Code of Practice for Research Degrees (MRes Programmes of Study; MPhil and PhD by Research; Professional Doctorates; PhD by Published Works)

Code of Practice for Research Degrees (MRes Programmes of Study; MPhil and PhD by Research; Professional Doctorates; PhD by Published Works) 2015-2016

Contents 1. Introduction... 5 2. Regulations... 6 2.1 Research Degrees Programmes... 6 2.2 Research Degrees Regulations... 7 3. Research Degrees structures... 7 3.1 Committees relating to Research Degrees provision... 7 3.1.1 UWTSD Research Degrees Committee... 8 3.1.2 Faculty / collaborative partner Directors of Research Degrees... 9 3.1.3 UWTSD Ethics Committee and Ethics approval... 10 3.1.4 Administrative structures for research degrees... 11 4. Research Degrees: institutional oversight...11 4.1 Directories and supervisory capacity list... 11 4.2 Enhancing supervisory and examination quality... 12 4.3 Annual Reports... 12 4.4 The Research Environment... 13 5. Selection and Admission...13 5.1 General... 13 5.2 Principles... 13 5.3 Compliance with Codes and Regulations... 14 5.4 Publicity... 14 5.5 Selection... 14 5.6 Appeals and Complaints Procedure in relation to admission decisions and processes... 15 5.6.1 Introduction... 16 5.6.2 Feedback... 16 5.6.3 Procedure for Requesting Feedback... 16 5.6.4 Appeal against an Admissions Decision... 16 5.6.5 Procedure for Appealing against an Admissions Decision... 17 5.6.6 Complaints... 18 5.6.7 Procedure for Complaints... 18 5.7 Changes to Programmes or Supervisory Arrangements or Discontinuation of Programme... 18 5.8 Deferred Entry... 19 5.9 Entry requirements and procedures... 19 5.10 RPCL, RPEL and direct entry... 20 5.11 Requirements for external students or students with an external supervisor... 20 5.12 Research or programmes requiring enhanced disclosure... 21 5.13 Applications from Welsh speaking students... 21 5.14 Applicants with disabilities or specific learning needs... 21 5.14.1 The Interview Process... 23 5.14.2 Processes following the completion of the assessment... 24 5.15 Applicants declaring criminal convictions... 24 2

5.16 International Applications... 25 5.16.1 Academic requirements... 25 5.16.2 External Agents... 25 5.16.3 English Language requirements... 25 5.16.4 Finance Information... 27 5.16.5 Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS)... 27 5.16.6 Refugees and Asylum Seekers... 27 5.17 The offer and welcome letter... 28 6. Training (for MPhil and PhD by Research)...29 6.1 Induction (for MPhil and PhD by Research)... 30 6.2 Induction to Part Two of MRes programmes of study and professional doctorates.. 31 6.3 Data management... 32 6.4 The Programme of Study Handbook (for (especially Part One of) MRes programmes of study and Professional Doctorates)... 32 7. Supervision...32 7.1 Confirmation of Director of Studies... 32 7.2 Supervision arrangements for MRes programmes of study... 33 7.3 The supervisory team (MPhil and PhD by Research, Part Two of Professional Doctorates, PhD by Published Works)... 34 7.4 Research Degrees Board Directory of Directors of Studies and Supervisors... 37 7.5 Professional development of supervisors, internal examiners and chairs of Transfer Panels and Examining Boards... 38 7.6 Supervisory roles... 39 7.7 Attendance monitoring... 40 7.7.1 General... 40 7.7.2 Informal meetings... 41 7.7.3 Formal meetings... 41 7.7.4 Part One of the MRes or Professional Doctorate:... 41 7.7.5 Part Two of the MRes or Professional Doctorate and all MPhil & PhD by Research and PhD by Published Work students... 42 7.7.6 International Research Students with a UKVI Tier 4 (General) Visa... 42 7.8 Needs analysis and the training programme for the thesis... 43 7.9 Absence of Director of Studies... 44 8. Progress, Review and Monitoring...44 8.1 What constitutes satisfactory progress?... 45 8.2 Annual monitoring... 45 9. Transfer from MPhil/PhD to PhD...45 10. Assessment...46 10.1 Submission of the thesis and, where appropriate, portfolio and any other associated materials... 46 10.2 Examinations... 48 10.2.1 Recording of the oral examination... 48 10.2.2 Request for Examination by Electronic Means (Video link)... 48 10.3 The Examining Board... 49 3

10.4 The examination process... 50 10.4.1 The oral examination... 50 10.4.2 Communicating the outcome of the examination... 51 11. Rights and responsibilities of students...52 11.1 Leave, absence, and authorised absence approval for international students requiring visas... 52 11.2 Employment... 53 Appendix 1.. 55 Guidelines for the Format, Word Count, and Binding of the thesis...56 1. Format of the Thesis... 56 2. Binding of the Thesis... 58 3. Submitting your Theses or Dissertations for Printing and / or Binding... 63 Declaration Sheet... 65 Appendix 2... 66 Guidelines for Chairs of Research Degrees Examining Boards. 66 1. Chair of Examining Boards...67 2. Responsibility of the Chair.....67 3. Further Responsibilities..........71 4

1. Introduction This Code of Practice for Research Degrees sets out the policies and procedures of the University of Wales Trinity Saint David related to all research degrees offered by the University. These include all MRes programmes of study, MPhil and PhD degrees by Research, all Professional Doctorates, and the PhD by Published Works. The Code of Practice for Research Degrees also applies to collaborative partner institutions with research degrees provision. This Code of Practice for Research Degrees applies to all research degrees students, unless, for University of Wales students, anything in this document directly contradicts what is in the University of Wales Code of Practice for Research Degrees. It is intended to provide information to members of academic staff, research degrees students, administrators, and members of examining boards. Together with the regulations contained the Academic Quality Handbook (see Chapters 7, 8, 9 and 10), it forms the framework for the management of research degrees. The University s overall framework for Research Degrees aims to ensure that: i. the academic standards of the University are maintained, and ii. postgraduate research students have a fair and reasonable opportunity to achieve the full potential of their research. The Code of Practice for Research Degrees contains a range of policies and procedures, which should be treated as having regulatory authority subordinate to the regulations. The code has been drawn up after consulting various documents published externally, including: Quality Code Chapter B11 research degrees; HEFCE October 2002 report Improving standards in research degrees programmes ; SET for Success; Credit and Qualifications Framework for Wales; NQA Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance; UKCGE: The Role of Publications and Other Artefacts in Submissions for the UK PhD; VITAE Researchers Professional Development; Concordat to support the Career Development of Researchers. This document should be read in conjunction with: the Research Degrees Regulations in Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook; the Procedural Framework for Collaborative Provision in Chapter 9 of the Academic Quality Handbook; the assessment and progression regulations in Chapters 6 and 7 of the Academic Quality Handbook for Part One of the MRes and Professional Doctorates programmes of study; the recognition of prior learning regulations in Chapter 10 of the Academic Quality Handbook; Research Student Handbook; Research Supervisors Handbook; the University s Research Integrity and Ethics Policy, Intellectual Property Policy, and Health and Safety policy; 5

Programme of Study Handbooks for MRes programmes of study and Professional Doctorates. Collaborative Partner Operations Manual. Note: Every effort has been made to ensure consistency between the different documents produced by the University of Wales Trinity Saint David for the management of research degrees. Faculties and collaborative partnership institutions are responsible for ensuring that any supplementary information given to research supervisors and / or research students does not contradict the central information and is regularly updated in line with changes made to the University s overarching framework. However, where there appears to be a conflict between the guidance or regulations contained in these documents, the Regulations for Research Degrees as outlined in the Academic Quality Handbook take precedence over all other documents, including this Code of Practice for Research Degrees. This Code of Practice for Research Degrees takes precedence over handbooks for research students and supervisors and programme handbooks for MRes programmes of study and Professional Doctorates or any Faculty or collaborative partner institution s specific information distributed to research degrees students. 2. Regulations The regulations are available to all staff and research students via the website and through MyDay. The regulations set out: the qualifications required for entry to all programmes of research (MRes, MPhil and PhD by Research, Professional Doctorates, PhD by Published Works), as well as qualifications or experience that may give exemption from part of the required period of study, or part of the required research methods or induction training; the requirements for progression, monitoring and review of required periods of study; thesis and examination rules and procedures. 2.1 Research Degrees Programmes The qualifications that are offered at research level are: Masters by Research (MRes); Master of Philosophy by Research (MPhil); Doctor of Philosophy by Research (PhD); Professional doctorates; Doctor of Philosophy by Published Works (PhD). Full details of the requirements for each qualification are provided in Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook. 6

2.2 Research Degrees Regulations The regulations and procedures outlined in the Academic Quality Handbook and the Code of Practice for Research Degrees are applicable to all research degrees students enrolled on UWTSD degrees. For students that are enrolled for University of Wales awards there is additional oversight at every stage of candidature by the University of Wales through its Degrees and Academic Awards Board (DAAB). The regulations as set out in Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook will apply to all research degrees students with the following exceptions: 1) The word count regulations have changed for research degrees students studying for a practice-based PhD / MPhil by research (e.g. within the Creative and Performing Arts) Students who started their degrees before October 2012 will continue to work towards the word limit and structure of their programme as stipulated by the regulations when they started their degrees. All students who started their degree on or after October 2012 will follow the regulations as set out in the current regulations. 2) Current students on either the DMin programme or the PhD in Applied Archaeology will continue to study according to the regulations that were in force when they started their programmes; the current Professional Doctorate regulations do not apply to students on those programmes. For all other UWTSD students, the 2015-2016 outcome regulations as outlined in Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook apply. 3) For University of Wales (UW) students the UW outcome regulations will apply. The unfair practice regulations, suspension and extensions regulations, appeal and complaints regulations as well as all disciplinary regulations will be applied to all students in accordance with the regulations as they are set out in the current Academic Quality Handbook, in Chapter 8. The Academic Quality Handbook can be found on the University website at: http://www.uwtsd.ac.uk/academic-office/ Please note that whereas students studying for an MRes degree or a professional doctorate study for a named award, students studying for an MPhil or PhD are studying for an MPhil or PhD by research rather than for an MPhil or PhD in a defined subject area. This includes research students working within practice-based areas of research. 3. Research Degrees structures 3.1 Committees relating to Research Degrees provision The regulations and procedures for research degrees are governed by the University of Wales Trinity Saint David s Research Degrees Committee (RDC). For students that are enrolled on degrees awarded by the University of Wales there is additional oversight of every stage of candidature by the University of Wales DAAB. For the consideration of admissions relating for the MPhil and PhD by Research and the PhD by Published Works there is a Research Degrees Admissions Sub-Committee. The terms of reference for this sub-committee can be found in Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook. Annual monitoring processes are overseen by the Annual Review Board and follow-up Review Boards. The terms of reference for these 7

boards can be found in Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook. All ethics approval processes for research degrees students are handled by the Ethics Committee, the terms of reference of which can be found in Chapter 2 of the Academic Quality Handbook. RPEL requests for professional doctorates are overseen by the RPEL Board as specified in Chapter 10 of the Academic Quality Handbook. Collaborative partner institutions will normally have their own Research Degrees Committees that report to the UWTSD Research Degrees Committee, with the appropriate Faculty partnership link (e.g. Partnership Coordinator, Partnership Team Leader, Faculty Director of Research Degrees Studies) attending as a member. In this Code of Practice for Research Degrees, the term Research Degrees Committee always refers to the UWTSD Research Degrees Committee. 3.1.1 UWTSD Research Degrees Committee The Research Degrees Committee (RDC) oversees all aspects of research degrees programmes. This committee, which has representation from all Faculties, reports to the Academic Quality and Standards Committee on the effectiveness of the arrangements for maintaining appropriate academic standards and enhancing the quality of postgraduate research programmes and to the Research Committee in relation to the research environment and culture for research degrees students as well as in relation to research skills training. Collaborative partner institutions are represented on the UWTSD RDC through the UWTSD Faculty that they are linked with (see Chapter 9 of the Academic Quality Handbook). The Research Degrees Committee meets on a regular basis, normally once per month, to discuss all matters relating to research degrees. It is also charged with developing all procedures that support, monitor, and review all aspects of the University s research degrees provision. Membership and the terms of reference of the Research Degrees Committee can be found in Chapter 2 of the Academic Quality Handbook. Faculties have a maximum of two representatives on the Research Degrees Committee with representation depending on the size of the research degrees provision. Faculties with more than 75 research degrees students (including those enrolled at collaborative partnerships) have two representatives. Most Faculties have one member and an alternate on the Research Degrees Committee in order to share the workload and ensure that the Faculty is represented at all RDC meetings. Information about the 2015-2016 membership can be found on MyDay. Staff can raise issues at the Research Degrees Committee through their Faculty Representative or directly through the Postgraduate Research Office (PGRO) or the chair of the Research Degrees Committee. Feedback is always very welcome as are suggestions as to how to improve and develop the University s research degrees provision. Three student representatives attend the Research Degrees Committee on behalf of all students enrolled on Research Degree Programmes. One of these representatives will represent the Carmarthen and Lampeter campuses, one the London campus, and one the Swansea campus. Students associated with collaborative partner institutions are represented on their local Research Degrees Committees and any feedback or issues raised by students that need to be considered by the Research Degrees Committee will be reported by the Faculty that the collaborative partnership programme is linked to. 8

