keele university code of practice on postgraduate research degrees

3.5 Regular progress monitoring
3.5.1 All Postgraduate Committees shall have procedures for the regular formal monitoring
<strong>of</strong> research students’ progress, to take place no less frequently than 6-monthly (in
Spring and Autumn). Postgraduate Committees may find it useful to specify in the RI
Handbooks the deadlines in the year for submission <strong>of</strong> progress reports.
a) Note that if doctoral progression for a student falls at the same time the RI is
not required also to conduct a progress review at that time
b) Students on leave <strong>of</strong> absence at the time the progress review is due should
have their Personal Development and Learning Plan reassessed on their
return to study, and then be reviewed at the next due date after their return.
3.5.2 Postgraduate Committees should devise two report forms for completion separately
by the Supervisor and student, to suit their own requirements. However, as a
minimum they should include the sections and questions set out in Annex B5.
3.5.3 It is the Lead Supervisor’s responsibility to ensure that Supervisor progress report
forms are completed and submitted to the Postgraduate Committee in a timely
manner.
All Supervisor progress reports will include a recommended grade <strong>of</strong> the student’s
progress in accordance with the scale set out in Annex B5. Any student who receives
an Unsatisfactory six-monthly progress report (grade E) is considered to be failing to
meet the requirements for maintaining good academic standing. If the subsequent
progress report is also unsatisfactory, then the student may be required to withdraw
from the University.
3.5.4 It is the student’s responsibility to ensure that Student progress report forms are
completed and submitted to the Postgraduate Committee in a timely manner,
together with the most up-to-date version <strong>of</strong> the Personal Development and Learning
Plan. Failure by the student to complete their progress report form or to keep their
Personal Development and Learning Plan up to date is likely to lead to the student
receiving a low grade.
3.5.5 Postgraduate Committees should consider together the reports from the Lead
Supervisor and the student, informed by the most up-to-date Personal Development
and Learning Plan, and determine an overall grade as well as any action required.
Students should be informed <strong>of</strong> the outcome <strong>of</strong> the progress review.
3.5.6 Postgraduate Committees are required to update the student record when students
have been reviewed. Where the Postgraduate Committee requires the University to
take any action, this should be notified separately in a memo from the Director <strong>of</strong>
Postgraduate Research to the Research Degrees Committee.
3.5.7 All recommendations from Postgraduate Committees that students be required to
withdraw for not remaining in good academic standing must be sent to the Research
Degrees Committee for approval.
3.6 Formal doctoral progression procedures (See Regulation 2D (6))
3.6.1 For intending doctoral candidates, all Postgraduate Committees shall have formal
procedures for determining a student’s suitability for doctoral study, normally no later
than 10 months’ full-time study (or equivalent for part-time). If appropriate this will
replace the normal 6-monthly progress review (see 3.5.1). At this stage, the
COP on PGR Degrees, November 2011 23