ACADEMIC REGULATIONS FOR PROFESSIONAL DOCTORATE PROGRAMMES From 1 September 2014

Transcription

1 ACADEMIC REGULATIONS FOR PROFESSIONAL DOCTORATE PROGRAMMES From 1 September The Award 1.1 The Professional Doctorate is a doctorate level qualification for professionals working in a particular field which aims to aid the dissemination, development and management of a range of professional practice and policy development. Students will be professional practitioners normally investigating their own practice. The award will be confirmed on behalf of the Academic Board by the University s Research Degrees Committee upon confirmation that both the taught component and the research component have been passed. 1.2 The degree of Doctor of ( D ), will be awarded to students who have successfully passed all of the formal taught elements of the programme and successfully been awarded a pass in the research component. 1.3 Characteristics of a Professional Doctorate Award 1.4 Title a) This doctoral level programme comprises, as an integrated whole, a total of 540 credit points. b) The taught component consists of normally 180 credit points; normally 150 Level 7 and a maximum of 30 credits at Level 6 (one third of the programme). c) Each element within the taught component will be assessed following the principles for Masters level taught programmes and regulations, and all of the 180 credit points must be satisfactorily completed before progression to the research component. d) Decisions relating to successful completion of the taught component and eligibility to proceed to the research component will be made by the relevant PAB equivalent Examination Board. e) The Assessment Regulations for Northumbria Awards apply to the taught component of the programme. f) The taught component must be completed before the research component is undertaken. g) The taught component develops subject knowledge, introduces research theory and delivers research preparedness. At least 30 credits of the taught programme also provide an advanced research bridge between the taught and the research component. h) The research component (two thirds) equates to 360 credits at level 8, doctoral standard. i) The research component is of doctoral standard (level 8); the student formally engages in a planned, approved and supervised research programme, which results in a substantial and original submission which makes an original contribution to knowledge and understanding within the student s area of professional practice. j) The research outcomes will contain publishable 1 elements of relevance to the professional areas, since dissemination of ideas, good practice; developments etc. are key features of the objectives of the programme and its outcomes. The degree of Professional Doctorate is awarded in a professional area such as Education, Engineering, Business Administration, and other appropriate professional subjects. 1 Publishable means: the potential for dissemination in peer review, Professional/Academic publications Page 1

2 Requirements for Admission and Registration Successful applicants are admitted as students of the University for registration for a Professional Doctorate programme at the discretion of the Executive Dean of Faculty, or his/her nominee. a) The minimum entry requirements are normally: i) a recognised first degree (which may be required to be subject specific), of at least upper second class honours standard, or the equivalent; ii) normally the equivalent of at least two years verifiable relevant practical experience of working in the field in a professional capacity, excluding any experience gained as part of the first degree studies. Where English is not the applicant s first language, a minimum International English Language Testing System (IELTS) score of 6.5 is required, with a minimum score of 6.0 in in all components of the IELTS Academic Test normally required on entry.2 However, a higher IELTS score may be required for particular disciplines, as specified by the relevant University body. If the development of the research is hindered by the student s competence in Academic English, or any other parts of the IELTS test, further evidence of ability to perform at the specified standard will be required to ensure continuation of the programme, particularly beyond the first twelve months. Students will apply and be accepted/enrolled on to the programme by the Faculty in which the programme is to be managed as per the current arrangements for taught postgraduate programmes. At the completion of the taught component, students are assessed against the learning outcomes expressed at Appendix 2 of this document. The decision (or not) to progress to the research component is made by the Faculty s Progression & Awards Board (FAB). Students are then re-assessed against the admission criteria and admitted onto the research component or not (this is a Research Committee decision). Students who are not admitted on to the research component may receive a lower award in accordance with the programme specification, the criteria and requirements of that lower award if appropriate. Advanced Entry i) Advanced entry assumes that the applicant will hold a minimum of 30 credits in relevant research skills training. ii) Exemption can be given for up to 150 credits of the taught component on an Advanced Standing basis with a prior qualification (through APL Accredited Prior Learning) and/or existing experience (APEL - Accredited Prior Experiential Learning) providing they can be shown to satisfy the programme s learning outcomes at the required level. iii) Exemption cannot be given for the taught advanced research bridging element (30 credits) which must be completed before commencing the level 8 research component. iv) Exemption from the Level 8 research component is not permitted. b) A working title of the proposed subject of study is submitted and is a viable research programme. c) There is an undertaking by the University to provide adequate supervision, which is 2 Pearson equivalent is as follows: score of 62 equates to IELTS 6.5; a score of 69 equates to IELTS 7.0 Page 2

