keele university code of practice on postgraduate research degrees

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• Electronic publications may be submitted but only with evidence that they will be publicly available for the foreseeable future in the current form and that they are <strong>of</strong> the appropriate quality for submission. Web links for the journal publishing the paper should be included in the critical commentary to ensure copyright requirements are covered • The number <strong>of</strong> publications will depend on the academic discipline and type <strong>of</strong> publication, but the submission should normally comprise at least ten publications. 5.3 The critical commentary, which must be submitted with the publications should demonstrate the coherence <strong>of</strong> and rationale for the submitted work. It should be no longer than 10,000 words excluding the submitted works. As a minimum it should contain the following: • Autobiographical context for the portfolio <strong>of</strong> evidence • Chronological description <strong>of</strong> the submission and the development <strong>of</strong> the work • An evaluative description <strong>of</strong> the originality <strong>of</strong> each output • Demonstration <strong>of</strong> the original and independent contribution to knowledge and a rationale to prove that the work submitted equates to PhD standard • A critical review <strong>of</strong> the overall contribution to the research area which has been made by the body <strong>of</strong> work submitted for examination. This could include any published reviews <strong>of</strong> the submitted work • A critical reflection on the candidate’s development as a researcher • Conclusions and suggestions for future work. 5.4 The contents <strong>of</strong> the submission must be in the English language unless specific permission to the contrary has been granted by Research Degrees Committee. 5.5 The submission must be accompanied by the relevant examination fee (available on the Graduate School web site). The copies should be bound in comb binding where possible. 6 Examination 6.1 The examiners will examine the work submitted; write independent reports following the guidance in the Code <strong>of</strong> Practice, and a further joint report agreeing their recommendation to Research Degrees Committee. They will make a recommendation to Research Degrees Committee who, after consideration, shall make a recommendation to Senate. 6.2 An oral examination is required for all submissions. 6.3 Arrangements for the oral examination are made in the same was for a PhD by supervision. 6.4 Recommendations available to examiners <strong>of</strong> research degrees are: 1. the student be awarded the degree for which he/she has made a submission; or 2. the student be awarded the degree for which he/she has made a submission once revisions to the critical commentary have been made to the satisfaction <strong>of</strong> the examiner(s); or 6. the student should be not awarded any degree nor be permitted to re-present the thesis, nor submit to any further examination. 7. the examiners are unable to come to a joint recommendation and an additional examiner or examiners should be appointed whose decision shall resolve the matter. COP on PGR Degrees, November 2011 72
6.5 Research Degrees Committee will communicate the outcome <strong>of</strong> the examination process to the candidate and any subsequent instructions prior to approval at Senate. 7 Appeals 7.1 Appeals can only be made following the outcome <strong>of</strong> the award and will follow the procedures laid out in Regulation 7. 8 Academic Misconduct 8.1 Any allegation <strong>of</strong> academic misconduct shall be dealt with in accordance with the following procedures. Academic misconduct is most likely to be, but is not exclusively, collusion, where a piece <strong>of</strong> work is prepared by more than one student, including work deriving from a piece <strong>of</strong> authorised collaborative group-work, and is presented in whole or in part for assessment as if it were the student’s own work. 8.2 Any such investigation shall be carried out by a panel consisting <strong>of</strong> a senior member <strong>of</strong> the academic staff nominated by the Vice-Chancellor as chair, the Dean or his/her nominee from the Faculty in which the alleged <strong>of</strong>fence has taken place and one other Dean or his/her nominee. If the alleged <strong>of</strong>fence has taken place in the Dean's department, then the Dean shall nominate a senior member <strong>of</strong> the academic staff from another department in that Faculty to act on his/her behalf. COP on PGR Degrees, November 2011 73
Page 1 and 2:
KEELE UNIVERSITY CODE OF PRACTICE O
Page 3 and 4:
ANNEXES............................
Page 5 and 6:
KEELE UNIVERSITY CODE OF PRACTICE O
Page 7 and 8:
institutional framework. The Resear
Page 9 and 10:
1.4.7 Postgraduate Committees are r
Page 11 and 12:
Supervisor lacks supervisory experi
Page 13 and 14:
SECTION 2 RESOURCES AND SUPPORT •
Page 15 and 16:
Students may take additional Resear
Page 17 and 18:
SECTION 3 MANAGING AND MONITORING S
Page 19 and 20:
3.1.11 Fees for research degree stu
Page 21 and 22: informed of the ou
Page 23 and 24: 3.5 Regular progress monitoring 3.5
Page 25 and 26: ) that the 30 month review has been
Page 27 and 28: SECTION 4 EXAMINATIONS AND APPEALS
Page 29 and 30: 4.2.10 The candidate will have the
Page 31 and 32: 4.5 Resubmission 4.5.1 If the stude
Page 33 and 34: SECTION 5 QUALITY ASSURANCE • Cri
Page 35 and 36: SECTION 6 STUDENT LIAISON, FEEDBACK
Page 37 and 38: ANNEXES Annex A1: University criter
Page 39 and 40: Candidates for the degree o
Page 41 and 42: Annex A2: Recommendations available
Page 43 and 44: examiners to recommend that the stu
Page 45 and 46: Leave of absence
Page 47 and 48: Annex B2: Format for research insti
Page 49 and 50: Annex B4: Doctoral progression proc
Page 51 and 52: Student’s report on progress [not
Page 53 and 54: 7 Research Institutes will raise an
Page 55 and 56: 5 All examiners, when confirming th
Page 57 and 58: Preparing for the oral examination
Page 59 and 60: Annex B9: Format for examiners’ r
Page 61 and 62: Annex B10: Terms and conditions for
Page 63 and 64: hours, meetings and other teaching-
Page 65 and 66: Annex B11: Ownership and management
Page 67 and 68: 2 Supervision Services 2.1 The cond
Page 69 and 70: SCHEDULE TO AGREEMENT FOR SUPERVISI
Page 71: Research Degrees Committee may take
Page 75 and 76: 3.4 The approved title will be conf
Page 77 and 78: Annex B15: Joint PhD Programmes wit
Page 79 and 80: Annex C - All forms available at th
Page 81 and 82: 8 Plagiarism in student writing is
Page 83 and 84: Regulatory framework 19 Ordinance I
Page 85 and 86: Annex D3: Roles and responsibilitie
Page 87 and 88: supervisor will of
Page 89 and 90: Literature search and referencing 5
Page 91 and 92: Pages Footnotes Single sided only.
Page 93 and 94: provided by the Student Union Print
Page 95 and 96: As a result, your research is more
Page 97 and 98: examined and awarded version <stron
Page 99 and 100: Annex D5: Joint Statement o
Page 101: G) Career Management - to be able t
show all

keele university code of practice on postgraduate research degrees

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?