3.1.2 Faculty / collaborative partner Directors of Research Degrees Every Faculty and collaborative partner that offers research degrees must have a Director of Research Degrees. Where a Faculty or collaborative partner has relatively large numbers of research degrees students (i.e. more than 75) they may decide to have additional Directors of Research Degrees (e.g. associated with particular Schools, Centres, collaborative partner institutions, programmes or disciplines). The responsibilities of Faculty Directors of Research Degrees are as follows: 1) to represent the Faculty and any collaborative partners linked to the Faculty on the Research Degrees Committee; 2) to be the primary link with the Postgraduate Research Office for all research degrees matters in their Faculty; 3) to ensure that the Postgraduate Research Office is kept informed of any changes in relation to the supervisory teams within the Faculty (e.g. prolonged illness or absence of members of staff or students); 4) to ensure that all Faculty s research degrees paperwork is submitted in good time and good order for any research degrees related meetings or boards; 5) to ensure that staff within the Faculty are fully informed about any changes to regulations, processes and procedures; 6) to be the first point of contact in the Faculty for any supervisors and students in relation to research degree related matters; 7) to ensure adherence to agreed research degree processes and procedures within their Faculty; 8) to monitor adherence to international attendance policies for any of their international research students on Tier 4 visas; 9) to evaluate, on behalf of their Faculty, any requests from students for extensions, change of study mode, suspensions etc. 10) to ensure that proposals for Examining Boards are submitted to the PGRO for approval at the RDC in good time; 11) to submit, on behalf of the Faculty, for Part One of any MRes or professional doctorates an annual programme report. The responsibilities for collaborative partner Directors of Research Degrees are as follows: 1) to ensure close liaison with the University through the link Faculty and the Postgraduate Research Office and to collaborate closely, as appropriate, with the Partnership Team Leader(s), the Faculty s Director of Research Degrees, and Partnership Coordinator;* 2) to be the primary link for the Partnership Team Leader(s), Partnership Coordinator, and other key University staff in relation to all research degrees matters of the collaborative partner; 3) to ensure that the University s quality assurance requirements are met in relation to the research degrees provision; 4) to facilitate the close monitoring of the collaborative partner institution s research degrees provision and provide the required annual report in good time and to oversee, monitor and report on any action plans coming out of the annual report; 5) to oversee and monitor the work of Programme Directors for any MRes or professional doctorates; 6) to ensure the appropriate quality of any research degrees related documentation and its consistency with University requirements; 9

7) to serve in a facilitating capacity at validation/review or other research degrees related events; 8) to ensure that the Postgraduate Research Office is kept informed of any changes in relation to the supervisory teams within the collaborative partner institution (e.g. prolonged illness or absence of members of staff or students); 9) to ensure that all collaborative partner institution s research degrees paperwork is submitted in good time and good order for any research degrees related meetings or boards; 10) to ensure, in liaison with the UWTSD s Partnership Team Leader(s), that staff within the collaborative partner are fully informed about any changes to regulations, processes and procedures; 11) to be the first point of contact in the collaborative partner institution for any supervisors and students in relation to research degree related matters; 12) to ensure adherence to agreed research degree processes and procedures within the collaborative partner institution; 13) to monitor adherence to international attendance policies for any of their international research students on Tier 4 visas; 14) to evaluate, on behalf of the collaborative partner, any requests from students for extensions, change of study mode, suspensions etc. 15) to ensure that proposals for Examining Boards are submitted in good time to the Postgraduate Research Office for approval at the UWTSD Research Degrees Committee; 16) to submit, on behalf of the collaborative partner institution, an annual programming report for Part One of any MRes or professional doctorates *These roles may be conflated. For example, in the case of a collaborative partner with research degrees provision, the Partnership Coordinator or Partnership Team Leader may also be the Faculty s Director of Research Degrees. For roles and responsibilities of the supervisory team (Director of Studies, second supervisors and advisers) see the Research Supervisor Handbook. For roles and responsibilities of Programme Directors (for MRes programmes of study and Professional Doctorates) see Chapter 7 of the Academic Quality Handbook. 3.1.3 UWTSD Ethics Committee and Ethics approval The University has a central Ethics Committee that is responsible for ensuring that research undertaken by students and staff is ethically responsible and that the candidates and supervisory team are aware of their responsibilities during the period of research. All research projects need ethics approval, but, obviously, there will be different levels of approval for different research projects depending on the level of risk involved with the research. Ethics approval is a key part of the admissions process. However, throughout a student s candidature it is checked at key stages of progress whether further ethics approval is needed (e.g. full research proposal, annual monitoring, transfer from MPhil/PhD to PhD). For the ethics approval processes of research projects undertaken at collaborative partner institutions, please see Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook (sections 8.8, 8.29 and 8.44). Following the meeting of the Ethics Committee both the student and supervisory team will be notified officially of the outcome. It is recommended that, where ethical issues have been 10

identified, the area of research that requires ethical approval should not commence until after written approval has been received. This may not prevent the student from commencing other aspects of their research unless the issues are so serious that formal clearance needs to be obtained before any research can be commenced. The University s Research Integrity and Ethics policy can be accessed through MyDay and the University s website. 3.1.4 Administrative structures for research degrees A number of professional units look after the University s research degrees provision. The Postgraduate Research Office (PGRO), which is part of the Academic Office, is responsible for the support of research degree students throughout their time at the University once they have been admitted, including the submission and examination of theses. The Postgraduate Research Office also offers support to all academic staff that are responsible for research degree students and liaises closely with the different Faculties, collaborative partner institutions, and a range of professional units. Responsibility for the admission of research degree students lies with the Registry s admission team. Responsibility for the research environment and training of research degrees students lies with the University s Research, Enterprise and Innovation Services (RIES). The Student Experience Department looks after student engagement, which includes student feedback (e.g. PRES survey) and the election of student representatives. 4. Research Degrees: institutional oversight 4.1 Directories and supervisory capacity list The University holds a number of directories centrally that are of importance to staff supervising research degrees: Directory of Directors of Studies and Supervisors; Directory of Advisers; Directory of Chairs of Examining Boards and Transfer Panels; Directory for the PhD by Published Works; Directory of Supervisory Capacity. The University also holds a record of which members of staff are able to examine through the medium of Welsh. The Directories cover both the University and all collaborative partners with research degrees provision. With the exception of the Directory of Supervisory Capacity which is updated after each meeting of the Research Degrees Committee, information for all other Directories is reviewed on, at least, an annual basis. For information about what qualifications and expertise are needed to be included in the different Directories, please see section 7.4 of this Code of Practice for Research Degrees and Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook. All staff who wish to be included for the first time within a Directory (whether they relate to the University or to a collaborative partner institution) need to submit a completed Directory form and CV for approval to the Research Degrees Committee. This process must also be followed for 11

advisers and for external supervisors. No member of staff can supervise or chair an examination board or transfer panel without being included in the appropriate central Directory. 4.2 Enhancing supervisory and examination quality The University is committed to the enhancement of its research degrees provision and supervisory quality as well as the quality of its chairs and examiners, both within the University and within its collaborative partner institutions with research degrees provision. The following are therefore provided to support supervisors, chairs and examiners: an annual staff development programme; mentoring systems for staff new to research degree roles (e.g. as a supervisor, assessor of a transfer or internal examiner); a number of annual analyses to ensure reflection on supervisory and examination practices (e.g. review of examining board reports, review of annual monitoring forms); an annual report on the research degrees provision within the University with a systematic action plan for the following year. All reports and analyses are shared with supervisors through the Faculty and collaborative partner institution structures. 4.3 Annual Reports The Research Degrees Committee submits an overview report and associated action plan annually to the Academic Quality and Standards Committee, Research Committee and Senate on the overall progress of research degree candidates. This includes registrations, completions, withdrawals/suspensions, and attendance at training programmes by supervisors and students, drawing attention to any innovative practices or training that it feels has helped the quality of their programmes, and highlighting any issues that need to be addressed. To support this report, the following analyses will be done annually: analysis of Examining Board outcome reports; analysis of Annual Monitoring reports; analysis of admission statistics; cohort analysis; extension analysis; analysis of PRES (bi-annually); analysis of graduate summer school feedback questionnaires and initial experience feedback questionnaires; staff and student development questionnaires. Annual Programme Reports (APRs) and minutes for the APR events for Part One of MRes programmes of study and Professional Doctorates are also received by the Research Degrees Committee as are collaborative partner research degrees provision monitoring reports from Partnership Team Leaders as well as annual reports from collaborative partner institutions with research degrees provision and partnership coordinators as per Chapter 9 of the Academic Quality Handbook. 12

4.4 The Research Environment During the consultation process with applicants prior to entry, Faculties and collaborative partner institutions must ensure that there is adequate expertise available to provide supervisory support for the topic to be pursued within a research-active environment and that appropriate training is available to support the student s specialist needs. Care should be taken to ensure that potential research students are not isolated within their own project and that they have contact with other researchers both from within and outside the University or collaborative partner institution so that they can share experiences and form networks. Generally there should be: opportunities to link with the wider professional community through, for example conference and seminar attendance; ready access to academic colleagues for advice and support; availability of adequate learning and research tools; the opportunity to develop peer support networks where issues or problems can be discussed informally; guidance on research ethics and good practice; an emphasis on the need to complete the research programme within the expected period of study. 5. Selection and Admission 5.1 General Admission processes for research degrees follow two distinct routes: 1) for all MRes and Professional Doctorates admissions; 2) for all MPhil and PhD by Research admissions as well as all admissions to the PhD by Published Works See section 5.5 of the Code of Practice for Research Degrees for a description of the two distinct processes followed and Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook for the terms of reference of the Admissions Sub-Committee. The precise processes and responsibilities for research degrees admissions for collaborative partner institutions are formally agreed with the collaborative partner institution, with auditing processes in place to monitor adherence to the admission policy and procedures. Please note that all MPhil and PhD by Research admissions for collaborative partner institutions must be considered and approved by the UWTSD Admissions Sub-Committee. 5.2 Principles The University s admissions policy is underpinned by the following principles. The University is committed to: providing clear and transparent admissions information to prospective applicants; operating a fair and effective admissions process; ensuring the consistent application of policy across the University; 13

encouraging applications from the widest range of educational, social and cultural backgrounds; ensuring that only suitably qualified applicants are admitted to research degrees study. 5.3 Compliance with Codes and Regulations The admissions policy and associated procedures comply with the Data Protection Act 1998, relevant equality and diversity legislation affecting the admissions of students and take account of sector best practice, including: the QAA s UK Quality Code for Higher Education: Chapter B2: Recruitment, selection and admission to higher education; Chapter B11 Research Degrees; and Part C: Information about higher education provision; Supporting Professionalism in Admissions SPA Good Practice Statement; The Schwartz report s principles of fair admissions; The requirements of relevant accrediting professional bodies; The requirements of the UKVI. 5.4 Publicity Faculties and collaborative partner institutions must ensure that their promotional material, whether web-based or paper-based, is clear, accurate and up-to-date, and of sufficient detail to be helpful and informative to potential students about the level of activity and focus of research. 5.5 Selection The University is responsible for ensuring that all applicants for study have been fully and fairly considered in the light of legal requirements and the applicable policies on equality and diversity. The Research Degrees Committee oversees and monitors the overall admission processes for research degrees admissions. This includes all admissions to research degrees programmes for collaborative partner institutions and the results of any audits are reported to the Research Degrees Committee. The Research Degrees Committee has a sub-committee, the Admissions Sub-Committee, which considers the research degrees admissions for the MPhil and PhD by Research and for the PhD by Published Works. This Admissions Sub-Committee reports all its recommendations for admissions to those research degrees programmes to the Research Degrees Committee. The Admissions Sub-Committee may also refer any complex applications to the Research Degrees Committee for consideration and approval. The Admissions Sub-Committee only considers formal applications where there are no issues in relation to the paperwork submitted for the application and where the Faculty or collaborative partner institution are recommending admission following the interview. Admission to MRes programmes of study as well as professional doctorates is coordinated through the Registry with admission decisions to those programmes of study reported to the Research Degrees Committee. The Admissions Sub- Committee also considers the composition of the supervisory team and research proposal for MRes and Professional Doctorates students who have successfully completed Part One of their programmes of study. Applicants will often, of course, approach Faculties or collaborative partner institutions informally in the first instance, for example in relation to available research expertise in the area of study that they would like to specialise in. As soon as a formal application is made the admission 14