3 likely to be sustained. d) The University/Faculty is able to provide appropriate facilities and other resources required to support the specified programme of study. e) The conditions for enrolment including the payment of the fees are satisfied. 3. Components of the Programme 3.1 Taught Component (level 7) The taught component is an integral part of the Professional Doctorate; its content will vary depending on the professional area of the degree but will be expected to contain: i) substantive study of the field. ii) a taught advanced research element (30 credits) bridging the taught component and research component. iii) This component is assessed under the ARNA regulations for taught programmes. Standard University Student Regulations apply to the taught component. 3.2 Research Component Students (also referred to as candidates ) are registered for the award on either a full or part time basis starting from the date the University formally accepts the applicant to the programme and enrols him/her as a registered student. Students will have access to the resources and facilities to support their programme to a level specified by the University on the basis of mode of study. i) A full-time student must devote a minimum of 37 hours per week for 45 weeks per year to the research activity. ii) A part-time student normally devotes a minimum of twenty hours per week for 45 weeks per year to the research activity 3.3 Applicants for the degree of Professional Doctorate who are based at another institution or organisation outside the UK may be registered as a full time or part time Northumbria University student on a split-site basis. In this case, the supervision team will normally consist of two supervisors, the Principal Supervisor (who is based at the Northumbria University) and the second supervisor who is based at the student s home institution. The research degree awarded will be awarded by Northumbria University. For the duration of their research degree studies, and irrespective of their actual location, students undertaking research on a split-site basis will be subject to the requirements of Northumbria s Code of Practice for Post Graduate Research Programmes, the Handbook of Student Regulations, and the PGR Academic regulations. Split site students must normally attend Northumbria University for a minimum of four weeks and a maximum of six months per year throughout the research programme; however, at some point in their programme, the student will be required to attend the University for a minimum period of eight consecutive weeks. Students will normally be required to be based at Northumbria for key points of the research degree cycle: induction, project approval, annual progression and the viva voce (oral) examination. Students will be subject to Northumbria s standard progress and monitoring processes. Page 3

4 3.4 A student registered for a research degree is required to undertake and complete the programme of research training under the guidance of the appointed supervisory team. The programme of training, as specified in the student s Professional Development and Research Training Plan, will include generic skills training and supporting studies. The combination of the initial research outline and taught advanced research bridging element are regarded as an equivalent to the standard postgraduate research Project Approval (PA). The PA equivalent assesses: the programme coherence, whether the programme can be complete in the timescale, the level required of the award and research training to be completed (including general skills training and supporting studies). On completion of the research component, the student is assessed by an examination of the work through the submission of a thesis or portfolio (as determined by the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled) and by a viva voce (oral) examination. Where a portfolio is to be submitted for that assessment, the nature and indicative components of the student s portfolio must be specified, through the Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee, when the student progresses to the research component. Specific guidance is available from individual Faculties. 3.5 Satisfactory progress must be made throughout the programme with regard to the required level of timely academic achievement; and progress will be monitored as follows: a) Completion of Project Approval; b) The Principal Supervisor monitors satisfactory and timely progress throughout the programme in the normal course of supervision, via monthly meetings with the student; 3 c) By successful completion of the Annual Progression process; d) By successful completion of Submission Readiness. Continued registration of the student for the award is conditional upon the programme having approved status and satisfactory/timely progress being maintained by the student to meet University requirements for Annual Progression. If a student does not satisfy these requirements, standard procedures apply to withdraw the student from the University for failure at Annual Progression (or unsatisfactory academic performance, as determined by the Principal Supervisor). 3.6 The student must notify the relevant University Committee (Research Degrees Committee) of the final title of the work three months before the end of the registration period, (i.e. when the examiners are nominated). 3.7 Students are required at all times to carry out their studies under the general direction of the Supervisory team. The student and supervisors are required to maintain regular and frequent contact to ensure the programme of study progresses satisfactorily. 3.8 All registered students are required to enrol with the University and to pay the tuition fees due when requested. 3.9 A student s status is defined as enrolled (as a student and registered for a research programme), suspended or withdrawn. 4.0 Duration of the Programme 4.1 The duration of the programme is defined as the period during which the student is 3 Where students are remotely located and face-to-face meetings are not possible, monthly contacts will be conducted by other means (e.g. telephone). Page 4

5 enrolled on the programme through to successful completion. All students are expected to submit for examination before the expiry of their standard duration date. Exceptionally, students may be given approval (via the Annual Progression process) by the Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee, to extend their period of study to a maximum duration date, and submit for viva voce (oral) examination before the expiry of their maximum duration. The periods of standard duration are as follows: Full Time Part Time Year 1 Years 2 & 3 Years 1 & 2 Years 3, 4 & 5 APEL and/or Research component APEL and/or Research component Taught component Taught component Standard duration: 3 years * Standard duration: 5 years* Exceptional extension: Year 4 Exceptional extension: Year 6, 7 * Note: except in Newcastle Business School. Students who fail to submit their thesis (or portfolio) for viva voce (oral) examination by the maximum duration date will not be permitted to submit their thesis (or portfolio) after that date and they will be withdrawn from the research programme. 4.2 In exceptional circumstances (as approved by the Faculty Research Degrees Sub- Committee) where students change their mode between full-time and part-time during the years of active research, the calculation of the duration will be adjusted pro-rata. 4.3 There is no minimum duration; however, submission earlier than three months before the standard duration date requires the approval of the relevant University Committee (Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee) Progression and Assessment through the programme 5.1 A student registered for a professional doctorate is required to make satisfactory and timely progress throughout the programme and to meet the University requirements for Annual Progression for the research component. 5.2 The Supervisory team regularly monitors the student s progress throughout the research component and assesses whether timely academic achievement at the appropriate level is being demonstrated. Supervision includes both monitoring and assessing sustained progress throughout the programme in the course of routine supervision, and also contributing to the Annual Progression process according to the requirements set by the relevant University Committee (Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee). The Principal Supervisor and Student are required to have formal contact on a monthly basis. It is expected that any student difficulty in meeting the required level of timely academic achievement will normally be identified first in the context of supervision, and that appropriate informal warnings will be issued to the student and documented in that context (see also regulation 7.1 following). If a student does not satisfy the requirements, standard procedures apply to withdraw the student from the University for unsatisfactory academic performance (see Handbook of Student Regulations, Annex 1 sections 2.9 to.2.12 [inclusive]). * Standard duration extends from start date until submission of thesis, not until examination (RDSC 24/05/02). Once the formal oral examination has taken place, the duration of continued registration, determined by the requirements of the examination outcome, takes precedence over the candidate s standard and maximum duration dates. 4 Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committees hold delegated authority from the University s Graduate School Committee Page 5

