R3.60 - Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

View/Print PDF (35 KB)

1. (1) A person who-
   
   1. is a graduate of or qualified to graduate in-
      
      1. the University; or
      2. some other university or institution recognized for the purpose of this regulation by the Board; and
   2. is of such standing as the Board prescribes;

   may apply to be a probationary candidate for the degree of doctor of Philosophy by submitting-

   3. a proposed course of advanced study and research to be undertaken by the applicant under the direction of a department of the University; and
   4. such other information as the Board prescribes.

(2) A person who is not eligible to apply under section 1(1) may apply to be a probationary candidate for the degree of doctor of Philosophy by-

1. submitting a proposed course of advanced study and research to be undertaken by the applicant under the direction of a department of the University;
2. submitting such other information as the Board prescribes; and
3. satisfying the Board that the applicant had such training and has such ability that the applicant's qualification to pursue the course proposed is substantially equivalent to that of a person who is eligible to apply under section 1(1).
2. (1) An applicant for probationary candidature may be admitted to probationary candidature if-
   
   1. the applicant is accepted by the Board on the recommendation of the head of the appropriate department and the dean of the appropriate faculty; and
   2. not being a graduate of the University, the applicant becomes a student of the University.

   (2) A probationary candidate must be engaged in full-time research for the duration of the probationary candidature unless the Board approves a course of study comprising coursework subjects and the preparation of a thesis proposal.

3. (1) Subject to section 2(2) and to section 6, the whole of a probationary candidate's time must be devoted to research for twelve months from a commencing date fixed by the Board-
   
   1. under the direction of such department of the University, and under such supervision as the Board designates; and
   2. subject to the prescriptions of the Board made either generally or specially in the candidate's case.

   (2) On the expiration of nine months after the commencing date-

   1. the school of Graduate Studies (‘the school’) must request the department to convene a confirmation committee comprising three or more members including the supervisor or supervisors of the candidate and such other members as are deemed appropriate on the advice of the head of department (‘the head’) in which the student is enrolled, the chairperson of which is to be nominated by the head; and
   2. within three months the confirmation committee must provide a written report to the school on the probationary candidate's progress and make a recommendation that-
      
      1. the candidature be confirmed, or
      2. the candidature be terminated, or
      3. probationary candidature may be extended for a maximum period of three months when the option of confirmation or termination will be re-considered.

   (3) When a probationary candidate applies for confirmation of candidature the Board-

   1. must consider-
      
      1. the written application made by the probationary candidate;
      2. the report of the supervisor and the head of the designated department; and
      3. any other written submissions made by the candidate in support of the application; and
      4. the satisfactory completion by the candidate of any advanced seminars, course work or other activities prescribed by the Board under section 3(1)(b); and
   2. may confirm the candidature.

   (4) Subject to section 14 of this regulation, if no application for confirmation of candidature is made in due time, or, if application is made and the Board does not confirm the candidature, the probationary candidature lapses at the expiration of twelve months after the commencing date.

(5) If the Board confirms the candidature the candidate must, subject to section 3(6), further pursue the course of advanced study and research in accordance with section 3(1) for a further period designated by the Board being not less than twenty-four months from the anniversary of the commencing date.

(6) Notwithstanding section 3(1) and (2), a candidate who has made exceptional progress in the completion of the thesis may apply to the Board to fix a total period of probationary and confirmed candidature (‘the total period of candidature’) of less than thirty-six months but no candidature is to be reduced to less than twelve months. Where the Board has approved a course in which the first year of candidature is to comprise coursework and the preparation of a thesis proposal, it must not reduce the total period of candidature to less than twenty-four months.

(7) Where a candidate fails to comply with any prescription made pursuant to section 3(1)(b) hereof, either generally or specially in relation to that candidate, the Board, after giving the candidate concerned an opportunity to be heard, may-

1. make such changes in the conditions of the candidature, including variation of the candidature from full-time to part-time pursuant to section 6, as it thinks fit;
2. suspend the candidature for such period as it deems appropriate; or
3. terminate the candidature.

(8) At any meeting of the Board for the purposes of section 3(7) five members of the Board, not including the examiner or supervisor of the candidate, constitute a quorum. The examiner or supervisor of the candidate, if present, must not vote.

4. (1) The total period of candidature must not exceed-
   
   1. where the period of candidature has not been reduced pursuant to section 3(6), thirty-six months;
   2. where the period of candidature has been reduced under section 3(6) the period of candidature is the reduced period.