process is administered by the Registry and monitored by the Research Degrees Committee. The Registry will normally communicate by email with applicants. A wide range of communications is sent to applicants, including the following: acknowledgement of receipt of an application; confirmation of the offer of entry; introductory and registration information. In addition to the above, applicants may receive communications from academic Faculties which may include an invitation to visit the University and programme specific information. Similarly, information may be sent to applicants by the collaborative partner institution that they will be studying with. If an application is found to contain false information at the point of verification or thereafter, the University reserves the right not to enrol the applicant or to require the student to withdraw from the programme of study. No research degrees students for the MPhil and PhD by Research or the PhD by Published Works can be admitted directly by the Faculty or collaborative partner institution and it is important that no promises in relation to admission for those programmes of study are made until the admission has been approved by the Admissions Sub-Committee. In general, the University operates three entry points for research degrees programmes: 1 October, 1 February, and 1 June. However, for some programmes, such as the DBA, there are different entry points; for full information please consult the website on http://www.uwtsd.ac.uk/postgraduate-research/ The University endeavours to turn-around all research degrees applications as quickly as possible and monitors closely turn-around times for all research degrees applications. The fast processing of formal applications is greatly supported if applicants ensure that all requested paperwork needed is submitted on time. Successful applicants will receive an offer of entry from the University. The offer of entry will either by Conditional or Unconditional. The Registry will contact any applicants that have been unsuccessful. Unsuccessful candidates are made aware that they can request feedback as per the policy outlined below. 5.6 Appeals and Complaints Procedure in relation to admission decisions and processes The University considers all applicants fairly and in line with the principles outlined in the policy. However, the University recognises that there may be occasions where applicants request an appeal (review of their application), or make a complaint about the admissions process. This section clarifies the arrangements for applicants to obtain feedback about an unsuccessful application, to appeal a selection decision or to complain about the admissions process. 15

5.6.1 Introduction The University is committed to fair, transparent and consistent admissions practices. Every unsuccessful research degrees applicant is given feedback as to why their application was unsuccessful. Following the provision of feedback, an applicant will have the right to appeal the selection decision, providing that there are sufficient grounds for an appeal (see section 5.6.4). An applicant who wishes to make a complaint about the admission policy and procedures may do so using the complaints procedure (see section 5.6.7). The complaints procedure cannot be used to challenge an academic decision to refuse an application. 5.6.2 Feedback Feedback in this context is defined as information about why an application was unsuccessful. Any unsuccessful applicant to the University may request further feedback on an admissions decision. Applicants should note that the most common reason for an application to be declined is that the applicant either does not meet the entry requirements for study at research degrees level or that the Faculty or collaborative partner does not have the academic expertise or the capacity to supervise the topic proposed. Unsuccessful applicants are encouraged to check the University's website for details of both standard offer levels and any specific entry requirements. 5.6.3 Procedure for Requesting Feedback The following procedure should be used to request further feedback regarding an unsuccessful application to the University. Requests for feedback should be made in writing to the Registry, within 20 working days following notification of the original admissions decision. Applicants should include their full name and the name of the programme applied to. It is not possible to provide detailed feedback by telephone. The Registry will respond in writing to each request for feedback within 20 working days of receipt of the request. Requests for further feedback must come from the applicant. The University will not respond to requests for feedback from those advising applicants (whether family members, employers, agents, or solicitors). 5.6.4 Appeal against an Admissions Decision For the purposes of this procedure, an appeal is defined as a request by an applicant for a formal review of the outcome of an admissions decision. An appeal will only be considered where there are adequate grounds, as set out below: Where there is substantial new information which, for good reason, was not made available either on the original application or during the selection procedure, and where that new information is significant and directly relevant to the original decision. Please 16

note that the new information must relate directly to the original application and cannot include activities or achievements which have taken place or been ratified subsequently. Where there is evidence that the University s published Admissions Policy has not been followed. Appeals against an admissions decision based on the academic judgement of University staff about an applicant s suitability for entry to a particular programme or appeals put forward on any grounds other than those specified above will not be considered. The University will also not consider appeals where decisions have been made on the grounds of available supervisory capacity or academic expertise. The University will not consider appeals that are based on errors made by external organisations, agencies or individuals. For example, inaccurate predictions of future grades; disputes about the grading of formal examinations; comments made by referees or agents. The University will not be able to consider appeals where a decision not to admit an applicant is based on restrictions imposed by external organisations or agencies for example restrictions imposed by UK Visas and Immigration. 5.6.5 Procedure for Appealing against an Admissions Decision The following procedure should be followed if an applicant wishes to appeal against an admissions decision. An applicant should seek feedback from the University (see section 5.6.2 above) before deciding whether or not he/she has grounds to appeal the admissions decision. An appeal will not be considered until after an applicant has received formal feedback. Appeals must be received within 20 working days following the provision of feedback from the Registry. An appeal should be submitted in writing to the Chair of the Research Degrees Committee, stating clearly the grounds for appeal (as above) and outlining the case in full. Appeals must be made by the applicant and not a third party. The University will not respond to requests from anyone other than the applicant (whether family members, employers, agents or solicitors). Once received, the Chair of the Research Degrees Committee will review the record of the application (normally in consultation with the relevant Faculty s Director of Research Degrees Studies) and will respond in writing, normally within 20 working days. If the appeal is upheld, the University will take such reasonable action as is appropriate and the applicant will be informed of the outcome. If the appeal is not upheld, the University will communicate the reasons for the decision to the applicant in writing. No applicant will be discriminated against in any future application on the basis of appealing a previous admissions decision. 17

5.6.6 Complaints (1) For the purposes of this procedure, a complaint is defined as an expression of dissatisfaction about the University s admissions policies and procedures which have been used to reach a selection decision or about the actions, or the lack of actions, by the University or its staff. (2) A complaint will not result in the amendment of an admissions decision. However, if in the course of investigating a complaint the Chair of the Research Degrees Committee believes there are grounds for an appeal against the selection decision, the Head of Registry may advise the applicant to submit a formal appeal. 5.6.7 Procedure for Complaints The following procedure should be followed if an applicant wishes to submit a formal complaint. Complaints must be received within 20 working days of the conclusion of the admissions process against which the complaint is being made. A complaint should be submitted in writing to the Chair of the Research Degrees Committee, and should provide the following information: the nature of, and reasons for, the complaint, giving as much detail as possible; any steps already taken to resolve the matter, if appropriate; details of any response received to date and a statement as to why the response(s) is not satisfactory; an indication of the outcome which is sought. The complaint must be made by the applicant and not a third party. The University will not respond to requests from anyone other than the applicant (whether family members, employers, agents or solicitors). Once received, the Chair of the Research Degrees Committee will investigate the complaint and will seek to resolve the complaint or explain the situation and will respond in writing, normally within 20 working days. If the complaint is substantiated, the University will take such reasonable action as is appropriate and the applicant will be informed of the outcome. If the complaint is not substantiated, the University will communicate the reasons for the decision to the applicant in writing. No applicant will be discriminated against in any future application on the basis of submitting a complaint 5.7 Changes to Programmes or Supervisory Arrangements or Discontinuation of Programme Where significant changes have been made to a published programme, those applicants with an offer on that programme should be informed of those changes as soon as possible. Such changes may include: A programme not being validated or accredited by a professional body or the University; 18

A programme gaining validation from a professional body; Major change (review) to an existing programme; Major variation to the programme fees; Change of location of programme delivery; The closure or suspension of a programme. Changes in relation to the proposed supervisory team Applicants will have the option of withdrawing their acceptance of the programme. Should an applicant wish to be considered for an alternative programme his/her application will then be assessed against the entry criteria for that particular programme, provided there is sufficient space to accommodate them. 5.8 Deferred Entry The University is willing to consider applications for deferred entry. However the University reserves the right to withdraw a programme from its prospectus during an academic year, and applicants choosing to defer their entry will be clearly informed of this. In addition supervisory expertise or capacity may no longer be available for the desired entry date and if this is the case applicants are informed of this. The University cannot guarantee that the programme s tuition fee will not change during the deferment period. 5.9 Entry requirements and procedures For admission requirements, see the relevant section of each programme of study in Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook. Where applicants do not meet these requirements, the University has the responsibility to ensure that they can demonstrate equivalent academic ability, for example, that they have acquired the requisite skills, knowledge and training from their professional work. As part of the admission procedures for such non-standard admissions, the features of the applicants professional work that evidence the acquisition of the skills are highlighted. For example, their professional occupation may use the academic skills developed during an undergraduate degree in a way which develops independent critical assessment of evidence, or formulation of plans, or use of methodologies which would have extended their undergraduate achievement. Clearly, applicants working in non-graduate positions will not easily be able to satisfy this requirement. RPEL requests will need to follow the procedures set out in Chapter 10 of the Academic Quality Handbook. In cases where assessed work for a research degree is based on activities and/or data or other resource accessed via the student s employment or another employer / external party, then, in addition to the academic requirements for admission listed above, a formal agreement from the employer or external party to permit access to such resource is required. This agreement must make clear how company data and other information might be used and how any issues of Intellectual Property are dealt with. Research degree applicants are expected to submit the names of two referees as part of the formal application process. These referees should normally be an individual from an organisation at which the applicant has studied or at which the applicant was or is employed. 19

The referees must not be a relative or personal friend of the applicant. If the referees are from an institution at which the applicant has studied, then he/she must be an academic who has assessed the student as part of the qualification that is being used to gain entry. If the referees are from an institution at which the applicant has been or currently is employed, then they must have had line management responsibility for the applicant. One referee will normally be contacted. An interview (either face-to-face or by electronic means for applicants at a distance) must, wherever possible, be conducted by at least one member of staff of the Faculty or collaborative partner institution, who must have had appropriate training in selection and admissions procedures. Applicants for the PhD by Published Works must be interviewed by two members of staff. An admission decision form must be completed for each applicant, irrespective of the research degree applied for, which reflects on the interview and application form. For admissions for the MPhil and PhD by Research and the PhD by Published Works a recommendation must be given by the Faculty or collaborative partnership institution to the Admission Sub-Committee. For admissions to MRes programmes of study and professional doctorates the Faculty must give the recommendation to the Registry and the collaborative partner institution must communicate the outcome to the Registry. The Registry monitors the turn-around times to ensure that applications are assessed in a timely manner. For international applicants who will be studying on a Tier 4 visa all interviews must be recorded and on the admission decision form Faculties and collaborative partner institutions are asked to comment on the English or Welsh language capabilities of any applicant whose first language is not English or Welsh during the interview. The interview must also include a credibility assessment. The staff responsible for interviewing applicants during the entry consultation process must: i. ensure that there is sufficient motivation to cope with the rigours of a research degree; ii. ensure that there is a realistic and sound initial research proposal and outline; iii. ensure that there are realistic prospects of having the resources to pay the required fees and to provide support through the programme; iv. ensure that there are no issues in relation to English / Welsh language skills and expertise; v. ensure that candidates have a clear picture of: the fees to be paid; the working environment (where appropriate); the resources and facilities available; the supervisory team and supervisory arrangements; the University and Faculty or collaborative partner institution s study / achievement expectations. 5.10 RPCL, RPEL and direct entry For RPCL, RPEL, and direct entry see Chapters 8 and 10 of the Academic Quality Handbook. All RPCL, RPEL and direct entry requests must be approved prior to admission. 5.11 Requirements for external students or students with an external supervisor The following information will be required from the Faculty or collaborative partner institution, in addition to the normal research application, before admission for either full-time or part-time 20