6 5.3 Assessment at Annual Progression constitutes the key, formal progression points for research degree students, when the relevant Committee (Faculty Research Degrees Sub- Committee) determines whether or not the programme may continue. Successful progression into the next twelve month period is dependent upon the Faculty Research Degrees Sub- Committee confirming that the student has demonstrated, to the Sub-Committee s satisfaction, that the following criteria have been met: a) the programme has been conducted satisfactorily to date and all ethical considerations have been addressed; b) timely progress has been made to date and the programme can be satisfactorily completed within the time available; c) the programme meets the level required for the award; d) the programme is likely to lead to a contribution to knowledge or understanding; e) the student s Professional Development and Research Training Plan, specified at Project Approval, is ongoing/has been completed satisfactorily to date. All Professional Doctorate students are required to satisfy the Annual Progression point by the annual anniversary of commencing the research component of their programme. 5.4 Each Faculty publishes the process whereby students demonstrate the timely progression of knowledge and understanding relevant to the academic discipline; this publication includes a clear statement of the documentation which students are required to submit within the Faculty at Annual Progression. The scope, content and format may vary across Faculties, but in each case the Annual Progression process will entail: a) documentation or material submitted by the student to substantiate work completed in the year (Faculties variously specify what this documentation or material comprises) b) a statement by the student of the key project deliverables indicating the research priorities for the next twelve month period and/or to submission of the thesis/portfolio c) annual review of the student s Professional Development and Research Training Plan d) annual review and confirmation of ethical scrutiny e) direct engagement with the student in order to monitor the Annual Progression f) independent review by two academic staff who are not part of the supervision team; the review panel provide a report to the Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee of their assessment containing their recommendation (as per regulation 5.5 below) to the Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee. The report states the reasons underlying the recommendation and provides the evidence to substantiate their conclusion. 5.5 At each Annual Progression point, the student must satisfy the relevant committee (Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee) that the published criteria have been met, in order for the programme to continue beyond each anniversary enrolment date. The recommendation of the Annual Progression Panel will be submitted to the Faculty Research Degrees Sub- Committee for approval. Very exceptionally, the Sub-Committee may decide not to approve the Panel s recommendation in such cases the Faculty Research Degrees Sub- Committee should decide the appropriate action. The following outcomes are available to Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committees, when monitoring the quality of a student s submission for Annual Progression: a) The student s Annual Progression is approved; the student is permitted to continue on the research degree programme and enrol for the next twelve month period; b) The student s Annual Progression is not approved; the student may submit a second time. The Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee will determine the timescale and deadline for the resubmission; Page 6

7 c) The student s Annual Progression on the current programme is not approved, the student is failed and it is recommended that the student is awarded credits from the taught component modules(s), in accordance with the criteria and requirements of the Professional Doctorate degree programme. 5 Note: clause c) above is only applicable in the case of a second submission. Any request to extend the deadline for Annual Progression must be made in writing to the Faculty Research Committee in advance of the deadline. If the development of study is hindered by the student s competence in Academic English, further evidence of ability to perform at the specified standard will be required to ensure continuation of the programme. The Principles and Procedures for a student to appeal against the outcome of Annual Progression are published in the Handbook of Student Regulations, Annex In approving Annual Progression into the next year of the programme (outcome A as described at regulation 5.5), the Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee confirms that: a) progress in the previous year was satisfactory & timely; b) planned deliverables for the next year are feasible and appropriate; and c) any problems identified have been resolved. 6. Exceptional Circumstances and Late Submission of Work 6.1 Late Submission of Work A student may apply for an extension of time (Authorised Late Submission) to submit for Project Approval, Annual Progression, Submission Readiness or Thesis Submission if there are personal circumstances which are unforeseen and unpreventable and have a serious effect on the student s ability to submit by the appropriate deadline. Application for Late Submission does not automatically mean it will be granted. The student must submit an Application for Authorisation for Late Submission before the submission deadline. Appropriate medical certification, or other relevant evidence confirming the circumstances, must be provided. Guidance is available to students from the web page The Chair of the Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee is responsible for the authorisation/rejection of a late submission. 6.2 Personal Extenuating Circumstances (PEC) At any point throughout the programme, where serious personal/health circumstances impact significantly on student performance, the student is responsible for notifying the University at the earliest opportunity. Personal extenuating circumstances should cover situations that are both unforeseen and unpreventable. A Personal Extenuating Circumstance (PEC) claim must be submitted as soon as possible and no later than any deadline for submission. The student submits details of the situation (always with clear evidence), to the Faculty PEC Sub-Committee. PEC claims are considered by the Faculty PEC Sub-Committee which decides whether to accept or reject the claim. Accepted claims are taken into consideration by the Faculty 5 Explicit guidance should be sought from the Graduate School in each individual case, because of differences dependent upon validation of specific programmes. see the document Submitting for Examination Guidance for Research Degree Students and Supervisors on the Graduate School web pages Page 7