   (2) Notwithstanding section 4(1), where circumstances warrant it, the Board may extend the total period of candidature beyond the maximum thirty-six months by up to two further periods each of six months duration. The total period of candidature may not exceed forty-eight months unless the Board is satisfied that special circumstances have so impeded the candidate in the course that a further extension is justified and, where candidature is permitted to exceed forty-eight months, the Board must set a limit beyond which no further application for extension is permitted.

(3) The Board may exercise the power conferred by this section before or after the expiration of any period of confirmed candidature.

5. (1) During the total period of candidature a candidate must devote at least twelve consecutive months of candidature to research in the University.

(2) In exceptional circumstances the Board may approve for the purposes of section 5(1) non-consecutive periods which in the aggregate amount to at least twelve months, and a candidate who devotes that aggregate period to research in the University is deemed to have complied with section 5(1).

(3) Where a candidate is unable to comply with a requirement set out in either section 5(1) or (2) the Board may, in special cases, and the candidate is able to maintain a substantial association with the University, exempt the candidate from such requirement.

6. (1) A person including a full-time candidate may be accepted by the Board as a part-time candidate if the Board is satisfied that any occupation in which that person is engaged leaves that person substantially free to pursue the course under the direction of a department of the University.

(2) A part-time candidate may apply to the Board to become a full-time candidate and the Board may permit the candidate so to do on such terms and conditions as it sees fit consistent with the purposes of the provisions of this regulation relating to full-time candidates.

(3) In the application of section 3 in relation to a part-time candidate-

1. in sections 3(1) and 3(4) the expression ‘twenty-four months’ is substituted for the expression ‘twelve months’;
2. in section 3(2) the expression ‘twenty-one months’ is substituted for the expression ‘nine months’;
3. in section 3(5) the expression ‘forty-eight months’ is substituted for the expression ‘twenty-four months’;
4. in section 3(6) the expression ‘seventy-two months’ is substituted for the expression ‘thirty-six months’; and
5. in section 3(6) the expression ‘seventy-two months’ is substituted for the expression ‘thirty-six months’ and the expression ‘twenty-four months’ shall be substituted for the expression ‘twelve months’.

(4) In the application of section 4(1) in relation to a part-time candidate the expression ‘ninety-six’ is substituted for the expression ‘forty-eight’ wherever it occurs.

(5) In the application of section 5 in relation to a part-time candidate the expression ‘twenty-four’ is substituted for the expression ‘twelve’.

(6) In the application of section 7(2) paragraph (a) in relation to a part-time candidate the expression ‘seventy-one’ is substituted for the expression ‘thirty-five’.

7. (1) Each candidate must, subject to Statute 12.5 and the provisions of this section, present for examination a thesis¹, in such a form as the Board may from time to time prescribe. A candidate must also present a Doctor of Philosophy Completion Seminar of their research findings in the form prescribed by the Board which –
   
   1. is held in the department prior to submission of the thesis;
   2. presents the objectives, methods, findings and significance of the candidate’s doctor of Philosophy research.

   (2) A candidate may present a thesis for the degree of doctor of Philosophy-

   1. subject to section 3(6) not earlier than the expiration of thirty-five months of the total period of candidature; and
   2. subject to section 7(14) not later than the expiration of any total period of candidature including any period for which it was extended.

(3) A candidate must present in the form prescribed by the Board such summaries of the thesis as the Board prescribes.

(4) A candidate must state, where relevant, in a preface to the thesis:

1. work carried out in collaboration indicating the nature and proportion of the contribution of others and in general terms the proportions of the work which the candidate claims as original;
2. work submitted for other qualifications;
3. work carried out prior to PhD candidature enrolment;
4. any third party editorial assistance, either paid or voluntary; and
5. where a substantially unchanged multi-author paper is included in the thesis, the contributions of all involved (a statement to that effect signed by all authors must be included with the submission form).

(5) A candidate must state in the thesis the sources from which the candidate’s information is derived.

(6) A candidate may not present as the candidate's thesis any work for which a degree, diploma or licence or similar distinction has been conferred on or granted to the candidate in this or another University or tertiary educational institution but the candidate is not precluded from incorporating such work in whole or in part in the thesis if-

1. the candidate has been granted, on the recommendation of the head of the designated department, permission by the Board so to do; and
2. the candidate indicates in the preface to the thesis the part of the previous work which has been so incorporated

(7) (i) There is a panel of two examiners, both of whom are external to the University. Both examiners may not be from within Victoria or the same institution. Examiners must be, or have been within the five years previous to their appointment, actively associated with-

1. a university
2. an institution of higher learning, or
3. a research institution
   
   approved for the purpose by the Board.

(ii) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (i), where a department wishes an examiner to be appointed who does not qualify under any of the criteria specified in that section 7(7) it must submit a written request containing a statement of reasons in support of the request, together with a curriculum vitae of the person being nominated as an examiner, for approval by a meeting of the school of Graduate Studies.