external students will be approved. Students regularly using facilities at the University or collaborative partner institution while conducting their research are internal students. Please note that not all research degrees programmes of study may be offered on a distance learning basis. The Faculty or collaborative partner institution must, using the admission decision form: confirm that the applicant will have access to all the required resources. These include access to specialised sources (such as data holdings, analytical equipment, catalogues, etc.) as well as more general resources such as IT support, internet and library facilities; indicate that contact requirements will be met. The expectation is that there will be ten such formal contact points per year for full-time students and five per year for part-time students. For students where external supervisors are part of the supervisory team, the following additional information will be required on the admission decision form: a detailed account of the qualifications and roles of the members of the supervisory team (both internal and external) and how they will manage the research programme, including the means and frequency of the student s access to supervisors, the role of the external supervisor, arrangements for informal and formal supervision, as well as formal reviews of progress, and the management of student s professional development portfolios (PDPs). 5.12 Research or programmes requiring enhanced disclosure Applicants who wish to undertake research or enrol on programmes where they will be required to work with children, young people or vulnerable adults will be informed during their interview and in subsequent offer letters that they will be required to gain an enhanced disclosure from the Disclosure and Barring Service in order to fully enrol as a student at the University or collaborative partner institution and before they are allowed to undertake research or work that requires contact with children or vulnerable adults. 5.13 Applications from Welsh speaking students All Faculties and, where appropriate, collaborative partner institutions are encouraged to respond to any prospective Welsh speaking students through the medium of Welsh. It is imperative that the University in accordance with its Welsh Language Scheme - provides a positive experience for all Welsh speaking prospective students whether they wish to study through the medium of Welsh or not. The Registry ensures that any formal correspondence with a prospective student is fully bilingual at all times and that arrangements are made, where possible, to interview Welsh speaking prospective research students through the medium of Welsh during the interview. 5.14 Applicants with disabilities or specific learning needs Applicants are encouraged to disclose any disability during the application process and throughout their time at University as early as possible to the appropriate persons. With the applicants explicit consent, disclosed information may be shared and used to determine reasonable adjustments and compensatory measures. Applicants who decline to share 21

information should be made aware that this may limit the University s ability to ensure that appropriate and timely support arrangements are put in place. Collaborative partner institutions will follow the policy and processes as outlined below but use their own equivalent structures for the assessment and consideration of any applications from applicants with disabilities or specific learning needs. Research degrees applicants are invited to indicate their disability which is then recorded on the student record system using the following coding structure. These are the same codes as those used for undergraduate and taught postgraduate applicants. A code other than A means the applicant has indicated some form of disability. The codes for disabilities, special needs and medical conditions are: A B C D E F G H I J No disability You have a social/communication impairment such as Asperger s syndrome/other autistic spectrum disorder You are blind or have a serious visual impairment uncorrected by glasses You are deaf or have a serious hearing impairment You have a long standing illness or health condition such as cancer, HIV, diabetes, chronic heart disease, or epilepsy You have a mental health condition, such as depression, schizophrenia or anxiety disorder You have a specific learning difficulty such as dyslexia, dyspraxia or AD(H)D You have physical impairment or mobility issues, such as difficulty using your arms or using a wheelchair or crutches You have a disability, impairment or medical condition that is not listed above You have two or more impairments and/or disabling medical conditions For code G the Registry will process the application in the same way as it processes all other applications, and the relevant DSA Administrator will be forwarded a pdf copy of the application. The DSA Administrator will forward the application to the relevant Specialist Academic Coordinator (Swansea campus) or Senior Learning Support Coordinator (other campuses). Codes B, C, D, E, F, H, I & J No offer of an interview or offer of a place will be able to be made until Student Services and the Faculty s Director of Research Degrees have discussed the implications of the declared disability and have identified and assessed the applicant s needs. All research degrees applicants are always interviewed prior to the offer of a place on any research degrees programmes. In addition, the interview for disabled applicants who have one 22

of these eight codes must involve Student Services as well as academic staff in advance of making an offer, as early as possible, in order that support requirements are identified. Where complex support requirements are identified, the student s case will be referred to senior Student Services staff prior to any decision regarding an offer being made. Similarly, applicants declaring a disability prior to or during an interview should also be encouraged to discuss their support requirements. The Registry will ensure that both the Faculty s Director of Research and the relevant Student Services member will receive a copy of the application. Together they will discuss the implications of the declared disability and the inherent requirements of the programme of study and, where appropriate, the venue of the programme of study. An interview should then be arranged as soon as possible by the Faculty involving both academic staff from the Faculty, Student Services staff, and other colleagues where appropriate (e.g. the Health & Safety Manager). The interview can be conducted by means of a face to face meeting, a telephone conference, or an electronic meeting held by Skype or Lync. The interview may be organised by the Faculty s Director of Research Degrees without the involvement of the Registry. If the Faculty s Director of Research Degrees wants the Registry to invite the applicant to interview, then confirmation should be sent to Registry that Student Services have been contacted and also details of the date and time of the interview. It would benefit all parties if the applicant is made aware beforehand that the interview will include a discussion of whether or not reasonable adjustments can be made. Applicants that have disclosed a disability on their application form are encouraged to contact Student Services, their Faculty or collaborative partnership, and the Registry to discuss their support requirements. 5.14.1 The Interview Process The Learning Support team within Student Services will make arrangements with the Faculty to support the interview process with the applicant, in order that a reasonable adjustment form can be completed and a conversation can take place if needed about the requirements of the applicant in order for them to participate to the fullest possible extent on the course. All interviews will need to include explanation by academic staff of the inherent requirements of the course and the course venue. A representative from Learning Support will be able to facilitate this as part of the interview in order for the Faculty s Director of Research Degrees to make an assessment in relation to the applicant s ability to undertake the programme of study. In discussions between Learning Support and the Faculty s Director of Research Degrees, both parties will need to come to an agreement on whether the Estates and Health and Safety officials need to be made aware of the possibility of consultation at interview times and the date that these are going to take place. Typically, the Health and Safety Manager needs to attend if it is deemed that an applicant may need assistance in the event of an emergency whereby a building needs to be evacuated. Where it has been deemed appropriate to involve the Health and Safety Manager, he will make a decision at the interview as to whether a Personal Emergency Evacuation Plan (PEEP) is required and will act on this as soon as possible thereafter. Reference will need to be made to the reasonable adjustment form by the Health and Safety official for the nature of requirements that need to be met. The Health and Safety Manager should make recommendations about any 23

necessary physical adjustments that will need to be made if the applicant is to be accepted onto the programme. During the interview, a Reasonable Adjustment form must be completed as well as the standard research degrees admission interview form. The Reasonable Adjustment form should then be emailed to the Registry, Student Services, Estates and any other interested party. The standard research degrees admission interview form must also be emailed to the Registry. 5.14.2 Processes following the completion of the assessment Any recommendation must be reported to the Registry so that the admission processes relevant to the particular research degree programme of study can be continued. The Registry will only continue to process the application as long as the Reasonable Adjustment form has been presented. Where appropriate for the research degrees programme, the Research Degrees Admissions Sub-Committee will receive the Reasonable Adjustment form to inform the recommendation that is made to the Research Degrees Committee. If the adjustment required would not be considered reasonable for the University in terms of the Equality Act 2010, the Faculty s Director of Research Degrees should report the following statement to the Registry: University provision is unsuited to the candidate s needs. Note: Not all applicants will declare their disability on an application form. All applicants who accept an offer of a place will be sent a Support Needs Enquiry Form regardless of whether a disability has been declared. 5.15 Applicants declaring criminal convictions The University has a duty to ensure the safety of its student and staff community. The application process requires applicants to disclose unspent convictions. For certain programmes and research involving interaction with children and/or vulnerable adults, applicants must disclose all convictions, including cautions, reprimands, final warnings, bind-over orders and spent convictions. Failure to declare a criminal conviction may result in an application being refused and if students are convicted of a criminal offence after they have applied, they must inform the University. Continuing students will be expected to declare a criminal conviction immediately and will be required to confirm at re-enrolment that they do not have a criminal conviction that has not previously been declared to the University. Applicants who declare a criminal conviction will be asked to complete a form that provides the University with further detail. The application will be assessed in the first instance on the basis of standard academic and non-academic selection criteria. The relevance of the criminal conviction(s) will be considered before a final decision is made. Applicants who wish to enrol on programmes or undertake research where they will be required to work with children, young people or vulnerable adults will be informed during interviews and in subsequent offer letters that they will be required to gain an enhanced disclosure from the Disclosure and Barring Service in order to fully enrol as a student at the University and before they are allowed to undertake work that requires contact with children or vulnerable adults. 24

5.16 International Applications Each applicant is assessed on an individual basis, according to the evidence provided on the application form and supporting documents. Each applicant must meet the University s requirements in addition to any requirements placed upon the institution by Government/legislative bodies. These include the requirements of Tier 4 (General) Student Visa sponsorship as defined by the Home Office. 5.16.1 Academic requirements Equivalence of academic qualifications may vary from country to country. Therefore the University uses a commonly accepted tool (NARIC) to assess the comparability with UK qualifications. As part of the University s UKVI Tier 4 Sponsor Licence, the University is required to view and maintain copies of all international students current passport and visa (valid for study at the University) along with original qualification documents (including certified translations if these are not in English) on the basis of which admission is granted to the University. The University undertakes these checks as part of the registration process upon arrival. The University cannot permit an international student to enrol/register at the University without undertaking this process. In addition to the documentation required as part of the University s UKVI Tier 4 Sponsor Licence commitments, it will also retain copies of any other documentation received in support of an application. All research degree applicants are interviewed prior to admission. International students requiring a visa must have their admissions interview either face to face or by electronic means. Interviews that are held via video-conference will be recorded. 5.16.2 External Agents The University has formal agreements with many institutions worldwide and in some countries UWTSD has appointed local representatives who can offer advice, information and assistance with applications. The local representatives are not authorised to make admissions offers on behalf of the University direct to applicants or to collect any tuition or accommodation fees on behalf of the University and all offers are made by the University in line with the admissions policy and procedures. Applicants should contact the University s International Office direct in the event that an agent seeks to collect funds on behalf of the University. 5.16.3 English Language requirements In the case of applicants whose first language is not English or Welsh, applicants need to meet the University s English or Welsh language requirements. English Language requirements have two dimensions: 1. academic requirement as stipulated by the University and 2. immigration requirements as stipulated by the UKVI. International 25

applicants who require a visa to facilitate their studies in the UK are required to satisfy both of these requirements. The University s requirements for admission to research degrees are higher than the UKVI ones. It is currently a requirement that all applicants for research degrees whose first language is not English or Welsh must produce evidence of their English language skills. The candidates are expected to undertake an English language test through a recognised examination centre, the most common of which is IELTS, although there are other recognised examination providers. The University will verify the validity of these certificates. A list of UKVI-approved Secure English Language Test providers is available on the UKVI website (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guidance-on-applying-for-uk-visa-approvedenglish-language-tests ). Offer letters will include appropriate information and guidance notes for international applicants. The University will carry out the appropriate checks to assess immigration history before issuing a Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) for applicants who require a visa. The University policy requires that the minimum scores (using the IELTS test scheme) for entry on to a research degree (with the exception of admission to an MRes programme of study) are: Writing 6.5 Reading 6.5 Speaking 6.0 Listening 6.0 With an overall score of 6.5 For MRes programmes of study the following minimum IELTS scores are required: A minimum score of 6.0 with no less than 5.5 in each component The scores have been set at this level to enable the candidate to engage with the research and to be able to cope with the complexity of the English language at doctoral level. In general there are two cohorts of students of varying language levels who are considered for entry to the University s doctoral-based programmes: MPhils and PhDs by Research and professional doctorates (i.e. DBAs and Doctorates by Professional Practice). These cohorts are: (i) (ii) Students who have current, valid evidence of an approved language test that meets the existing entry requirements Students who have obtained a Masters level qualification in a majority Englishspeaking country that required evidence of minimum scores of IELTS 6.0 across all components on entry to that programme. In the event of concerns being raised by tutors or supervisors about specific areas of weakness in language competence, for example at one of the key stages of the monitoring of progress, intensive language support and subsequent testing within a set period of time may be stipulated as a mandatory component of their subsequent teaching. In these circumstances, if a student does not achieve the required language levels within the set time period, their candidature will be terminated. 26

5.16.4 Finance Information The applicant must make an initial payment to secure a place to study with the University. Evidence is required to confirm that the applicant has sufficient funds to pay for their tuition fees for the first year of study and the living costs as stipulated by the UKVI. On verification of the evidence submitted by the applicant the University will issue a CAS. Details regarding acceptable evidence, which may vary from country to country, are provided on the UKVI website. Details of tuition fees and financial requirements can be found on the University s website. International applicants (non EEA applicants) are required to pay a tuition fee deposit before receiving their CAS. A CAS is a unique reference number which is assigned and used by the UKVI. 5.16.5 Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) The CAS number links to the electronic information about a student and the programme of study which is provided by the University to UKVI. Every student has a unique CAS number. The University generates the CAS via the UKVI Sponsor Management System, once an offer is unconditional and has been firmly accepted. It should be noted that a Tier 4 visa application can only be made in the three months prior to the start of a programme. In order to apply for a UK Tier 4 (General) Student visa and enrol at the start of a programme, applicants must produce their original certificates and transcripts. More information is available on the University s website, including information about immigration and visas, travel to UWTSD and English Language requirements, as well as the 'International Students' Guide'. 5.16.6 Refugees and Asylum Seekers The University is aware that it is good practice to employ holistic assessment, looking not just at examinations and grades but also the circumstances in which the applicant s education was undertaken. Refugees and asylum seekers represent a highly qualified and motivated group of potential students and the University considers the positive qualities that they may bring to programmes at all levels. The families of refugees and asylum seekers may also encounter other problems of exclusion and form part of other under-represented groups. In some parts of the UK, such as Wales, they may be specifically identified for support under widening inclusion strategies and activities. The University follows the recommendations of the Welsh Government as set out in the Refugee Inclusion Strategy published in 2008 which highlighted the role of HE as Priority 3, Action 4 of the Refugee Action Plan. The June 2012 update ensures that Higher and Further Education Institutions are fully aware of refugee and asylum seeker entitlements. The Action Plan aims to provide accessible information, advice and guidance as well as direct financial and other support to increase access to further and higher education by refugees and asylum seekers. 27