8 Research Degrees Sub-Committee/University Research Degrees Committee. Guidance is available to students from the web page Possible outcomes are as follows: a) Students may be allowed an extension to deadlines (in excess of the late submission of work process). b) Students may be allowed to interrupt their studies (for a maximum of twelve months, in total, calculated across the entire period of the student s registration). (For part-time students, the maximum total period of interruption is calculated on a pro-rata basis). Once the student s period of interruption has ended, their registration is re-instated. Retrospective interruption is not permitted. c) Students may be allowed to transfer mode (whilst still in their period of active research). Student will not normally be permitted to transfer mode once the period of active research has been completed. d) Students may be allowed to re-register for the research degree for a period of twelve months, where, extraordinarily, additional time is required to complete the programme. In seeking re-registration, the student must be able to provide sufficient evidence to the relevant Committee (Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee) that he/she is still a suitable student; that the research is still current and appropriate; and can be completed and submitted for viva voce (oral) examination within the extra twelve months if re-registration is permitted. Normally only one re-registration is permitted. 6.3 Technical Extenuating Circumstances (TEC) Technical extenuating circumstances affecting submission of Project Approval, Annual Progression, Submission Readiness or Thesis Submission will normally be considered and resolved by the appropriate review panel and approved by the Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee/University Research Degrees Committee. A TEC normally relates to circumstances which have affected the student for which the University has responsibility. 6.4 Maternity/Paternity/Adoption leave Details of arrangements are published in the PGR Maternity, Paternity and Adoption Leave Policy at 7. Supervision of the programme 7.1 The University will provide an appropriate and qualified Supervision Team with the relevant subject expertise. The Supervision Team must have both the appropriate subject and practice expertise, sufficient to advise the candidate throughout the period on the planning and execution of professional practice which has depth and complexity appropriate to the degree. A student will have at least two, but not normally more than three supervisors. A permanent member of staff will be appointed to the team and will be designated as the Principal Supervisor. The student and Principal Supervisor will meet (or make contact) on a monthly basis and will maintain a formal record of each meeting. The Principal Supervisor has responsibility for the overall management and quality assurance of the student s meetings, the Principal Supervisor should discuss with the student the level required for the research degree award and comment on whether (in the Supervisor s academic judgement) the student s engagement with the research programme is at the right level and that progress is timely. This makes it possible to address any difficulties at an early stage. Page 8

9 7.2 Where the Principal Supervisor judges that the student s engagement with the research programme is not at the right level and/or the student is not maintaining timely academic achievement, the Principal Supervisor alerts the student to this; identifies the deficiencies; and discusses and agrees, with the student, realistic and timely objectives within the student s research project plan to bring progress back on track. At this point, the Principal Supervisor should issue an informal and/or formal warning to the student, which documents their discussion on the need for the student to improve their academic performance and provides the student with a clear list of the requirements they have discussed (of both content and the timescale for improvement) and which the student must meet within the timescale that they have agreed. 7.3 The Principal Supervisor also identifies situations where a student fails to satisfy the University s published attendance requirements, to submit work as planned or to meet requirements of relevant professional codes of conduct. In all such circumstances, the Principal Supervisor alerts the student (via informal and/or formal warnings which are then documented) to the fact that it is the student s responsibility to remedy the situation and that continuing unsatisfactory performance over a sustained period of time will lead to the student being withdrawn from the University for unsatisfactory performance. 7.4 Members of the supervision team will not normally be registered for a research degree at any University themselves. This exclusion does not apply to registration for the award of PhD by published work. In addition to the supervisors, an adviser may be proposed to contribute some specialised knowledge or a link with an external organisation. 7.5 The relevant Committee (Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee) approves a proposal for change in supervision arrangements. 7.6 The supervision team must have both subject and practice expertise, sufficient to advise the candidate throughout the period on the planning and execution of professional practice which has depth and complexity appropriate to the degree. 7.7 Collaboration with professional colleagues and the profession in the course of the studies and the preparation of the research submission (thesis or portfolio) is encouraged. 8. Viva Voce Examination of the Research 8.1 On completion of the research programme, the candidate is assessed by an examination of the work (the submission, which will be either a thesis or a portfolio) and by a viva voce (oral) examination. 8.2 Both the form of the research submission (see Appendix 1 - Instructions to Students for the Submission of the Research Programme for Viva Voce (oral) Examination) and the method of examination are specified by research students at the Annual Progression one year before standard duration expires. The relevant Faculty Committee (Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee) endorses the recommendation before sending it to the relevant University Committee (Research Degrees Committee) for approval. 8.3 The student takes no part in the nomination of the examiners and must have no formal contact with any appointed examiner before the viva voce (oral) examination. 8.4 All students are expected to submit for viva voce (oral) examination before the expiry of their standard duration date (see Section 4.1) Page 9

10 8.5 The tone of the viva voce (oral) examination will allow full expression to the professional dimension of the work. 8.6 The examiners will assess whether the student has undertaken research, critical investigation and evaluation of an approved topic in the professional area of work, produced a submission which successfully articulates the findings, and will judge whether the work is an original contribution to knowledge and professional practice in the field. Students will be expected to have demonstrated their ability to integrate rigorous academic/critical analysis with practical relevance and application, to translate ideas into a form understandable by and meaningful to the profession, and to communicate and disseminate ideas to fellow professionals to stimulate developments of good practice, and to further research into and enhance the profession generally. 9. Appointment of Viva Voce Examiners 9.1 Assessment is undertaken by (at least) two independent examiners, one of whom must be external to the University. 9.2 The appointed examiners approved by the relevant University Committee (Research Degrees Committee) must satisfy all the following criteria: a) Each examiner (internal and external) is experienced in research in the general area of a student's submission and has experience as a specialist/professional practitioner in the area(s) to be examined. In order to ensure that these points are met, the student is required to submit to the Principal Supervisor an abstract of the submission of approximately 300 words before the examiners are nominated. b) The viva voce (oral) examination team as a whole has substantial experience (i.e. three or more previous examinations) of examining research degree students at the level being examined or above. At least one member of the examination team must have a minimum of one examination experience, at the level being examined or above, in the UK. c) The examiners must be independent. Independence means that the: i) examiners (internal and external) have not previously acted as a member of the student's supervision team ii) external examiner/s are not appointed so frequently 6 that familiarity with the University might prejudice objective judgment; iii) external examiners have not normally been engaged in the capacity of supervisor to another student within the University during the previous five years; iv) external examiners have not been employed by the University as a member of staff or as a consultant to the University during the previous three years; v) examiners (internal and external) must confirm before appointment, that they have no informal/personal connection with the student, which might prejudice the independence of the examination. Co-authorship or other forms of collaboration between the student s supervisor and Examiners are not evidence against the independence of the examiners. 9.3 A person registered for a research degree will not normally be appointed to act as an examiner. 9.4 If the student has a permanent contract of employment with Northumbria University (or the collaborating establishment) or has been in continuous employment with the University in excess of three years, the examination team will consist of two external examiners. 6 An external examiner cannot be appointed more than three times in five years Page 10