(8) The head of the designated department, not being an examiner or the supervisor of the candidate, acts as chairperson of the panel.

(9) The supervisor of the candidate is not to be appointed as an examiner or as chairperson of the panel.

(10) If the head of the designated department is an examiner or the supervisor of the candidate, the Board must appoint a member of the full-time teaching or research staff of the University to act as chairperson of the panel.

(11) The chairperson of the panel does not have a vote.

(12) A third examiner appointed pursuant to Statute 12.5 must be external to the University.

(13) If a second and final examination of a candidate's thesis is required, the examiners appointed for this purpose are to be the persons who previously served as examiners for the first examination, unless the Board determines otherwise.

(14) Subject to section 3(6) a candidate may apply to the Board for permission to present a thesis at a time outside the period provided in section 7(2)(a) and (b) and the Board may, after consulting with the head of the designated department, permit the candidate to present a thesis within a period to be determined by it which is not permitted to exceed twenty-four months after the expiration of candidature except in exceptional circumstances.

(15) For the purposes of Statute 12.5 the thesis must be written in English unless the Board otherwise determines.

8. A candidate whose thesis has been judged to be satisfactory by the examiners and who has fulfilled the prescribed conditions may be admitted to the degree of doctor of Philosophy.
9. (1) Where a thesis has been judged unsatisfactory by the examiners but the examiners have recommended that the candidate (whether full-time or part-time) be given an opportunity to re-submit the thesis for re-assessment, the Board may, notwithstanding section 4(1), upon application to the Board extend the candidate's total period of candidature for a period immediately ensuing and not exceeding twelve months and thereupon the candidate is required to re-submit the thesis for a second examination within the period for which the total period of candidature is so extended.
   
   (2) Notwithstanding section 9(1), if the head of the designated department certifies that exceptional circumstances-
   
   1. are likely to delay the candidate in preparing the thesis for re-submission; or
   2. have prevented the candidate from so preparing the thesis;

   and that it would be unjust to the candidate, having regard to the efforts made by the candidate to prepare the thesis, to limit the total period of candidature to the period referred to in section 9(1) the Board may further extend the total period of candidature beyond the period referred to in section 9(1).

(3) Where a candidate fails to re-submit a thesis by the expiration of the period of additional time allowed pursuant to sub-sections (1) or (2) hereof his or her candidature is deemed to have then terminated.

10. In the computation of periods of candidature under this regulation, the only period which is not to be counted is be any period for which a candidate was granted leave of absence from his or her course.
11. (1) The Board may on the recommendation of the head of the designated department-
    
    1. require a candidate as part of the course to attend such lectures, seminars and practical work as the Board determines; or
    2. subject to section 5 grant permission for the candidate to be absent from the University for such periods greater than three months but not exceeding twelve months in any one instance as the Board determines if the head of the designated department recommends that it is essential for the candidate's advanced study and research and the Board is satisfied that supervision of the candidate's work satisfactory to it can be maintained; or
    3. permit a candidate to pursue research in an institution which is affiliated to the University or may permit a candidate to pursue research in another institution where no such affiliation exists, provided the school of Graduate Studies supports the recommendation of the head of the designated department and satisfies the Board that the academic environment and facilities of the unaffiliated institution are comparable with those found in a department of the University; or
    4. in special circumstances grant to a candidate leave of absence from the course in periods of whole months. In cases where the Board has approved a course of study comprising coursework subjects and the preparation of a thesis proposal, any period of leave granted to a candidate during the undertaking of such a course of study must be limited so as to ensure that the candidate is able to complete the course of study in the minimum time; or
    5. require a candidate, as part of the course, to submit for assessment a dissertation together with a corpus of creative work or performance as an integrated whole.

    (2) The head of the designated department may, subject to section 5, grant permission for a candidate to be absent from the University for periods of up to three months without reference to the Board if the head is satisfied that it is essential for the candidate's advanced study and research and that satisfactory supervision of the candidate's work can be maintained.

12. In this regulation-
    
    1. ‘department of the University’ means any department within the meaning of Statute 6.1 and any other institution which Council may determine to be a department for the purposes of this regulation; and
    2. ‘head’ in relation to a department which is not within Statute 6.1 means the person designated by Council as the head of that department for the purposes of this regulation.
13. Nothing in this regulation precludes the appointment of a head of a department as supervisor.
14. (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this regulation where a late application for probationary candidature, confirmed candidature or an extension of confirmed candidature is received by the academic registrar, the Board may ante-date the commencing date of probationary candidature, of confirmed candidature or of an extension of a confirmed candidature (as the case may be) so that the applicant is not adversely affected by the delay but the ante-dating must not exceed two months prior to the date of the receipt by the academic registrar of the application unless the Academic Board is satisfied that the delay was not caused by any omission of the candidate.
    
