Guidelines for Confirmation of Candidature for Doctoral and Masters By Research Degrees

Transcription

1 Faculty of Arts, Business, Informatics and Education Guidelines for Confirmation of Candidature for Doctoral and Masters By Research Degrees The Faculty of Arts, Business, Informatics and Education Guidelines for Confirmation of Candidature for Doctoral and Masters By Research Degrees are composed of the University s Guidelines for Confirmation of Candidature and the Faculty s Procedures in the form of Appendices. Appendices Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Doctoral and Masters By Research Provisional Candidate Research Proposal Submission Form Guidelines for the Review of a Detailed Program of Research and Study Reviewer s Report for a Detailed Program of Research and Study Doctoral and Masters By Research Provisional Candidate Research Proposal Confirmation Panel Assessment Guidelines 1

2 Appendix A Faculty of Arts, Business, Informatics and Education Doctoral and Masters By Research Provisional Candidate Research Proposal Submission Form Candidate s name Program: PhD EdD Masters by Research Upgrade to PhD Principal supervisor s name The attached confirmation document has been written under the supervision of the Principal Supervisor and meets the following requirements: Requirement Yes No Amendments Required Aims and objectives Literature review Proposed contribution to the field of research Approach and methodology Facilities and resources required Work undertaken to date A provisional title for a thesis Certification of ethical clearance (where necessary) Intellectual property rights Any significant departure from the original proposal? Is it expected that the research costs will exceed $2000 (Masters) $3000 (PhD, EdD)? The candidate has undertaken and received a passing grade in the prescribed coursework A time schedule for on-time completion Oral Presentation Comment s Attached N/A The candidate will be presenting an oral presentation in conjunction with my written confirmation document. Yes No Date and Time Proposed for Oral Component Ethical Clearance Certification Ethical Clearance Certification Number 2

3 Comments Candidate s Signature Date Principal Supervisor s Signature Date 3

4 Appendix B Faculty of Arts, Business, Informatics and Education Doctoral and Masters By Research Provisional Candidate Guidelines for the Review of a Detailed Program of Research and Study Each Detailed Program of Research and Study (DPORS) has a defined focus, this focus is established in consultation between the candidate and the supervisor, information will be provided in relation to details of the task to be reviewed. Review Criteria The reviewer is invited to make comment on the following criteria: i. A well structured proposal, which signals the topic and its significance are worthwhile to study and suited to the level of the award. The focus of the study is clearly delineated. ii. The proposal has been presented in a scholarly form and format which indicates familiarity with scholarly conventions suitable for the award area. iii. The proposal is of a quality which indicates the candidate has sufficient knowledge in the field and its literature to proceed with the study. iv. The proposal indicates and justifies the approach and methodology to be used sufficiently for the panel to be confident it could be conducted well and within a practical time limit. v. The proposal gives sufficient indication that if the study is pursued as outlined then it would be likely to meet the criteria of the relevant award. vi. The constraints and difficulties which are identified can be satisfactorily negotiated and overcome, using available resources and expertise. vii. A technically sound proposal, i.e. references are accurate and use a consistent and recognised format; spelling and grammar are correct; proper sentence structure is used and good use of word count is made. viii. Other Comments. ix. Required Changes. x. General Recommendations the examiner is invited to make recommendations to the student and supervisor about future directions. Grading The grading categories for the Task are Satisfactory, Revisions Required or Unsatisfactory. 4

5 Appendix B Faculty of Arts, Business, Informatics and Education Doctoral and Masters By Research Provisional Candidate Reviewer s Report for a Detailed Program of Research and Study Candidate s name Program: PhD EdD Masters by Research Upgrade to PhD Title (if applicable) Reviewer Technical/Presentation Criteria A well structured proposal, which signals the topic and its significance is worthy of study and suited to the level of the award. The focus of the study is clearly delineated. Comments The proposal is of a quality which indicates the candidate has sufficient knowledge in the field and its literature to proceed with the study. The proposal indicates and justifies the methodology to be used sufficiently for the panel to be confident it could be conducted well and within a practical time limit. The proposal gives sufficient indication that if the study is pursued as outlined then it would be likely to meet the criteria of the relevant award. 5

6 A technically sound proposal, i.e. references are accurate and use a consistent and recognised format (e.g. Harvard or APA); spelling and grammar are correct; proper sentence structure is used and good use of word count is made. Criteria not specified by the writer. The constraints and difficulties which are identified can be satisfactorily negotiated and overcome using available resources and expertise Other Comments: Required Changes: Overall Evaluation: Satisfactory Revisions Required Unsatisfactory 6

7 Appendix C Faculty of Arts, Business, Informatics and Education Doctoral and Masters By Research Provisional Candidate Research Proposal Confirmation Panel Assessment Guidelines Candidates Name: Research Topic: Date Enrolled: Expected Completion Date: / / Upgrade Expected Completion Date: / / Masters by Research EdD PhD Upgrade to PhD Purpose of the confirmation panel The purpose of the confirmation panel meeting is to ascertain: That the research proposal is of an acceptable standard to result in a high quality thesis within a required timeframe. To provide recommendations to the candidate to enable the progress toward same. University requirements As per the university rules does the proposal define: Requirement Yes No Amendments Required Aims and objectives Literature review Proposed contribution to the field of research Approach and methodology Facilities and resources required Work undertaken to date A provisional title for a thesis Certification of ethical clearance (where necessary) Intellectual property rights Any significant departure from the original proposal? A time schedule for on-time completion Comment s Attached N/A 7

8 Faculty Requirements 1. Is it expected that the research costs will exceed $2000 (Masters by Research), $3000 (PhD, EdD)? Yes No 2. Is the supervision adequate and should continue? Yes No 3. Has the candidate received a passing grade in the prescribed coursework Yes No Not Applicable 4. Have any additional problems been identified? (Please provide comments overleaf) Yes No 5. Is an oral presentation component required? Yes No 5a. Date and time proposed for oral component 5b. Have any further requirements arisen from the oral presentation? Yes No Not Applicable Recommendation: Is the research proposal of an acceptable standard to result in a high quality thesis within a required time frame? Yes Yes with amendments No Signature Date ADR&I SECTION Checklist Candidature be confirmed (Masters By Research) Candidature be upgraded to PhD (confirmed) Candidature be confirmed (PhD, EdD) Candidature continue with conditions Candidature be terminated Other (specify) RHD57 Completed RHD56 Completed (Both forms required for upgrade) Application to RHD (Upgrade only) Written Feedback sent to candidate (Date ) 8

9 Comments 9