11 9.5 Examiners, satisfying regulation 9.2 above, are proposed by the relevant Supervisor and endorsed by the relevant Faculty Committee (Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee) three months before the end of the active period of research. The examiners are then submitted to the relevant University Committee (Research Degrees Committee) to be considered for approval. An examination is void if the examiners have not been appointed in accordance with the regulations and approved by the relevant University Committee (Research Degrees Committee). If the relevant Committee (Research Degrees Committee) decides that the proposed examiners should not be appointed, then the proposal is returned to the relevant Faculty Committee (Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee) for reconsideration and fresh nomination as appropriate. 9.6 Each viva voce (oral) examination shall have an Independent non-examining Chair, whose role will be to facilitate a professional and authoritative setting for the examination, and to ensure that the assessment process is conducted rigorously, equitably, appropriately, fairly and consistently, according to the University s regulations and procedures. The Chair shall have a neutral role and take no part in the actual assessment of the student or submission. The Chair will advise the examiners on the University s research degree regulations, procedures, policy and practice, and provide a report (in standard format) to the relevant University Committee (Research Degrees Committee) on the conduct of the viva voce (oral) examination. 9.7 The Independent non-examining Chair shall be nominated by the relevant Faculty Committee (Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee) and appointed by the relevant University Committee (Research Degrees Committee) when the examiners are appointed, and must satisfy the following criteria: a) is a current member of the University s academic staff; b) has successfully supervised to completion at least one research degree candidate (PhD or Professional Doctorate); c) has experience of examining for the degree being examined; d) has experience of management of staff; e) has sufficient experience and seniority to command respect and, if necessary, intervene in the viva voce (oral) examination; and f) is independent. Independence means that the Independent Chair: i) has not previously acted as a member of the student's supervision team; ii) has not previously acted as an adviser to the candidate s research programme (including at Project Approval stage or Annual Progression review stages); iii) confirms before appointment that they have no informal/personal connection with the candidate, and no conflict of interest, which might prejudice the independence of the examination. 10. Conduct of the Viva Voce Examination 10.1 The viva voce (oral) examination should normally take place within two months of the candidate handing in the submission One member of the supervision team (normally the Principal Supervisor) may attend the viva voce (oral) examination, at the request of the candidate, as an observer only. A written request from the candidate for attendance by the Supervisor must be made in advance of the examination date. The examination team will be informed if the Supervisor is to attend. The Supervisor must withdraw from the examination venue with the candidate prior to the deliberations of the examiners on the outcome of the examination. 7 7 Regulations approved by Academic Board on 14 November Page 11

12 10.3 At the conclusion of the viva voce (oral) examination, the examiners provide a report of the examination which contains their recommendation which will be one of the following: A. Award the degree. 8 B. Award the degree, subject to modifications being carried out to the satisfaction of the nominated examiner/s; 9 C. Require a re-submission for the degree, including a further viva voce (oral) examination, and with the work re-submitted within a maximum period of twelve months from the date of the first examination. D. Fail the degree and recommend the award of credits from the taught component module(s), in accordance with the criteria and requirements of the professional doctorate degree programme NOTE: In the case of a second examination following re-submission, the Examiners cannot recommend clause C) above The examiners report states in detail the reasons underlying the recommendation and provides the evidence to substantiate their conclusion; and, where appropriate, lists the alterations and/or additions required to the work. The report is normally word-processed and always completed in full immediately after the viva voce (oral) examination has concluded, i.e. on the same day The examiners recommendation is submitted to the Research Degrees Committee for approval. Very exceptionally, the Committee may decide not to approve the examiners recommendation (e.g. where examiners recommendations are at variance with the content of their report or contrary to the University s regulations or inconsistent). In such cases, the Committee should determine the appropriate action The Independent non-examining Chair facilitates the examiners reaching a consensus recommendation If a consensus to make an award is not possible, the examiners provide separate reports which should clearly indicate the examiners individual recommendations and the reasons for these. The Independent Chair will also be required to report on why a consensus was not possible Normally, only one viva voce (oral) re-examination is permitted The relevant University Committee (Research Degrees Committee) will, in each case, determine the timescale and deadline for the amendments required by the examiners taking into account the scale of the amendments required Any request to extend the deadline for submission of a corrected submission [the thesis or portfolio as determined by the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled] (or a re-submission) must be made, in writing, by the candidate to the relevant University Committee (Research Degrees Committee). The request must be made in advance of the examiners deadline, stating the reason(s) for the request and the duration of the required extension. 8 Examiners may recommend this outcome, i.e. Award the degree, despite typographical/spelling or minor textual corrections being needed, provided that the Examiners do not wish to review these corrections after the Student has made them. 9 Modifications may include revision of material in the submission that the Examiners specify, in detail, and which in their judgement are necessary for the submission to reach an acceptable standard. This can include revisions that rectify omissions as well as improvements to the contextualisation/arguments/discussions within the submission, and removal of sections/other re-structuring of the submission. The award of the degree is withheld until the Examiners confirm that all requested modifications have been completed to their satisfaction. Page 12