    (2) Where the Board permits a candidate to convert his or her candidature for a degree of master or M.D. to probationary candidature under this regulation, or to transfer from doctor of Philosophy. candidature at another recognised institution, it may ante-date the commencement of such probationary candidature by the number of months it determines appropriate or it may deem the probationary candidature to have commenced on the date that candidature for the masters degree, M.D. or doctor of Philosophy commenced.
15. The Board must prescribe the time within which-
    
    1. application for confirmation of candidature may be made by-
       
       1. full-time probationary candidates; and
       2. part-time probationary candidates;
    2. such application is to be considered by the Board; and
    3. application may be made under section 9 for an extension of confirmed candidature in order to re-submit a thesis.
16. A candidate for the degree of doctor of Philosophy who was enrolled as such before the coming into operation of this regulation and who qualifies in accordance with the regulations in force on the 31 December 1976 may be admitted to the degree of doctor of Philosophy.

1 Three copies must be submitted (see Statute 12.5)

Procedures For The Examination of Phd Theses Pursuant To Regulation R3.60 And Statute 12.5 As Prescribed By The Academic Board

View/Print PDF (38 KB)

Prescriptions of the Academic Board pursuant to Regulation R3.60 governing the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

In reading these prescriptions it should be borne in mind that under Statute 5.1.6 each faculty shall advise the Academic Board on all matters pertaining to the studies within its scope. If a faculty considers it necessary to do so it may send advice to the Academic Board concerning the standards it would wish to be applied for the acceptance of applicants whose studies as candidates for the degree would be undertaken in a discipline in which the degrees or diplomas pertaining to the faculty are granted and may instruct the heads of its departments accordingly.

1. The standing prescribed by the Academic Board in respect of a graduate or a person qualified to graduate who applies for probationary candidature for Doctor of Philosophy is as follows-
   
   1. a degree of bachelor in this or any other University or institution approved for this purpose by the Academic Board (whether obtained as a full-time or part-time candidate) following a course approved for this purpose by the Academic Board which required students to undertake full time study for at least four academic years in which an overall level of honours or its equivalent was attained in the last year of the course or over the aggregate period of the course; or
   2. a degree of bachelor in this or any other University or institution approved for this purpose by the Academic Board which required study for at least three academic years (full-time equivalent), together with a fourth year or more of study (full-time equivalent) in a University or institution where the Academic Board is satisfied that both courses considered together entailed work of a standard at least equivalent to that required for the degree of bachelor with honours in this University referred to in paragraph 1(a); or
   3. the degree of master in this or any other University or institution approved for this purpose by the Academic Board where the Academic Board is satisfied that the course for the degree of master (and earlier courses together) entailed work of a standard at least equivalent to that required for a degree of bachelor in this University referred to in paragraph 1(a); or
   4. the degree of doctor earned in this or any other University or other institution approved for this purpose by the Academic Board.
   5. other criteria including knowledge of the discipline and evidence of research ability as approved for this purpose by the Academic Board.
2. The Academic Board may, under exceptional circumstances, accept as a candidate a person who does not have the standing prescribed in paragraph 1 if it is satisfied that that person’s experience in research and the results of that experience are so outstanding as to indicate that that person is likely to have the ability to pursue the course successfully.
3. Applicants for probationary candidature under R3.60.1(1) will be required to supply the following information-
   
   1. Present and recent occupations (with dates);
   2. Details of academic standing (graduates of other universities or institutions must provide certificates and official transcripts of academic records);
   3. Professional, technical and other qualifications held;
   4. Details of the proposed course;
   5. Details of previous training;
   6. Details of other commitments whilst a candidate.

   Applicants for probationary candidature under R3.60.1(2) will be required to supply the following information-

   1. Present and recent occupations (with dates);
   2. Professional, technical and other qualifications held;
   3. Letters of reference from supervisors of research work undertaken previously;
   4. Details of the proposed course;
   5. Details of previous training;
   6. Details of other commitments whilst a candidate.
4. When recommending to the Academic Board the acceptance of an applicant for probationary candidature the head of the appropriate department must-
   