5.17 The offer and welcome letter The Registry is responsible for advising the Faculty or collaborative partner institution of the admission decision. Where formally agreed with the collaborative partnership institution, collaborative partner institutions may send out offer letters themselves. The offer letter sent by the Registry (or where formally agreed the collaborative partner institution) to successful applicants for the MPhil/PhD by Research and PhD by Published Works must state the following information: the title of the degree programme; that normally students will be enrolled for an MPhil (unless given direct entry), with possible transfer to a PhD after satisfactorily completing a qualifying period of study (for MPhil/PhD candidates only); the mode of study; the minimum (expected) and maximum periods of study; expected total fees, including tuition fees and any other fees (e.g. continuation fee), charges or costs at current rates that students would be expected to meet; the names of the Director of Studies and the other members of the supervisory team, including any advisers; The welcome letter, sent by the Registry (or where formally agreed the collaborative partner institution) to applicants who have accepted the offer for the MPhil/PhD by Research and the PhD by Published Works will include information about induction as well as: the name of the person at the University or collaborative partner institution whom they may contact in case of problems (usually the Faculty Director of Research Degrees); contact details for the Postgraduate Research Office or equivalent professional unit in the collaborative partner institution; the link to the Regulations, Code of Practice for Research Degrees and the Research Degrees Student Handbook, where further information (including information about arrangements for enrolment, induction, students responsibilities, attendance and training requirements, opportunities to undertake teaching or other duties, practical arrangements, as well as any restrictions on hours of work outside the research programme) can be accessed; for collaborative partner institutions: links to any information specific to the collaborative partnership. The offer letter for MRes and Professional Doctorate applicants must state the following information: the title of the degree programme; the mode of study; the minimum (expected) and maximum periods of study; expected total fees, including tuition fees and any other fees (e.g. continuation fee), charges or costs at current rates that candidates would be expected to meet. 28

The welcome letter, sent by the Registry (or where formally agreed the collaborative partner institution) to applicants who have accepted the offer for an MRes or Professional Doctorate will include information about induction as well as: that once they have successfully completed Part One, they will be written to with the name of the Director of Studies and, for Professional Doctorates, the other members of the supervisory team as well; that students will be expected to be able to complete Part One of their degrees successfully before they can proceed to Part Two; the name of the Programme Director; the name of the person at the University or partner institution whom they may contact in case of problems (usually the Faculty / School s Director of Research Degrees); contact details for the Postgraduate Research Office or the equivalent professional unit in the collaborative partner institution; the link to the Regulations, Code of Practice and the Research Degrees Student Handbook, where further information (including information about arrangements for enrolment, registration and induction, candidates responsibilities, attendance and training requirements, opportunities to undertake teaching or other duties, practical arrangements, as well as any restrictions on hours of work outside the research programme) can be accessed; for collaborative partner institutions: links to any information specific to the collaborative partnership. Faculties are responsible for sending students any supplementary information in relation to the Faculty (e.g. specific facilities available to students, resources etc.). Similarly, collaborative partner institutions are responsible for sending students any supplementary information directly related to the collaborative partner institutions. 6. Training (for MPhil and PhD by Research) All MPhil and PhD by Research students should complete the central research induction training programme. This can be done electronically through an electronic platform by external students. In addition, students must complete any compulsory courses provided by the University, Faculty, School, or collaborative partner institution. Students without appropriate training in research methods must complete the generic skills module for research degree students or an equivalent generic skills programme offered by a collaborative partner institution. If Faculties or collaborative partner institutions run any compulsory induction or training programmes they need to ensure that students are made fully aware of the requirements for attendance and of any cost associated with the training or induction. Directors of Studies are responsible for ensuring that personal development needs and professional development portfolios are reviewed regularly and recorded appropriately. The Research Degrees Committee annually reviews training needs based on the overview report of the annual monitoring forms as well as the analysis of any training feedback questionnaires. The University makes available an annual training programme for its research degrees students. 29

6.1 Induction (for MPhil and PhD by Research) It is normally a requirement for all students to attend an induction programme as soon as possible after admission, either by attending the programme in person on the campus that they are studying or at the collaborative partner institution or by following the programme electronically through an electronic platform. All students will be clearly informed of their responsibilities at the beginning of their programme. Where students provide documented evidence that prior training equivalent to that provided in the induction programme has been completed satisfactorily, the Research Degrees Committee, on recommendation by the Faculty or collaborative partner institution, may decide that they can be exempted from the requirement to undertake part or all of the induction programme. The induction programme aims to provide information and training as well as introducing students to academic and administrative staff, and helping the development of their networking with other postgraduates. Arrangements are also made for students to be introduced formally to the relevant library and IT staff and for them to receive appropriate library and IT training. Part of the induction programme will be delivered centrally and part within the Faculty. For collaborative partner institutions some of the programme will be delivered by the Partnership Team Leader, Partnership Coordinator or the link Faculty s Director of Research Degrees and part of the programme by staff from the collaborative partner, such as the Collaborative Partner s Director of Research Degrees. The overall induction process clarifies: facilities available to students; administrative support available to students; rules about the use of facilities, good practice, and, where appropriate, training required for special equipment; rules about data management and protection, where appropriate; Health and Safety requirements and, where appropriate, C.O.S.S.H.; Intellectual Property policy issues; the research ethics application and approval processes and requirements as well as an introduction to the research integrity policy; requirements for students to attend and give research seminars and undertake other research training; research skills training information; opportunities for students to attend conferences and meetings; supervisory and review arrangements and available support. Following confirmation of completion of the induction programme or the granting of an exception in whole or part, as part of the University s commitment to the Researcher Development Framework, students are required to complete a Research Training Review form. This form follows on from the assessment of training needs at the admission stage and outlines students training needs in respect of the proposed research project. It is the first stage in the PDP process. 30

Following completion of a Research Training Review form, students and their supervisor(s) must discuss and agree a plan which will form the basis of the PDP. The plan must be reviewed regularly and revised throughout the duration of the research programme. The plan must contain a full skills assessment and details of any training which may be required to assist in the successful completion of the research project. Students must review, and where necessary revise, the plan throughout the duration of the research programme. Directors of Studies are responsible for ensuring that assessment of the PDP forms part of the annual monitoring report for supervisory teams. 6.2 Induction to Part Two of MRes programmes of study and professional doctorates Students enrolled on MRes programmes of study or professional doctorates will follow an induction programme when they start Part Two of their research degrees programme. Part of the induction programme will be delivered centrally and part within the Faculty. For collaborative partner institutions some of the programme will be delivered by the Partnership Team Leader, Partnership Coordinator or the link Faculty s Director of Research Degrees and part of the programme by staff from the collaborative partner, such as the collaborative partner s Director of Research Degrees. This induction programme will cover the following: facilities available to students for Part Two of their programme of study; administrative support available to students during Part Two of their programme of study; rules about the use of research facilities, good practice, and, where appropriate, training required for special equipment; rules about data management and protection, where appropriate; Health and Safety requirements and, where appropriate, C.O.S.S.H.; Intellectual Property policy issues; the research ethics application and approval processes and requirements as well as an introduction to the Research Integrity and Ethics policy; requirements for students to attend and give research seminars and undertake other research training; research skills training information; opportunities for students to attend conferences and meetings; supervisory and review arrangements and available support. Following confirmation of completion of the induction programme or the granting of an exception in whole or part, as part of the University s commitment to the Researcher Development Framework, students are required to complete a Research Training Review form. This form follows on from the assessment of training needs at the admission stage and outlines students training needs in respect of the proposed research project. It is the first stage in the PDP process. Following completion of a Research Training Review form, students and their supervisor(s) must discuss and agree a plan which will form the basis of the PDP. The plan must be reviewed regularly and revised throughout the duration of the research programme. The plan must contain a full skills assessment and details of any training which may be required to assist in the successful completion of the research project. 31

Students must review, and where necessary revise, the plan throughout the duration of the research programme. Directors of Studies are responsible for ensuring that assessment of the PDP forms part of the annual monitoring report for supervisory teams. 6.3 Data management Research degrees students are responsible for ensuring that all research data is stored securely and backed up regularly. Digital files may be accidentally lost or corrupted so that errors are introduced or the file becomes unreadable. To avoid corruption of data, the research degree student is responsible for ensuring that data is backed-up regularly ideally automatically and to several locations. This ensures a copy of the data is made that can be retrieved if the original is lost or corrupted. Similarly, back-up arrangements should be in place if any data is held in hard copy. Loss of data may have a significant impact on a research student s ability to complete their research in a timely manner, but where appropriate steps to back up data have not been taken, such loss will not be considered as an appropriate extenuating circumstance by the University. 6.4 The Programme of Study Handbook (for (especially Part One of) MRes programmes of study and Professional Doctorates) For MRes programmes of study and Professional Doctorates, a Programme of Study Handbook is available for students. This will include as a minimum: programme specification including overall aims and objectives of the programme; the name and contact details of the Programme Director and of all members of staff involved in the teaching of the programme; module specifications and descriptors for each taught component of Part One; general overview about assessment for Part One; relevant extract from the Credits and Qualification Framework; teaching schedule for the taught modules and dates of the academic year; information about the transfer from Part One to Part Two and the induction processes for Part Two; information about supervisory arrangements and research facilities available during Part Two and any specific arrangements for the group as a cohort during Part Two (e.g. monthly supervisory group workshops in addition to individual supervisory sessions). Further information relating to Part Two for MRes and Professional Doctorate students is contained in the research student handbook. 7. Supervision 7.1 Confirmation of Director of Studies Details of Directors of Studies are confirmed when students are offered a place to study for an MPhil or PhD by research or for a PhD by Published Works, and are included in the welcome letter. Where possible, the names of other supervisors and any advisers must also be included. However the Research Degrees Committee may wait until students are enrolled before finalising 32

the supervisory team but the full supervisory team must be confirmed within three months of enrolment. In the case of an MRes Programme of Study or a Professional Doctorate, details of the supervisory team must be confirmed when students have successfully completed Part One of their programme and are required for the full Research Degree Proposal form. 7.2 Supervision arrangements for MRes programmes of study Research Master s students normally have only one supervisor, together with access to the Programme Director who has responsibility for ensuring that the supervision process is carried out as specified by the regulations and this Code of Practice for Research Degrees. The name of the supervisor must be specified on the full research proposal form and is confirmed when the full research proposal is approved by the Research Degrees Committee. Normally supervisors should be members of academic staff who are expected to remain in employment at the University or collaborative partnership institution for at least the minimum (expected) period of study for which students are being enrolled. They must be listed on the University s Directory of Directors of Studies and Supervisors and have: evidence of recent research activity; possession of a higher degree by research; authorship of research publications in an area relevant to the proposed research project; experience of supervising research in an area relevant to the proposed research project. Normally the supervisor should also have experience of supervising dissertation candidates at Master s level or above to successful completion. In cases where a potential supervisor is lacking such supervision experience they may still be appointed, but must undergo appropriate staff development before the start of the dissertation research and be mentored by the Programme Director or an experienced nominee. The supervisor will normally have a contract of at least 0.4 FTE or above. Faculties or collaborative partner institutions can make a reasoned case to the Research Degrees Committee for those with contracts of less than 0.4 FTE. In this case, confirmation of the following will be needed: the means and frequency of the student s access to the supervisor; arrangements for informal and formal supervisory sessions as well as formal reviews of progress; the management of the student s professional development portfolio (PDP); how the Faculty or collaborative partner institution will ensure that the supervisor is kept fully up-to-date with regard to the University s regulatory framework for research degrees, its research degrees systems and processes and any changes to the research degrees framework and its requirements. Where Faculties or collaborative partner institutions employ pools of external supervisors, it is expected that an academic member of staff with a full-time contract will have responsibility for overseeing this pool of supervisors. They must: 33