13 11. Access and Copyright 11.1 Following successful viva voce (oral) examination a print copy is normally placed in the University library and a PDF copy will be placed in the Northumbria Research Link, the University s institutional research repository. For Research theses, a PDF copy will also be included in the British Library s national theses repository through its Electronic Theses Online System (EThOS). Arrangements for confidentiality of submissions (normally made at the start of the programme or on request at appointment of examiners) are approved by the relevant University committee (Research Degrees Committee) and are normally limited to two years. The arrangements for confidentiality of the submission must be made and approved before the viva voce (oral) examination team is appointed. Once a two year period of restriction has expired, if the restriction needs to continue it is the candidate s responsibility to initiate a request to the Research Degrees Committee (via the Graduate School) for the confidentiality to be extended for a further period of two years The copyright of the submission rests with the candidate As a condition of enrolment, the student agrees that the University shall own any Intellectual Property (IP) that may result from his/her research activity and in return the student is eligible for a share of the revenue generated under the same procedures as members of academic staff 10 (subject to regulation 11.2 above). The student will also be required to sign all documents specified by the University 11 for the purposes of seeking intellectual property protection and exploitation. If a student considers that he/she has been the sole creator of the intellectual property and that the University has not made a critical contribution to the creation of IP, then he/she can apply to be released from the IP Ownership Agreement. The application to release is subject to legal advice and must be approved by the University. If agreement at University Pro Vice Chancellor level is not reached an external arbitrator will address disputes. In the case where a student is funded wholly or partly by a third party external to the University, the supervisor(s) and the student should clarify intellectual property ownership issues with the third party at the outset of the research project. In such circumstances, the University will consider requests to assign, share or license IP ownership with that party. This is particularly relevant when contracts for a research project (on which the research degree student s research degree programme is based) contain considerations of this kind. It is important, therefore, that the University Secretary s Office is consulted at the earliest possible stage of discussion with the third party regarding the IP implications of any contract. The physical copies of the submission (thesis or portfolio) submitted for viva voce (oral) examination (including electronic copies) will become the property of the University, whilst other artefacts for assessment will remain the personal property of the candidate along with the submission (thesis or portfolio) copyright. 12. Appeals against the outcome of the viva voce examination 12.1 The principles and procedures for research degree candidates to appeal against the outcome of a research degree viva voce examination are published in the Handbook of Student Regulations, Annex To disclose any innovation to the University on the Innovation Disclosure Form. The University commits to sharing income generated by the exploitation of IPR with the individuals contributing to the development of that IP. Each income sharing-agreement will be negotiated on its own merits. 11 A business plan, including innovation disclosure form and an income-sharing agreement Page 13

14 APPENDIX 1 INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS FOR THE SUBMISSION OF THE RESEARCH PROGRAMME FOR VIVA VOCE (ORAL) EXAMINATION 1. Submission of the thesis or portfolio i) The student is responsible for submitting the final submission (thesis or portfolio as determined by the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled) for the assessment of the award. The work must be presented to an excellent standard of presentation and securely bound. Details of the format of the binding and style of presentation are issued separately 12. The student must ensure that the format and standard of submission fully meet the requirements of the University s regulations. ii) iii) iv) The student is responsible for ensuring that the work acknowledges opinions, ideas and contributions from the work of others; and does not incorporate, without acknowledgment, material derived from the work (published or unpublished) of another individual. This should be confirmed, before submission, by the student using Turnitin software, and consulting the Principal Supervisor on the interpretation of the resulting report. The submission (thesis or portfolio as determined by the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled) must be submitted to The Graduate School (including re-submissions). The Graduate School will advise the student of the number of copies required (normally three, possibly four) which will include a one page Abstract of not more than 300 words of the written submission for the viva voce (oral) examination. The candidate is also required to produce an identical copy for themselves and a further copy for their Principal Supervisor. The viva voce (oral) examination should normally take place within two months of the candidate handing in the submission. The Graduate School cannot accept the submission if the Examination Team has not been appointed. An electronic copy of the full submission (thesis or portfolio as determined by the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled) in PDF format must also be submitted see section 1 vi) below. v) A declaration that the work has not been submitted for any other award, except that entailed by research training as declared when the project was initially approved; that states the number of words contained in the submission and that states it is the work of the student alone, must be included. 13 The latter should include evidence that the work acknowledges opinions, ideas and contributions from the work of others; and does not incorporate, without acknowledgment, material derived from the work (published or unpublished) of another individual. 14 Where appropriate, this declaration will specify the relationship of the submission to any wider project or collaborative project. The Declaration should be signed and dated. Guidance on the specific wording required for this Declaration is contained in the Graduate School document Submitting for Examination: Guidance for Research Degrees Students and Supervisors (Annex B - Requirements for Presentation of a Professional Doctorate Thesis or Portfolio). 15 vi) A copyright declaration must also accompany the submission (thesis or portfolio as determined by the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled). The declaration form will be provided separately by the 12 See the document Submitting for Examination Guidance for Research Degree Students and Supervisors on the Graduate School web pages. 13 The word length of the submission excludes bibliography (academic references), footnotes and appendices. 14 For example, evidence from use of Turnitin software available from the University s Blackboard electronic learning portal. 15 See Page 14