   1. state whether adequate facilities and supervision will be available to the candidate during the period of probationary candidature, and of any confirmed candidature to which the candidate may be subsequently admitted;
   2. state whether the candidate will be free to pursue assiduously the course of study the candidate proposes during the period of probationary candidature and any period of confirmed candidature to which the candidate may be subsequently admitted;
   3. state whether the course of advanced study and research proposed by the applicant is appropriate having regard to the standard of work required for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of this University;
   4. state the means by which the candidate will satisfy the residency requirement
      referred to in R3.60.5;
   5. nominate a proposed supervisor and state the number of research students currently under the supervision of the nominated supervisor, exclusive of the applicant; and
   6. state whether there are any other matters, and if so, what matters, relevant to the Academic Board’s consideration of the application.
5. When accepting responsibility for supervision of a prospective candidate, the supervisor shall report to the RHD Committee on the feasibility and methodology of the candidate’s proposed research topic.
6. When reporting on a probationary candidate who has applied for confirmed candidature, the supervisor and the head of the designated department must state-
   
   1. whether the candidate has demonstrated assiduous application to the course;
   2. whether the candidate has shown initiative consistent with the requirements of the course;
   3. whether the candidate has made satisfactory progress at a level of achievement appropriate to the course;
   4. whether the candidate, if working at the pace of the candidate’s probationary year of the course, in the opinion of the head and supervisor is likely to complete the requirements of the course during the minimum period of confirmed candidature;
   5. whether adequate facilities have been, and will continue to be, made available to the candidate;
   6. the estimated date of presentation of the thesis; and
   7. whether there are any matters, and if so, what matters, relevant to the Academic Board’s consideration of the application.
7. In a case where the Academic Board approves a course of study which includes or consists of a substantial number of coursework subjects in the first year, the candidate will proceed to confirmed candidature only after satisfactorily completing the approved coursework subjects and preparing a satisfactory thesis proposal. This will be reported by the head of department when recommending the candidate for confirmed candidature.
8. When reporting on a candidate’s application for an extension of the total period of candidature, the supervisor and the head of the designated department will state-
   
   1. whether the candidate has assiduously applied himself or herself to the course;
   2. whether the candidate has made satisfactory progress and achieved a level of scholarly development commensurate with and appropriate to persons who are normally awarded the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of this University;
   3. whether in the view of the head of the designated department and the supervisor the candidate is likely to complete the course within the extended period of candidature if the application were granted;
   4. details of mitigating circumstances that will prevent the candidate from submitting the thesis for examination by the end of the existing period of candidature;
   5. why the candidature should not be allowed to lapse with the option of later reinstatement for examination of the thesis only under R3.60.7(14); and
   6. whether there are any other matters, and if so, what matters, relevant to the Academic Board’s consideration of the application.
9. (a) All PhD candidates are normally required to complete the equivalent of at least 12 months full time (24 months part-time) advanced study and research in the University;
   
   (b) Residency is defined as a period during which the candidate is available to make systematic use of the facilities provided by the University as required. These facilities include not only supervision and physical resources, but also such formal research training as may be required;

(c) Under certain circumstances permission will be given to fulfil the residency requirements by means of two or more short periods of residency totalling into 12 months full-time (or 24 months part-time). Time spent on approved fieldwork or other off-campus studies for a period of less than three months may be approved by the RHD Committee as part of the minimum period of residency. Application for non-consecutive periods of residency must be made to the RHD Committee.

(d) In exceptional circumstances, and where an applicant already has a proven professional background in the area of research, application may be made to meet the equivalence of the residency requirement. The application must include a statement of capabilities of applicant, details of proven research skills and professional background and a commitment to attend the University for face-to-face meetings with the supervisor and meet other expectations as identified at least at commencement, at 6 months, at 12 months and annually thereafter.

(e) All candidates should remain in residence throughout the calendar year except for approved periods of annual leave, leave of absence, or study away from the University.

10. In cases where the Academic Board has approved a course of study which includes the completion of a substantial number of coursework subjects in the first year (for a full-time candidate) the candidate will normally be allowed to undertake no more than 9 hours per week of approved coursework on average in the first year.
11. A PhD program at the University of Melbourne is a demanding undertaking requiring performance to the full extent of the candidate's ability. It is therefore expected to be a full-time commitment unless enrolment is part-time. In some instances, the candidate, in consultation with their supervisor and head of department might determine that additional coursework subjects will assist in their PhD research program. Application should be made on the ‘Additional coursework subjects’ form in these cases.
    
    Professional development is considered an integral part of the PhD training program, and might include tutoring or demonstrating. The University of Melbourne does not stipulate the maximum hours to be worked but recommends, as a guide, that more than 6 hours per week across the year, during normal working hours, would be undesirable. Where sessional teaching is undertaken, it should be understood that the initial tutorial will include two hours of preparation and marking. Repeat tutorials involve one additional hour.
    
