereby having some peer review of their work. In such a case, the thesis should include a list of publications with full publication details including their DOIs. If the thesis itself includes articles or other published written research outputs (e.g. as chapters or equivalent), it is only possible to include Open Access publications or ‘green’ final manuscript versions of articles or papers within theses for copyright reasons. Creative practice If the thesis includes creative practice, the nature and form of these elements and/or their representation must be approved by the examiners prior to submission. Hard Cover/Binding for Personal Use As noted above, the University does not require or accept bound hard copies of the final accepted version of the thesis. However, students may wish to produce this for themselves, their supervisors or their funders. If so, any final hardbound thesis should be such that the spine is flexible enough so that it can be opened fully for ease of reading. It should be fixed so that pages cannot be removed or replaced and the cover is rigid to support the weight of the pages when upright The wording on the spine of a permanent bound thesis should include

• surname and initials of the candidate, • qualification aim/achieved, • year of submission, and • volume of work if the work consists of more than one volume.

The wording on the front page/cover should include:

• title of the work, • surname and initials of the candidate, • qualification aim/achieved, and • year of submission.

UoP PGR thesis presentation 2019 Edition

- 111 -

MODEL DECLARATION

Author's Declaration

TO BE TAKEN AS AN EXAMPLE, AND AMENDED ACCORDING TO THE CANDIDATE’S REQUIREMENTS AND DETAILS

At no time during the registration for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy has the author been registered for any other University award without prior agreement of the Doctoral College Quality Sub-Committee. This thesis has been proofread by a third party; no factual changes or additions or amendments to the argument were made as a result of this process. A copy of the thesis prior to proofreading will be made available to the examiners upon request.

Work submitted for this research degree at the University of Plymouth has not formed part of any other degree either at the University of Plymouth or at another establishment. This research has been conducted under a formal agreement with name of other higher education institution(s), for which a joint award will be awarded. This study was financed with the aid of a studentship form the sponsor name and carried out in collaboration with collaborating institution. A programme of advanced study was undertaken, which included taught modules taken, other as relevant. The following external institutions were visited for research and consultation purposes: Publications (or public presentation of creative research outputs):

Presentations at conferences: Word count of main body of thesis: Signed Date

UoP PGR thesis presentation 2019 Edition

- 112 -

MODEL TITLE PAGE:

AN EVALUATION OF THE MEASUREMENTS OF PORT EFFICIENCY

by

SUSAN MARIE SMITH

A thesis submitted to the University of Plymouth in partial fulfilment for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences

[In collaboration with Rutland Port Authorities]

August 2020

UNIVERSITY OF PLYMOUTH DRAKE CIRCUS, PLYMOUTH PL4 8AA

Doctoral College December 2019