15 Graduate School. vii) viii) ix) The student should also provide, with the submission of the thesis or portfolio (as determined by the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled), a list of any material which he/she may have published (alone or jointly), to enable the examiners to be fully informed of the contribution to knowledge actually made by the submission. In addition, a separate electronic copy of the full submission (thesis or portfolio as determined by the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled) in PDF format must also be submitted (including for re-submissions following a viva voce (oral) examination). In all cases, the electronic version of the submission (thesis or portfolio) must be identical to (and must accompany) the hard copy versions submitted to the Graduate School. Arrangements for the confidentiality (e.g. due to commercial sensitivity) of the work must be specified before the Examination Team is appointed (normally three months before the submission is due). The submission of the thesis or portfolio (as determined by the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled) for viva voce (oral) examination is at the sole discretion of the student. 16 It would be unwise for the student to submit their thesis (or portfolio) against the advice of the supervision team, but they do have the right to do so. The student should also not assume that a supervisor s agreement to the submission of their thesis (or portfolio) guarantees the award of the degree. 2. Format of the submission for the research component The form of the submission will normally be one of the following: The standard submission comprises a written thesis with an indicative word length of 55,000 to 60,000 words The Portfolio will always contain a critical commentary of between 15,000-30,000 words. Further advice is available from the relevant Committees. 17 For a submission (thesis or portfolio) over the maximum words, the student must obtain prior approval for submission, from the relevant University Committee (Research Degrees Committee), explaining the outlining reason. 3. The final submission (thesis or portfolio - as determined by the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled) The finalised thesis or portfolio will be submitted as follows: 18 one permanently bound copy (with any non-written elements appropriately secured in/with the submission) for the University Library; plus an identical electronic copy of the final approved submission (thesis or portfolio) in PDF format. In addition, further permanently bound copies should be provided to the supervisor(s) and any external sponsors. 16 However early submission requires the approval of the relevant University committee (Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee). 17 Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee or Research Degrees Committee. 18 See University requirements on presentation and binding of theses (or a portfolio) at Submitting for Examination Guidance for Research Degree Students and Supervisors on the Graduate School web pages Page 15

16 The Portfolio Where a Portfolio is submitted, rather than a Thesis, the following is relevant: The nature and indicative components of a portfolio must be specified at the outset as part of the approval process through the Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee, such as to enable the candidate to demonstrate (at the final examination) that the learning outcomes have been met. Specific guidance is available from individual Faculties. The portfolio must focus on an area or theme of direct relevance to the student s professional area of work and aim to disseminate new knowledge and practice throughout the profession to aid its development. The portfolio will always contain a critical commentary of between 15,000 30,000 words (depending on the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled). The critical commentary sets the material in a theoretical and professional context; elaborates the overriding line of argument, discussion of the research philosophies, methodology and evidence of data collection which are included in the portfolio; and demonstrates the original contribution made by the portfolio to theory and professional practice. It is expected that the majority of the material in the portfolio (at least two-thirds) will encompass the prospective nature of the research programme; the remainder of the portfolio will contain retrospective material. Examples of evidence (though not exclusive) which could be included within the portfolio, are: Published journal and conference papers, book chapters or books Strategic Organisational Reports Strategic Policy Documents Evaluation Reports CD Rom and Web work Videos of practice interventions Innovative methods of developing professional practice Feedback on interventions, developments and professional practice Student s own self development evidence, contributions and reflections on professional practice Reflective diary extracts The portfolio, taken as a whole, will make an original contribution to knowledge and professional practice. Page 16

17 APPENDIX 2 THE FRAMEWORK The Professional Doctorate award is given subject to the student having successfully passed all of the formal taught elements of the professional doctorate programme and successfully been awarded a pass in the research component. 1. PROGRAMME AIMS & OBJECTIVES 1.1 Aims and Objectives a) To acquire a range of research skills and to be able to apply these to the development and management of a range of practices and activities in the profession and its policies and strategies. b) To be able to translate ideas into a form understandable by and meaningful to the profession. c) To conduct the research and produce a thesis or portfolio of original quality in the professional area. d) To disseminate/publish that research and its outcomes to the professional audience. 1.2 Learning Outcomes As a result of having completed the taught component of the programme, students will have: a) Developed further understanding and knowledge of their profession and its academic base b) Attained critical analysis and research skills and become proficient in using these c) Advanced their communication skills d) Proposed and designed an original research project that shows the potential to add to the existing knowledge base and to the development of personal and professional advancement through reflective practice. 2. MANAGEMENT OF THE PROGRAMME 2.1 The management and administration of the programme will be a combination of those for research degrees and taught postgraduate programmes, but with the additional features detailed below. 2.2 The Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee will include Professional Doctorates in its annual report to Graduate School Committee to cover approval of student proposals and plans, progression, and any other issues arising within the research component. 2.3 Quality assurance of the delivery of the elements of the taught component and the standards attained will be exercised via existing mechanisms for taught postgraduate programmes, including the assessment of students and the appointment of External Examiners. 2.4 A Programme Leader will be responsible to the relevant Executive Dean of Faculty (or his/her nominee) for the administration of the taught component of the programme and will be advised by a Programme Management team, responsible for overseeing the quality of the delivery of the taught component of the programme. Page 17