    No other commitments should impact on the time commitment to the PhD program. It is the responsibility of the supervisor, head of department and student to ensure that paid work will not jeopardise the completion of the course of study in the time allowed.
12. (a) A full-time member of the academic staff of the University who is otherwise acceptable will be eligible to be enrolled as a part-time rather than full-time candidate.
    
    (b) Any other person must not be or remain a part-time candidate unless the Academic Board is satisfied at the commencement of each year of the candidature that the candidate will have adequate time to carry out research for the degree and to interact satisfactorily with supervisor and department.
13. Subject to the recommendation of the head of the designated department, time spent by a candidate defining the scope of the candidate’s proposed research and the investigation of source materials may be regarded as part of the course and the probationary candidature may be ante-dated accordingly. Applications for probationary candidature will not be ante-dated more than two months from the date of receipt of the completed application form by the Academic Registrar, except (at the discretion of the RHD Committee) where the candidate is converting from a Master’s or M.D. degree at this University or transferring candidature from another university, or where any delay in forwarding the application to the Academic Registrar was not caused by any omission of the candidate.
14. (a) A grant of leave, an approval for conversion from full-time to part-time candidature, or vice versa, or other change of status of the candidate will be ante-dated not more than two months from the date of receipt of the application by the Academic Registrar.
    
    (b) Leave of absence may be granted by the RHD Committee for sickness, family or carer responsibilities or other reasons which prevent the candidate carrying out research, up to a maximum of 12 months at a time. Applications for a second consecutive period of 12 months leave of absence should be particularly well documented. Leave of absence beyond an aggregate of 24 months will not normally be approved. Any period of leave of absence will not be counted in the computation of candidature.
    
    (c) Students may be granted maternity leave for a period up to 12 months. This leave should be arranged in advance with a doctor’s certificate attached to a leave form. Maternity leave is a separate entitlement to other requests for leave of absence and will not diminish the entitlement or compromise a student’s application for other leave.
    
    

    (d) Students may be granted jury leave for a period up to 12 months. This leave should be arranged in advance with a copy of the notice from the Juries Commissioner’s Office. Jury leave is a separate entitlement to other requests for leave of absence and will not diminish the entitlement or compromise a student’s application for other leave.  

15. Supervisors will be-
    
    1. full-time or fractional full-time members of the academic staff of the University who have appropriate research experience and a continuing active participation in research; or
    2. professors appointed pursuant to Regulation 7.1.R2; or
    3. professorial fellows appointed pursuant to section 2 of Regulation 7.1.R3; or
    4. such fellows appointed pursuant to Regulation 7.1.R3 as may be approved as supervisors by the Academic Board on the recommendation of the RHD Committee (See Regulation 7.1.R3).

If it considers it appropriate, the Academic Board may, in addition, designate one or more qualified persons as associate supervisors. A candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy may not be a supervisor of any other candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

All candidates must have an advisory committee, the chair of which must not be a supervisor of the candidate.

16. Where the Academic Board has approved a course of study which includes coursework subject, the details of all such subjects must be submitted to the RHD Committee for approval. At least 50% of the higher degree subjects must be at masters level or above and no subjects less than a 300 level will be included in the course of study.
17. Except where the Academic Board otherwise determines a thesis submitted for the degree must-
    
    1. not exceed in length 100,000 words exclusive of tables, maps, bibliographies and appendices. In the case of creative arts disciplines, an equivalent word count for the corpus of creative works or performance is included;
    2. be accompanied by a declaration by the candidate that the thesis does not exceed in length 100,000 words exclusive of tables, maps, bibliographies and appendices; and
    3. include an abstract of 300 - 500 words in English. In the case of creative arts, the abstract must include a description in the form and presentation of creative work. In the case of students enrolled in PhD Music Composition and where a dissertation constitutes the second component of the degree, a separate abstract of 300-500 words is required.
18. (a) The nomination of examiners must be countersigned by the supervisor, with comments if the supervisor so wishes, and any dispute about the appointment of examiners must be referred to the RHD Committee.
    
    (b) Where there is a question of failure or of deferring a result the Chairperson of Examiners will consult with the supervisor concerning questions raised by the examiners, with a view to facilitating communication between the examiners, and if the supervisor so wishes may make a written report, the supervisor being the person acting as supervisor at the time of the submission of the thesis.
19. The result of the second examination of any thesis will be final.
20. (a) An application for confirmation of candidature must be made between 6 and 12 months after the commencing date of the candidature in the case of a full-time candidate and between 12 and 24 months after the commencing date of the candidature in the case of a part-time candidate;
    
    (b) The Academic Board will consider an application for confirmation of candidature before the expiration of 6 months from the commencing date of the candidature in the case of a full-time candidate, and before the expiration of 12 months in the case of a part-time candidate;
    
    (c) An application under Regulation R3.60.9 for an extension of candidature in order to re-submit a thesis must be made within two months of the date of the despatch by the Academic Registrar to the candidate of the result of the first examination. If a candidate fails to re-submit the thesis within the total period of extended candidature, the candidature will terminate, and the candidate will not be permitted to re-submit a thesis unless the candidature is reinstated by the Academic Board within a period of 12 months from the date of termination.
    