be the first point-of-contact for those supervisors; (in liaison with the Postgraduate Research Office or, in the case of collaborative partners, the Partnership Coordinator, the Partnership team Leader, or the link Faculty Director of Research Degrees) organise appropriate training for the supervisors; monitor closely the supervisors performance and alert if there are any concerns; oversee the supervisors implementation of the University s research degrees quality assurance framework and all processes and systems for research degrees; oversee the adherence to all appropriate processes for any Tier 4 (General) visa students. The performance of all supervisors, whether they are at the University or one of its collaborative partner institutions, will be closely monitored by the University in a variety of ways, e.g. through the University s or collaborative partner institution s annual appraisal system, through outcomes of key stages of review and progress, particularly in relation to examination outcomes, and through student feedback (e.g. as part of the annual monitoring process). Where external supervisors are employed for students at the University, it is the responsibility of the Faculty to arrange appropriate contracts with HR following the approval of the supervisor through the Research Degrees Committee. Payments are normally made annually, following the annual review process, and contracts are also renewable annually, following satisfactory performance. It is the responsibility of the Faculty to submit the relevant HR form before commencement of employment and prior to an annual renewal date. For the employment of external supervisors at collaborative partner institutions equivalent HR and review of performance processes must be followed. For an individual staff member, the supervisory workload for Research Masters dissertations should normally not exceed 8 full-time or 16 part-time students. Whilst this allowance is in addition to that for doctoral students as specified in this Code of Practice for Research Degrees, Faculties and collaborative partner institutions should bear in mind the total workload for individual members of staff and should not normally utilise both Research Masters and doctoral allowances to the full. Exceptionally a Faculty or collaborative partner institution can make a case to the Research Degrees Committee for an increased supervisory capacity allowance for a particular member of staff, making a reasoned case which includes the assessment of the overall workload of the member of staff. When students have submitted their dissertation, they no longer count towards this limit, and Faculties or collaborative partner institutions may (within reason) anticipate the submission date in planning supervisory responsibilities for expected student enrolment. Normally members of staff who are themselves candidates for research degrees must not simultaneously be supervisors of other students, as this may give rise to a conflict of interest. 7.3 The supervisory team (MPhil and PhD by Research, Part Two of Professional Doctorates, PhD by Published Works) Students enrolled on an MPhil or PhD by Research programme, or on Part Two of a Professional Doctorate or a PhD by Published Works should have at least two supervisors who are expected to remain in employment at the University or collaborative partner institutions for at least the minimum (expected) period of study for which the student will be enrolled. It is expected that, normally, at least one member of the supervisory team is a substantive employee of the University or collaborative partner (holding a contract equivalent to at least 0.4 of a full- 34

time post). Where two external supervisors are employed or both proposed supervisors have a contract of 0.4FTE or less, it is good practice to add a third supervisor or adviser with a contract of at least 0.5FTE. Faculties or collaborative partner institutions can make a reasoned case to the Research Degrees Committee for supervisory teams where both supervisors have contracts of less than 0.4FTE. In this case, confirmation of the following will be needed: the means and frequency of the student s access to the supervisory team; arrangements for informal and formal supervisory sessions as well as formal reviews of progress; the management of the student s professional development portfolio (PDP); the appropriate management of any Tier 4 (General) student visa students; how the Faculty or collaborative partnership will ensure that the supervisory team is kept fully up-to-date with regard to the University s regulatory framework for research degrees, its research degrees systems and processes, and any changes to the research degrees framework and its requirements. Where Faculties or collaborative partner institutions employ pools of external supervisors, it is expected that an academic member of staff with a full-time contract will have responsibility for overseeing this pool of supervisors. They must: be the first point-of-contact for those supervisors; (in liaison with the Postgraduate Research Office, or, in the case of collaborative partnerships, the Partnership Coordinator, the Partnership team Leader, or the link Faculty Director of Research Degrees) organise appropriate training for the supervisors; monitor closely the supervisors performance and alert if there are any concerns; oversee the supervisors implementation of the University s research degrees quality assurance framework and all processes and systems for research degrees; oversee the adherence to all appropriate processes for any Tier 4 (General) visa students. The performance of all supervisors, whether they are at the University or one of its collaborative partner institutions, will be closely monitored by the University in a variety of ways, e.g. through the University s or collaborative partner institution s annual appraisal system, through outcomes of key stages of review and progress, particularly in relation to examination outcomes, and through student feedback (e.g. as part of the annual monitoring process). Where external supervisors are employed for students at the University, it is the responsibility of the Faculty to arrange appropriate contracts with HR following the approval of the supervisor through the Research Degrees Committee. Payments are normally made annually, following the annual review process, and contracts are also renewable annually, following satisfactory performance. It is the responsibility of the Faculty to submit the relevant HR form before commencement of employment and prior to an annual renewal date. For the employment of external supervisors at collaborative partner institutions equivalent HR and review of performance processes must be followed. Supervisory teams must include staff with: experience of supervising research degree candidates to successful completion; 35

evidence of recent research activity; evidence of substantial research achievements (for example, significant levels of publications, grants or awards). The main supervisor is called the Director of Studies and has overall responsibility for the academic work and progress of students, supervising them regularly and frequently. Directors of Studies are responsible for directing supervisory teams, and ensuring that students and other supervisors know the role of each member of the team. Directors of Studies must be suitably qualified active researchers, fulfilling criteria set out by the University for inclusion in the University s Directory of Directors of Studies and Supervisors. All members of a supervisory team will have a contract with either the University or the collaborative partnership. At least one supervisor must have experience of supervising from registration to successful completion of research degrees at or above the level of the proposed enrolment. Supervisory teams for PhD by Published Works students that do not have experience in supervising for this particular research degree will be assigned an adviser with such experience. It is also expected that all supervisors should be able to demonstrate that they fulfil at least one of the following requirements: possession of a higher degree by research at doctoral level; authorship of research publications in an area relevant to the proposed research programme; experience of supervising research in an area relevant to the proposed research programme. In addition to supervisors, an adviser or advisers may be attached to supervisory teams to contribute some specialised knowledge or to act as a link with an external organisation. The Research Degrees Committee, through the Admissions Sub-Committee, is responsible for ensuring that supervisory teams have the appropriate expertise and experience, especially in research activity and achievement and training and that the volume and range of responsibilities assigned to individual members of the supervisory team are such that supervisors are able to carry out their duties satisfactorily and promptly. For MRes and Professional Doctorate students, the consideration of the composition of the supervisory team and initial research proposal is the responsibility of the Admissions Sub-Committee. The Research Degrees Committee has determined that for an individual staff member, the supervisory workload, including both Director of Studies and other supervisory roles, must not exceed a total of ten full-time equivalent students, with a maximum of six full-time equivalent students as Director of Studies. However, at the request of the Faculty or collaborative partnership and with the appropriate evidence supplied by the Faculty or collaborative partnership in relation to the overall workload and contract of the member of staff, the Research Degrees Committee will consider, in specific instances, for research intensive staff and especially where research supervision is the exclusive role of the post holder a quota larger than specified above. 36

When students have submitted their thesis, they no longer count towards this limit, and Faculties or collaborative partner institutions may (within reason) anticipate the submission date in planning supervisory responsibilities for expected student enrolments. Normally members of staff who are themselves candidates for research degrees must not simultaneously be supervisors of other students, as this may give rise to a conflict of interest. If, exceptionally, a Faculty or collaborative partnership would like to include such a member of staff within the supervisory team approval must be sought from the Research Degrees Committee, the proposal must state which member of the proposed supervisory team is a research degree student, and the special expertise for which they are included in the supervisory team. In addition, it will be expected that this member of staff is at an advanced stage of their studies and that the Director of Studies in the proposed supervisory team is a very experienced supervisor of research degrees. Finally, a statement needs to be included by the Director of Studies for the member of staff evaluating the possible impact of taking on additional duties close to submission of the research thesis. Normally, they would be expected to have the role of adviser. 7.4 Research Degrees Board Directory of Directors of Studies and Supervisors In the context of the Register of Directors of Studies and Supervisors, Faculties or collaborative partnership institutions may submit to the Research Degrees Committee at any time the names of proposed Directors of Studies who fulfil any of the following criteria: i. Refereed outputs (publications/conference presentations/exhibitions) In the previous five years, a minimum of three publications, of which two should be in journals or other publicly available research-related documents, e.g. an essay in a catalogue; ii. iii. iv. Practice-based expertise Demonstration in the past five years of national standing in discipline (e.g. keynote speaker at professional conference, election to senior position in a national organisation, national award, appointment to a national consultancy role such as membership of government committee) and three practice-based journal publications or published conference presentations, government evaluation reports, technical papers, or consultancy reports; Experience Prior substantial track-record of research achievement (i.e. less than (i) in past five years but substantial prior publications etc.) and, in the last six years, a track-record of at least two successful PhD completions as a Director of Studies; Funded research/classic knowledge transfer expertise At least two completed Classic Knowledge Transfer Partnerships (KTPs) in the main academic supervisory role, or other substantial grant-funded research activity. (Mini KTPs should not be counted here). Where proposed Directors of Studies do not meet any of the criteria (i) to (iv), the Faculty or collaborative partner institution may make a case to the Research Degrees Committee for them to be included on the Directors of Studies Directory. For example, colleagues may possess a combination of elements from different criteria. 37

In the context of the Directory of Supervisors, Research Degrees Committees may submit to the Research Degrees Board at any time the names of proposed supervisors who fulfil any of the following criteria: i. Holder of a higher degree by research in a relevant discipline at or above the level at which the person may supervise; ii. iii. iv. Authorship of research publications in an area relevant to the proposed research programme; Track-record of research grant awards or refereed publications in the past five years; Practice-based journal publications or published conference presentations, government evaluation reports, technical papers or consultancy reports in the past five years; v. Demonstration in the past five years of national standing in discipline (e.g. keynote speaker at professional conference, election to senior position in national organisation, national award, appointment to national consultancy role such as membership of government committee); vi. Experience of recent supervision of research in an area relevant to the proposed research programme, e.g. in the past six years a track record of a successful supervision of a PhD to completion; at least one completed Classic KTP in the past six years in the main academic supervisory role. Where proposed supervisors do not meet any of the criteria (i) to (vi), the Faculty or collaborative partnership may make a case to the Research Degrees Committee for them to be included on the Supervisors Directory; for example, colleagues may possess a combination of elements from different criteria which are slightly outside the time-limits set above. 7.5 Professional development of supervisors, internal examiners and chairs of Transfer Panels and Examining Boards The University offers an annual training programme for all staff engaged in research degrees provision. Some training events are offered centrally to all staff from the University and all collaborative partner institutions engaged in research degrees supervision; some training is offered at one of the University s campuses or at collaborative partner institutions. Professional development of research degrees supervisors is managed through a system of mentoring and training events for new supervisors. All academic staff new to supervision must attend workshops for new supervisors, before the end of their first year as a supervisor. In addition, another member of the supervisory team on which they serve or another experienced member of staff must be assigned formally as their mentor for developing supervisory skills. The Postgraduate Research Office will be able to advise in relation to possible mentors. Inexperienced supervisors must meet with their mentor at least once per term formally to discuss progress and any issues. Mentors are expected to write a short annual report to the Faculty s or Collaborative partner institution s Director of Research Degrees to reflect on the mentoring which will be used as part of the appraisal process. 38