18 2.5 The relevant University Committee will approve proposals relating to the portfolio submission as a routine part of the validation and approval process. 3. VALIDATION OF THE DEGREE 4. TITLE Approval of proposals for Professional Doctorate degrees e.g. DEd, DEng, should follow the normal quality assurance processes: be approved by the Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee (FRDSC), Faculty Learning and Experience Committee (FLEC) and the Graduate School Committee (GSC). The validation event should be chaired by an approved member of the Graduate School Committee with an additional approved member on the Panel. The Approval Panel should include an SLEC nominee (from the home Faculty or another Faculty) experienced in the application of Assessment Regulations for Northumbria Awards (ARNA). The validation event must consider the 540 credits as an integral whole, reviewing how the programme develops subject knowledge, introduces research theory, and delivers research preparedness and research outputs. The process for assessing and approving prior qualifications (through APL) and/or existing experience (APEL - Accredited Prior Experiential Learning) against the programmes learning outcomes must be presented to the validation panel. Evidence must also be provided to demonstrate that appropriate supervisory capacity is in place to support the research component of the programme. The degree of Professional Doctorate is awarded in a professional area such as Education, Engineering, Business Administration, and other appropriate professional subjects. The title is to have currency in the academic area and designated as Doctor of subject (abbreviated to D and acronym). The title is to be approved by the Graduate School Committee during the validation process. 5. RESEARCH COMPONENT: GENERIC DESCRIPTOR FOR PROFESSIONAL DOCTORATE THESIS / PORTFOLIO Credit Points Equivalent to 360 at Level 8 Duration Undertaken normally over two years of full time or three years of part time study. The research component of the Professional Doctorate, though smaller in scope, is equivalent to PhD standard, in that it results in a submission (thesis or portfolio as determined by the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled), which makes an original contribution to theory and applied professional practice and which contains publishable elements. 19 Aims 1 To investigate critically and evaluate an approved topic 20 resulting in an independent and original contribution to knowledge and understanding related to professional practice (i.e. worthy of publication as judged through peer review by the academic and professional community); 2 To demonstrate an understanding of and effectively apply research methods appropriate to the field; 19 It will also demonstrate understanding of the general area within which the research lies and the student s ability to translate ideas into a form understandable by and meaningful to the profession. Page 18

19 3 To submit the work for examination (thesis or portfolio as determined by the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled) presented to a professional standard. 4 To defend the submission at oral examination to the satisfaction of examiners (who will include independent professionals). 21 Learning Outcomes As a result of completing the research component the student will be able to demonstrate: 1. Professional learning and impact on development of personal and professional practice, including the student s own professional development through reflective practice; 2. Substantial critical analysis and, synthesis, and proficiency in using these in a developmental, visionary and strategic way; 3 The creation and interpretation of new knowledge through original research and advanced scholarship of a quality to satisfy peer review and merit publication; 4 The conceptualisation, design and implementation of research which engages with professional practice for the generation and dissemination of new knowledge and practice appropriate to the profession to aid its development; achieved through the application of original research to extend the forefront of professional practice; and the ability to adjust the research programme in the light of reflection and/or unforeseen problems. 5. The production and defence of original coherent research which engages professional practice and adds to the existing knowledge base and the development and enhancement of the profession and / or organisation; 6 The ability to self-direct, manage and deal with complex data collection and project management; 7 Verbal reasoning skills used to interact with other professionals in the field to exchange and disseminate knowledge, good practice and research; 8 Appropriate academic writing and publication skills and advanced communication skills to enable the production of the submission (thesis or portfolio) and defence of the work to examiners. Learning & Teaching Strategy The research programme must focus on an area or theme of direct relevance to the student s professional area of work. Collaboration with professional colleagues and the profession in the course of the studies and the conduct of the research is actively encouraged. The concepts of moving theory into practice and applying knowledge in action, underpin the learning and teaching process of the submission (thesis or portfolio) (as determined by the requirements of the specific Professional Doctorate programme on which the student is enrolled). 20 The Faculty Research Degree Sub Committee approves individual PGR programmes and appropriate supervisors in accordance with the approved programme philosophy and specification, at the appropriate stage of the programme. 21 Regulation 9.1 states that assessment is undertaken by (at least) two independent examiners. Page 19

20 Strategies are employed to ensure that the students benefit from a supportive, collaborative environment: Research supervision will be provided according the research degree regulations. The inclusion of a project practice adviser will be encouraged; Facilitated participation in Faculty research activities; The Research Management Team and Faculty Research Degrees Sub-Committee will facilitate opportunities for all research students i.e. Professional Doctorate and PhD to share their research work. Students will have the opportunity to spend time with researchers in the field when they are actively pursuing their research. This supporting facility is intended to allow them to engage, network and begin to establish their place in the research community. The Portfolio Where a Portfolio is submitted, rather than a Thesis, the following is relevant: The portfolio must focus on an area or theme of direct relevance to the student s professional area of work and aim to disseminate new knowledge and practice throughout the profession to aid its development. The portfolio will always contain a critical commentary of approximately 15,000 words. The critical commentary sets the material in a theoretical and professional context; elaborates the overriding line of argument, discussion of the research philosophies, methodology and evidence of data collections which are included in the portfolio; and demonstrates the original contribution made by the portfolio to theory and professional practice. Examples of evidence (though not exclusive) which could be included within the portfolio, are: Published journal and conference papers, book chapters or books Strategic Organisational Reports Strategic Policy Documents Evaluation Reports CD Rom and Web work Videos of practice interventions Innovative methods of developing professional practice Feedback on interventions, developments and professional practice Student s own self-development evidence, contributions and reflections on professional practice Reflective diary extracts The portfolio, taken as a whole, will make an original contribution to knowledge and professional practice. Page 20