    (d) Where the candidate is not reinstated, the result of the examination will be returned as a fail.
21. Should the Confirmation Committee of a probationary candidate recommend against confirmation of candidature, the candidate will be so informed and may, in accordance with timelines set out in Statute 11.5, make oral and written representation to the RHD Committee in support of continued probationary candidature. Any student whose candidature is not confirmed by the RHD Committee will be so informed and may appeal to the Academic Board. Written notice of appeal must be lodged with the Academic Secretary, University Secretary’s Department within one month of the date upon which notice of the decision was given. The Academic Board will give the student an opportunity to be heard before making a final determination.
22. Full time PhD students may not concurrently undertake any other course of study or individual subjects at the University or elsewhere without prior approval by their head of department and the Chair, Research Higher Degrees Committee. Candidates may seek enrolment in additional subjects to assist their PhD research program subject to the approval of their supervisor, head of department and the Chair, Research Higher Degrees Committee. Subjects unrelated to the research program will normally not be approved.

View/Print PDF (24 KB)

Preamble

The PhD is a degree of the University. Subject to review by the Academic Board, functions relating to the PhD have been delegated to the RHD (Research Higher Degrees) Committee; the examination procedures being handled by the Chairperson of the RHD Committee, heads of departments, faculty/department postgraduate committees and those staff members of the School of Graduate Studies who service the Committee.

The Chairperson of the RHD Committee is authorised by the Academic Board to approve the appointment of examiners on behalf of the Academic Board. All decisions are reported to the Committee.

1. Appointment of examiners
   
   1. Three months before the thesis is submitted, the School of Graduate Studies invites the head of department to recommend two examiners, together with a reserve name for use should a third or replacement examiner be required. Where the nature of the thesis warrants it, a fourth name may be submitted so that examiners are drawn from more than one discipline. The examiners shall be external to the University and would not have a formal association with the University within the last 5 years. Formal association is normally interpreted as meaning employment at the University in teaching and/or research as either a full-time, part-time or sessional staff member, or in an honorary capacity or through direct involvement with the thesis (that is, through reading drafts or discussing the research). Examiners must be of international standing in the precise area(s) of research with which the thesis actually deals. Normally at least one examiner must be from overseas. Examiners should be a member of a university or research institution within the last 5 years. Normally, examiners should have a PhD and have had experience in PhD supervision and/or examination.
   2. Prior to submission of the nomination of examiners, the head of department is encouraged to consult with the supervisor(s) and appropriate senior members of the department. Particular attention should be given to the international standing of the proposed examiners in the precise area(s) with which the thesis actually deals, and to the inappropriateness of examiners who may find it difficult to judge the thesis impartially. Individuals who have collaborated in work with the candidate, or who have published with the candidate, should not be nominated.
      
      If, independently of these confidential consultations, the candidate has reason to believe that any person would be unsuitable to serve as examiner, he or she may submit the name of this individual and the reasons for such exclusion to the head of department. In all cases, the anonymity of examiners nominated and appointed must be retained.
   3. The recommendation, which should be signed by the head of department, the candidate’s supervisor(s), and the nominated Chairperson of Examiners, if other than head of department, should include the name, title, specific field of expertise relevant to the thesis, and full work address. The head of department is asked to indicate whether or not the nominated examiners have been approached to act.
   4. The nominations are forwarded for approval to the Chairperson of the RHD Committee who will then report them to the RHD Committee.
   5. The Chairperson of the RHD Committee may ask the head of department to submit additional names or to provide additional justification for the appointment of nominated examiners to ensure appropriate standards of examination. A short curriculum vitae is required if (i) an examiner has neither PhD supervision nor examination experience, (ii) where a nominated examiner is not clearly a member of a university or research institution or (iii) where a nominated examiner does not have a PhD.
   6. The School of Graduate Studies will then formally invite the examiners to act, asking that they complete the examination within six to eight weeks of receiving the thesis.
   7. Any dispute about the appointment of examiners shall be referred to the RHD Committee.
2. Correspondence

All correspondence with the examiners will then be conducted by the School of Graduate Studies in consultation with the Chairperson of Examiners.

