keele university code of practice on postgraduate research degrees

Annex B4: Doctoral progression procedures
Section 3.6 <strong>of</strong> the Code <strong>of</strong> Practice describes the formal doctoral progression procedures.
This Annex sets out the typical contents <strong>of</strong> the written report and the typical criteria for
satisfactory progress and continuation to PhD study as well as the constitution <strong>of</strong> the panel
which should consider each student’s case. Research Institutes may modify these to meet
the particular needs <strong>of</strong> their disciplines provided details are clearly set out in Research
Institute Handbooks.
Report – Typically the report (up to 5,000 words) will include the following (as appropriate)
and should be accompanied by an updated copy <strong>of</strong> the Personal Development and Learning
Plan:
• Literature review summary and/or update
• Background and rationale for proposed research
• Research methods to be used
• Acquisition <strong>of</strong> skills and techniques
• Report on preliminary studies
• Research plan for the next year.
Ethics - All research involving human participants, their tissues, or personal information must
be approved by a recognised research ethics committee before the research can commence.
This includes social science research (e.g. fieldwork-based, interview and questionnaire
studies). For more information about how to obtain the appropriate ethical approval for your
research please access http://www.<strong>keele</strong>.ac.uk/researchsupport/researchethics/
Criteria – Criteria for satisfactory progress and continuation to PhD study typically include:
• Demonstrated progress in developing the intellectual and cognitive skills
necessary for the satisfactory completion <strong>of</strong> a doctoral thesis
• Thorough literature review and demonstrated understanding <strong>of</strong> the context <strong>of</strong>
the research
• Clearly identified research question or topic
• Appropriate research plan and methodologies
• Acquisition <strong>of</strong> necessary skills and competences to carry out the research
plan
• Demonstrated an ability to set and keep to realistic deadlines for the
production <strong>of</strong> work
• Approval, where required, by one <strong>of</strong> the University’s Ethical Review Panels
(or by a recognised external committee, such as an NHS-REC). Where
approval has not yet been granted, a satisfactory explanation <strong>of</strong> either why
approval is not required or what plans are in place for obtaining it must be
provided.
No student may pass doctoral progression unless and until he or she has fulfilled the relevant
research training requirements as set out in COP section 2.2.
Panel – The composition <strong>of</strong> the doctoral progression panel should be given in the RI
Handbook. When determining the composition, RIs should consider the following:
• The Chair should be a member <strong>of</strong> staff experienced in postgraduate research
education – there may be some value in consistency and some RIs may wish
to have the Director <strong>of</strong> Postgraduate Research
The panel may not include members <strong>of</strong> the supervisory team, but they could be present as
observers and only with agreement <strong>of</strong> the student and other panel members.
COP on PGR Degrees, November 2011 49