Experienced supervisors must attend training events to maintain and enhance their skills and to ensure they are familiar with the quality framework, requirements and processes of the University especially where new regulations and requirements are introduced. In addition, where staff have not acted previously as internal examiners or chairs of Transfer Panels or Examining Boards they must attend relevant training programmes in these aspects of research degree practice and have a mentor assigned. Whenever inexperienced colleagues are part of a supervisory team, an internal examiner, or chair of a transfer panel or Examining Board, it is important that the remainder of the team is experienced. The overall balance of teams must be fully considered. Mentors of internal examiners will be required to provide support throughout the process, but particularly at the following stages of the examination process: an initial meeting must be held to go through the process, regulations and expectations; without reading the thesis themselves, mentors are required to read the independent examining report to check whether there is enough detail in the report and whether a preliminary decision is explained clearly and evidenced comprehensively; to reflect on the oral examination and entire examining process after the event has taken place. The chair of the oral examination will also be able to provide useful feedback. Wherever possible, the examining of transfer panels will be used to provide experience at the examining at research degrees level. With the permission of the student, it may also be possible for an inexperienced internal examiner to sit in on an oral examination of another student. Mentors of chairs will be required to provide support at the following stages of the examination process: an initial meeting must be held to go through the process, regulations and expectations; to reflect on the oral examination and entire examining process after the event has taken place. The internal examiner will also be able to provide useful feedback. Wherever possible, the chairing of transfer panels will be used to provide experience in the chairing of examinations at research degrees level. With the permission of the student, it may also be possible for an inexperienced chair to sit in on an oral examination of another student. Where an external examiner is appointed with little or no experience of examining, the same level of mentoring is required. Some of this process will then be done by electronic means. RIES keeps a central register of attendance at all UWTSD research degrees staff development events. Collaborative partner institutions must keep a log of attendance at any research degrees staff development events held at the collaborative partnership. 7.6 Supervisory roles For MRes programmes of study, the supervisor is recommended by the Programme Director and approved by the Research Degree Committee. The supervisor must carry the main responsibility for the day-to-day supervision of the student. The Programme Director must: 39

provide support for the supervisor and, if appropriate, the adviser; provide mechanisms of pastoral support for the student (e.g. through the personal tutor system); arrange alternative supervisory support in case of the prolonged absence of the supervisor. Normally, for MPhil and PhD by Research, for Professional Doctorates, and for the PhD by Published Works, the supervisory team will consist of a Director of Studies and a second supervisor. A larger supervisory team may be needed in some cases to ensure adequate expertise and experience, and in some cases a novice supervisor may be added to a team for experience. The Faculty or collaborative partner institution, however, should aim to propose a supervisory team of two wherever possible, as working with a larger team brings with it logistical problems for students. Where larger teams are proposed the Research Degrees Committee will require evidence that there are clear roles of responsibility for each of the supervisory team members and that effective communication arrangements between the supervisory team have been put in place. This is especially the case where an external supervisor is proposed. Supervisory teams must be put together with the intention of each member having a specific role in the supervisory process. Normally Directors of Studies must carry the main responsibility for the day-to-day supervision of the student. Other members of supervisory teams may: provide expertise in a particular facet of the research; assist the candidate in the development of reflective skills; provide support for the Director of Studies; provide pastoral support for the student; act as the main supervisor in the (prolonged) absence of the Director of Studies. It is essential that supervisory teams establish agreed roles and responsibilities and communicate these to the students. For the academic anchoring of research degree provision within collaborative partnerships see Chapter 9 in the Academic Quality Handbook. 7.7 Attendance monitoring 7.7.1 General The policy outlined below covers both University and collaborative partnership research degree students. The systems described below cover research degree students enrolled at the University. For collaborative partners, equivalent systems and record keeping are expected, with oversight of these by the Partnership Coordinator and Partnership Team Leader(s). 40

7.7.2 Informal meetings Meetings between Directors of Studies (or other members of supervisory teams) and students are often informal. However, a proper record on the RM2 form must be kept by students and supervisors of agreed actions and an electronic copy of these meetings must be held by the supervisory team. At the end of candidature, withdrawal, or graduation, these informal records of supervisory meetings must be transferred to the Postgraduate Research Office where they will be archived as part of the overall student file. 7.7.3 Formal meetings Supervisory teams must hold regular formal meetings with research students (ten per year for full-time candidates and five per year for part-time students) to review achievements, progress, skills acquisition, and to establish objectives for the next period of research. For external students such meetings may take the form of electronic meetings through, for example, Skype or Lync. All formal meetings must be recorded on the required RM1 form and an electronic copy must be sent to the appropriate Faculty office A meeting schedule for this year must be recorded and sent to the appropriate Faculty office on the required RM3 form, with both scheduled and actual meetings recorded on this form. A completed RM3 form is required at the start of the academic year (or start of a student s studies) as well as during the annual monitoring process. Directors of Studies must ensure completion of a supervision meeting record for each formal meeting, and notify the Faculty s or collaborative partner s Director of Research Degrees Studies if progress is not satisfactory, so that appropriate remedial action can be taken without delay. The sub-sections below specify what happens if consecutive contacts are missed for particular research degrees programmes and how cumulative attendance is monitored. 7.7.4 Part One of the MRes or Professional Doctorate: All students on Part One of an MRes or Professional Doctorate are required to attend scheduled classes and Faculties will record academic attendance. Contact points will be specified for each programme, taking into account the structure of the programme and the scheduled timetable. After three consecutive missed contacts, the appropriate Faculty Office will write to the student and ask him/her to meet with the appropriate programme representative. A copy of the letter will be sent to the Postgraduate Research Office for filing on the student s record. If a student has two further consecutive missed contacts the student will be sent a final warning by the Faculty Office. A copy of the letter will be sent to the Postgraduate Research Office for filing on the student s record. Students who have a legitimate reason for absence (including of illness or injury) must produce evidence. Authorised absence will not be counted against the student. The confirmation of the authorised absence will be lodged on the student record in the Postgraduate Research Office. If a student does not provide any reasonable justification for absence and/or the student fails to attend after receiving a final warning then the Faculty will ask the Research Degrees Committee 41

via the Postgraduate Research Office to withdraw the student within two months of the last recorded date of attendance. Each student s cumulative attendance will be reviewed at the end of the academic year. Any student with a cumulative attendance for the academic year below 70% will be sent an end of year warning letter by the Postgraduate Research Office to warn her/him that attendance is below the level expected by the University and if poor attendance continues this may lead to the individual being withdrawn from the programme. 7.7.5 Part Two of the MRes or Professional Doctorate and all MPhil & PhD by Research and PhD by Published Work students All students are required to attend supervisory sessions and attendance at sessions will be recorded. All full-time students (whether they are internal or external students) are required to have ten formal supervisory sessions per year. For external students, these could be held faceto-face or by electronic means (i.e. Lync, Skype) but they cannot be by email. All part-time students (whether they are on-campus or distance learning students) are required to have five formal supervisory sessions per year. The schedule of supervisory meetings is set up by the supervisory team. After two consecutive missed contacts for a research student (irrespective of their study mode), the supervisory team will alert the appropriate Faculty Office who will write to the student and ask him/her to meet with their supervisory team. A copy of the letter will be sent to the Postgraduate Research Office for filing on the student s record. If a research student has one further consecutive missed contact (irrespective of their study mode), the supervisory team will alert the appropriate Faculty Office and the student will be sent a final warning by the appropriate Faculty Office. A copy of the letter will be sent to the Postgraduate Research Office for filing on the student s record. Students who have a legitimate reason for absence (including illness or injury) must produce evidence. Authorised absence will not be counted against the student. The confirmation of the authorised absence will be lodged on the student record in the Postgraduate Research Office. If a student does not provide any reasonable justification for absence and/or the student fails to attend after receiving a final warning then the Faculty will ask the Research Degrees Committee via the Postgraduate Research Office to withdraw the student within two months of the last recorded date of attendance.each student s cumulative attendance will be reviewed at the end of the academic year as part of the annual monitoring process. Any cumulative attendance for the academic year below 70% will be taken into account during this process and a letter will be sent by the Postgraduate Research Office to warn the student that attendance is below the level expected by the University and if poor attendance continues this may lead to the individual being withdrawn from the programme. 7.7.6 International Research Students with a UKVI Tier 4 (General) Visa In addition to the attendance requirements noted above, the following regulations will apply to international students with a UKVI Tier 4 (General) visa. If an international student misses six consecutive contact points without any form of authorisation, the student will be reported by the supervisory team to the appropriate Faculty 42

Office who will inform the Registry. The Registry will inform the UKVI that the student s Tier 4 sponsorship is withdrawn. In addition, international students with a Tier 4 (General) visa will be required to attend two compulsory re-registration points held in January and May. If an international student fails to attend a re-registration point or has missed six consecutive contact points, the student will be reported to the the Registry by the appropriate Faculty Office. The Registry will inform the UKVI that the student s Tier 4 sponsorship is withdrawn. A copy of the letter is logged on the student s record. Students who have a legitimate reason for absence (including illness or injury while in the UK preventing attendance) must produce evidence. Students must get permission to travel abroad prior to leaving. Authorised absence will not be counted against the student. The confirmation of the authorised absence will be lodged on the student record in the Postgraduate Research Office. Each student s cumulative attendance will be reviewed at the end of the academic year as part of the annual monitoring process. Any cumulative attendance for the academic year below 70% will be taken into account during this process and a letter will be sent by the Postgraduate Research Office to warn the student that attendance is below the level expected by the University and if poor attendance continues this may lead to the individual being withdrawn from the programme and to withdrawal of his/her Tier 4 (General) visa. Any international student with a Tier 4 (General) visa whose cumulative attendance falls below 50% for the academic year will be withdrawn from the programme by the Research Degrees Committee and the Registry will inform the UKVI that his/her Tier 4 sponsorship is withdrawn. 7.8 Needs analysis and the training programme for the thesis Supervisory teams will help research students undertake an analysis of their academic and generic skills, and the skills required for them to complete the thesis. Supervisory teams and students reflect on training needs at all formal progression stages of candidature. These key stages may vary depending on which research degrees students are enrolled on. In the light of this analysis, supervisory teams will assist students in setting up a training schedule and monitoring skills acquisition at formal review meetings. All research degrees students must develop PDPs. Advice on PDPs and reflective practice should be included in induction programmes. Many students may have developed a PDP as a requirement of their professional work prior to admission to study and this may be adaptable to include within their research development. The University follows the guidelines of the VITAE Researcher Development Framework. 43

7.9 Absence of Director of Studies Where a Director of Studies is absent for short periods (three months or less), another member of the supervisory team should assume their responsibilities, either through formal or informal arrangements. In order to manage appropriately a prolonged absence of the Director of Studies or any other member of the supervisory team, it is crucial that Faculties inform the Postgraduate Research Office of any such absences. For collaborative partner institutions the Postgraduate Research Office will need to be informed through the Partnership Coordinator. Where a Director of Studies is expected to be absent for a period of more than three months, the Postgraduate Research Office will consult with the Faculty or collaborative partner institution, through the Partnership Coordinator, students and supervisory teams to seek together the best way forward. This may involve appointing another Director of Studies (either for the period of absence of the current Director of Studies, or for the remainder of the research programme [as appropriate]). The impact of extended absence by other members of supervisory teams must also be considered by the student s Director of Studies and, where necessary, the Faculty s / Collaborative partner institution s Director of Studies should consult with the Faculty s / Collaborative partner institution s Director of Studies to identify and appoint a suitable alternative supervisor. 8. Progress, Review and Monitoring Supervisory teams play a critical role in ensuring that postgraduate researchers are able to acquire the necessary skills and knowledge to make progress on research programmes at the rate required to allow completion within the expected period of study. Students and supervisors are jointly responsible for ensuring that the objectives of the research and training plan are reviewed at reasonable intervals and adjusted in the light of developments. Supervisors are responsible for evaluating the progress of students in achieving these objectives, and advising them of the corrective action necessary where problems arise. At an early stage (preferably within three months of enrolment [for MPhil and PhDs by Research] or of commencing Part Two [for Professional Doctorates], for full-time candidates and six months for part-time candidates) students should agree a research programme with the supervisory team and submit a full research proposal to the Research Degrees Committee, whose approval shall be required for continued enrolment. Supervisory teams are required to comment both on the quality of the proposal and on the progress made so far. Where students have not submitted a project for approval within the timeframes specified above, this will be a cause of concern and in such circumstances, the Research Degrees Committee will ensure that satisfactory progress is being made, for example through an action plan for a specified period, and that supervisory teams have developed adequate plans to deal with any barriers to progress. Students studying for a PhD by Published works are expected to have a full plan of action agreed with their supervisory team within three months for full-time students and six months for part-time students. 44