3. The Examination
   
   1. The School of Graduate Studies may, after consultation with the Chairperson of Examiners, contact any examiner who has not submitted a report by the end of the twelfth week after dispatch of the thesis, advising that it will be necessary to proceed to the appointment of a replacement examiner if the report is not received within a further two weeks, and shall proceed to do so, after consultation with the Chairperson of Examiners, if the report is not received within that time.
   2. Once a thesis has been sent to a replacement examiner, after the fourteenth week (as outlined in (a) above) any report subsequently received from the examiner who has been replaced shall not be considered in determining the result of the examination.
   3. Each examiner shall separately assess the quality of the thesis and shall make a report in writing, containing a recommended result, within six to eight weeks of the date of receiving the thesis.
   4. An examiner may request that the School of Graduate Studies, in consultation with the Chairperson of Examiners, obtain from the candidate clarification of any part of the thesis or work, or written answers to questions about the thesis or research work.
   5. An examiner may ask the School of Graduate Studies in consultation with the Chairperson of Examiners to require that the candidate make changes to the thesis.
   6. After both examiners’ reports have been received, the School of Graduate Studies will send them to the Chairperson of Examiners for comment. After consultation with the candidate’s supervisor(s) regarding these reports, the Chairperson of Examiners will be given the opportunity to send to the School of Graduate Studies comments on the examination and on the thesis itself. These written comments will then be communicated to the Chairperson of the RHD Committee.
   7. Where the two examiners clearly agree, the Chairperson of Examiners shall write to the Chairperson of the RHD Committee, stipulating the result to be pass, fail, or re-submission within a stated time period, in accordance with the expressed decisions of the examiners. The Chairperson of the RHD Committee on behalf of the Academic Board will sign the memo in straightforward cases, but may first seek further information from the Chairperson of Examiners and/or take the matter to the RHD Committee for consideration if he or she has reason to believe that the examination may not have been properly conducted.
   8. If the two examiners’ recommendations are not clearly in agreement, the Chairperson of Examiners should consult with the supervisor(s) and where appropriate with senior colleagues in the department before recommending in writing to the Chairperson of the RHD Committee on a further course of action.
   9. If the Chairperson of Examiners and the Chairperson of the RHD Committee jointly judge that there are resolvable differences between the reports of the examiners, the two examiners may be invited to consult on the matter.
   10. If the Chairperson of Examiners and the Chairperson of the RHD Committee jointly judge that the two examiners are unable to agree or that the result is undetermined, a third examiner shall be appointed who is external to the University, and who has specific expertise in the area of any issues to be resolved. The result of the examination shall then be in accordance with the majority recommendation of the examiners.
   11. In very exceptional cases, the RHD Committee, at the request of one or more examiners, may require an oral examination of the candidate, normally held in Melbourne and normally attended by at least two of the examiners.
   12. In the case of creative arts disciplines where a thesis consists of creative works and a dissertation, and where the creative work component includes performance or exhibition of visual art works, examiners will normally travel to the site of the performance or exhibition. The reserve examiner and the Chairperson of Examiners will also attend the performance. Each examiner will be given the candidate’s dissertation, bound in temporary binding, at or prior to the time of the viewing. The creative work and dissertation must be examined as an integrated whole. Examiners will note the different format of PhD music composition where the dissertation may be complementary or independent of the creative work. Examiners will take the dissertation away to complete the examination. Any additional documentation eg. video of the performance, must be supplied to the examiners within one month of the viewing. In the case of PhD Music Composition students who have written a dissertation and presented a folio of works, separate examiners may be appointed for each component.
   13. Where the examiners recommend that the thesis be passed subject to inserting minor corrections or revising part or parts of the thesis as specified, if the revised copies of the thesis have not been submitted within the initial or extended approved time, the candidate will have three months to submit the corrected thesis, otherwise it will be considered that the requirements of the degree have not been met and the result will be returned as a fail.
4. Re-examination
   
   1. Where a result is deferred and the thesis is submitted for a second examination, the examiners appointed for this purpose shall, subject to their consent, be the persons who served as examiners for the first examination, unless the Academic Board determines otherwise.
   2. The examiners will make a pass/fail decision. The examination will be conducted in accordance with section 3 above, sub-sections (a) to (g) inclusive.
   3. If the Chairperson of Examiners and the Chairperson of the RHD Committee jointly judge that the two examiners are unable to agree or that the result is undetermined, a third examiner shall be appointed who is external to the University, and who has specific expertise in the area of any issues to be resolved. The decision of the third examiner shall be final.
5. The Result

In all cases, the reports and decisions of the examiners shall remain confidential until a pass recommendation is received by the School of Graduate Studies. On receipt of the recommendation, the School of Graduate Studies will notify the candidate and inform the examiners, the Chairperson of Examiners, head of department, and supervisor(s) of the result.