For detailed guidance as to what should be done at the different key stages of candidature, please see the research supervisor handbook. 8.1 What constitutes satisfactory progress? Satisfactory progress generally means making sufficient progress to maintain the likelihood of completion within the normal minimum period of enrolment (the expected period of study). Unforeseen personal or professional problems may impede progress, and this advice is intended to provide general guidance, not to anticipate all possible eventualities. 8.2 Annual monitoring Annually, MPhil and PhD by Research students as well as Part Two Professional Doctorate students and their Directors of Studies must complete a report to Research Degrees Committee detailing progress against planned objectives, and objectives for the coming year, as well as drawing attention to any set-backs or problems which might delay the successful completion of research programmes. Reports also allow students the opportunity to comment, for example, on the facilities available to them, and on the quality of the supervision they receive. This process takes place annually during May with the central Annual Review Board scheduled during June. Faculties and collaborative partner institutions are responsible for ensuring that all the annual monitoring forms reach the Postgraduate Research Office in good time before the central Review Board. Although students and supervisory teams are required to file a report annually, students or supervisory teams may submit a report directly to the Research Degrees Committee at any time if they experience problems which are not being resolved satisfactorily by their supervisory teams or student respectively. All reports coming directly from students will be considered confidentially and additional measures will be put in place if the student is an employee of the University. The Research Degrees Committee constitutes a central Annual Review Board (and any followup review boards to consider students classified as cause for concern or unsatisfactory ) to consider the annual monitoring reports and the recommendations made by the Faculties and collaborative partner institutions in relation to a student s performance and to ensure consistency in relation to the decisions made. Please note that supervisory teams and Faculties can only recommend an outcome and that it is the central Annual Review Board (and any follow-up Review Boards) that make a final decision on the outcome in order to ensure parity and consistency in decision making for all students across the University s research degrees provision. This may mean that, based on the evidence provided, recommended outcome decisions from supervisory teams and Faculties are overturned. Minutes from the Annual Review Board and any follow-up Review Boards are reported to the Research Degrees Committee and any decisions where a student s candidature is terminated needs to be ratified by the Research Degrees Committee. 9. Transfer from MPhil/PhD to PhD Except where students are allowed to enrol with direct entry to the PhD due to the prior satisfactory completion of a substantial piece of research, all students are required to undergo a 45

formal review process before they can transfer to, or continue on, a PhD programme. For the time-lines, please see Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook. The purpose of the transfer process is to ensure that students have shown the development in skills needed to be able to complete the PhD. It is not expected that all the skills required of a doctoral student at examination will be fully developed at transfer, however where students are clearly not showing an appropriate level of skills development then they should not transfer to a PhD enrolment but complete the degree of MPhil. Students are required to complete a report, reflecting on their progress so far and including a detailed plan of action for the remainder of their candidature, using the template form for transfers. The report must be assessed by a transfer panel. For the membership of this panel see Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook. This panel must be approved by the Research Degrees Committee. On the transfer panel as a whole, either the chair or the independent assessor must have examining experience, and mentoring will be provided for any chair or independent assessor unfamiliar with those roles. All transfer panels are approved by the Research Degrees Committee and all arrangements for the transfer examination are made by the Postgraduate Research Office in liaison with the Faculty and supervisory team. As part of the transfer process, students must give an oral presentation to the progression panel, and respond to questions raised by members of the panel. Full reasons in support of the recommendation must be given in the report submitted by the transfer panel to the Research Degrees Committee. The Research Degrees Committee makes a final decision on all transfer recommendations. Note: Where a student has been permitted to enrol directly onto a PhD, a formal process of transfer of enrolment does not apply. However, the first annual review (second for part-time candidates) should be considered as important as a transfer review. 10. Assessment The formal procedures for assessing all research degrees are set out in the regulations which can be found in the Academic Quality Handbook. The oral examination of a student on the basis of his or her thesis forms the final assessment for all research degrees and criteria for the award of the appropriate degree are included in the Academic Quality Handbook, with further information given in the Research Supervisor Handbook. 10.1 Submission of the thesis and, where appropriate, portfolio and any other associated materials To be eligible to submit a thesis, research degrees students must be enrolled on the degree for which submission is intended, and have paid all fees due (including any re-examination fee required) and satisfied all other financial obligations. MRes and Professional Doctorate students must also have completed successfully Part One of their degrees. 46

The intention to submit a thesis for examination is sent in by the student three months before the submission of the thesis. Following the submission of this form, the Postgraduate Research Office approach the supervisory team to start the setting up of an Examining Board in order to ensure that time-lines for Examining Boards can be met. Within the maximum enrolment period, students must submit to the University two copies of the temporarily or permanently bound thesis and separate material, as well as an additional loose copy of the abstract transcribed onto the appropriate form. In addition, an electronic copy must be provided. Where the nature of the work makes it difficult to comply with the requirement for copies of separate material, students must seek advice from the Postgraduate Research Office on the numbers of copies. For corrections one copy must be provided; for resubmissions two copies must be provided. For the inclusion of published papers within a research degree other than the PhD by Published Works please consult Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook and ensure that the required statements in relation to ownership are included in the submission and that all published papers are included as appendices. Students studying for the PhD by Published Works must submit two temporarily bound copies of their critical analysis as well as an electronic copy. In relation to the submission of a portfolio of work, advice will be given by the supervisory team as the exact submission will depend on the nature of the published works. Generally, for the portfolio, in the case of printed publications, the student must submit two hard copies and, where possible, an electronic copy, together with the relevant ISBN numbers. For the inclusion of non-textual artefacts, see the regulations in Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook. When non-textual artefacts are included in the thesis, at the same time as the approval of the composition of the Examining Board and the arrangements for the oral examination, the access to the non-textual artefacts also needs to be specified and approved. With respect to this, the Faculty or collaborative partnership is requested to detail the following on the required Examining Board nomination form: the nature of the non-textual artefacts and how the examiners will gain access to these in advance of the oral examination so that they can each reflect separately on this part of the thesis in their independent reports; in case of an event (e.g. recital or performance) or exhibition, where and when this event or exhibition will be held and the nature of this event; how the Faculty or collaborative partnership will ensure that there is no communication between examiners and between the examiners and student prior to the oral examination. For further information on format, word count, appendices and binding of the thesis see Appendix 1 of this Code of Practice for Research Degrees. Arrangements for the examinations and all associated correspondence are coordinated by the Postgraduate Research Office. Submission before the end of the minimum enrolment period will only be allowed in exceptional circumstances and only if all the required fees are paid. Students will be expected to discuss their intention to submit early with their supervisory team prior to any submission. If the supervisory team has concerns they will need to inform the student of any such concerns in writing and a copy of the letter must be sent to the Postgraduate Research Office where it will be kept on the student s file. 47

10.2 Examinations Students for MPhil and PhD degrees are examined on the basis of their work. This involves the examiners independently reviewing and reporting on the thesis, followed by an examining board conducting an oral examination. The thesis may include an associated portfolio, for example for professional doctorate students or practice-based MPhils or PhDs by Research. Students for the PhD by Published Works will be examined on their thesis which includes their portfolio of work as well as their critical analysis. The date of the examination is normally within twelve working weeks of the examiners receipt of the thesis. If the submission is delayed then the time commitments of members of the examining board may preclude an early oral examination. In cases where there has been a significant delay in the submission after the appointment of the examining board, the University will ensure that members of the board will be available for the oral examination within an acceptable time frame. The advice of the Postgraduate Research Office should be sought if it seems necessary for an alternative examiner to be appointed. The oral examination may not be deferred for a period exceeding 12 months from the date of submission of the thesis. External examiners are not allowed to communicate with each other prior to the submission of their independent reports to the Postgraduate Research Office. Students are not allowed to communicate with any members of the Examining Board either prior to or following the oral examination. 10.2.1 Recording of the oral examination All oral examinations are recorded, unless the student has explicitly opted out of this process when the composition of and arrangements for the Examining Board are approved. Students that do not wish their oral examination to be recorded forfeit their right to an appeal based on the conduct of the oral examination. Only the actual oral examination is recorded. The meetings before and after the oral examination by the Examining Board are not recorded. Chairs of Examining Boards are responsible for the recording of the oral examination and for ensuring that the recording is transferred to the Postgraduate Research Office following the oral examination. All recordings of oral examinations will be stored by the Postgraduate Research Office for a period of two years. The recording can only be accessed for appeal purposes. recordings for either training or feedback purposes. It is not possible to use such 10.2.2 Request for Examination by Electronic Means (Video link) In very exceptional circumstances, the Research Degrees Committee will allow the oral examination to take place by video link. Such exceptional circumstances can include the following: 48

(1) Where conditions have arisen under which it would not be possible otherwise to proceed with the oral examination (eg. where a student cannot return to the UK because of visa or other restrictions) or (2) Where agreed arrangements for a face to face oral examination have had to be terminated because of unexpected circumstances (eg. severe weather; illness of one of the participants). Where such circumstances arise, the University would expect that, normally, the oral examination should be postponed, rather than be held through electronic means, but it is accepted that it will occasionally be necessary for electronic means to be used instead (eg. where the student would suffer disproportionately as a result of postponement). A Request for Examination by Electronic Means Form must be completed by the student and submitted to the Postgraduate Research Office prior to the examination date. This request must be approved by the full Examining Board as well as the Research Degrees Committee before the oral examination by electronic means can take place. Because of the additional operational arrangements involved such a request must normally be made before a student has submitted his/her thesis. The Examination by electronic means can only take place by video-link (not Skype) at an established or recognised institution such as a University, the United Nations office or an embassy and not from home or at an internet café. There must be an official independent representative with the student. Approval will not be given to the use of a telephone link alone for the purpose of examination. The following will be expected to form part of the case made for the request which should be accompanied by relevant evidence: Written confirmation from the intended participants (including the student) that they have no objection to the examination being held, at an agreed time; through electronic means A written statement from the student that he/she has waived any right to appeal against the outcome of the examination on the grounds of the use of the electronic medium or consequences arising from the use of such medium; Confirmation that sufficient time has been allotted for the oral examination itself, and that necessary technical support will be available before and during the oral examination; Confirmation that additional time has been made available before the start of the formal examination to enable the participants to familiarise themselves with the scope and limitations of the medium in use; Confirmation of the locations used for the oral examination; Confirmation of how the student s identity will be verified. If such a request is approved, normally, any costs associated with the holding of an oral examination by electronic means will be borne by the student. In addition, the student is normally responsible for identifying a suitable location to be approved as part of the request by the Research Degrees Committee. 10.3 The Examining Board For the composition of the examining board for Part One of MRes and Professional Doctorates programmes of study see Chapter 7 of the Academic Quality Handbook. 49

Regulations for Examining Boards for Part Two of MRes and Professional Doctorates, MPhil, PhD and PhD by Published Works can be found in Chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook. Internal examiners are staff of the University or a collaborative partner institution. Whilst there is no specified limit on the number of times a member of staff can act as an internal examiner, it is good practice to vary the person appointed to the role. External examiners are from outside the University or its collaborative partner institutions. 10.4 The examination process 10.4.1 The oral examination Guidelines for chairs are available as Appendix 2 to this Code of Practice for Research Degrees. A preliminary meeting of the examining board should take place prior to the oral examination to consider the structure of the questioning, to confirm the initial opinion of the examiners and to decide upon the main points to be raised during the examination. Students may decide whether or not any supervisor is present during the oral examination, but if present a supervisor may only speak in response to a direct question from the examiners. It is good practice for students to be asked in writing whether they agree to the attendance of any member of the supervisory team. The oral examination will normally be conducted at one of the campuses of the University or at the collaborative partner institution. Exceptionally, and with the approval of the Research Degrees Committee, the oral examination may be conducted at another place or by video-link (see section 10.2.2). In the latter case the Chair must ensure that the student is able to communicate only with the examining board during the examination. In the case of students normally resident outside of the United Kingdom, the oral examination may be deferred until their return to this country, provided that they give no less than two months written notice to the Postgraduate Research Office of the dates between which they will be available for oral examination in this country. When the Examining Board assembles on the day of the examination, the independent written reports of each examiner must be available to all members of the board, and the Director of Studies, if present. The oral examination should cover all aspects of the thesis, in particular the points selected by the examiners at their preliminary meeting. Students should be given an opportunity to comment on any adverse points and on any amendments of substance that the examiners are intending to recommend. At the start of the examination, the Chair should ensure that student is introduced to the examiners, and that the atmosphere is reasonably relaxed so that the student are not intimidated by the event. Examiners may sometimes wish to indicate their initial opinion of the thesis at the beginning of the oral examination, so that students have the opportunity to challenge it; however no indication should be given that the oral examination is a formality. Examiners are required to satisfy 50

themselves at the oral examination that the thesis is the student s original work. At the end of the oral examination, the student and any members of the supervisory team are required to withdraw. The Chair will inform the student of the approximate time when the announcement of the outcome, that is the recommendation to be made to the Research Degrees Committee, is expected. 10.4.2 Communicating the outcome of the examination The Chair should agree with the examiners on the announcement to the student of the outcome of the examination. The normal expectation is that this will be on the day of the examination following the oral examination. In exceptional circumstances, for example where the examiners are unable to agree on the outcome, the recommendation may need to be deferred. In this case candidates should be informed of the conflict on the day of the examination, and of the established procedures for resolving it. It should be made clear to the student that the outcome communicated is a recommendation only. At the end of the examination, the examiners are required to submit a joint report setting out their reasons for the recommendation. In the joint report examiners should explain in detail how the student s work meets the requirements for originality and scholarship, or how it failed to do so. Full instructions must be included of any changes required to the thesis, and these requirements must be made available to the student. Following the private discussion between the examiners, the student (and Director of Studies, should the student wish) should be invited to return to the examination room. The recommendation of the examining board should be conveyed to the student and the recommended outcome will be considered by the Research Degrees Committee and also by UW DAAB in case of UW candidates. All research degrees examinations from collaborative partner institutions come to the UWTSD Research Degrees Committee for consideration and approval of the recommended outcome. The Research Degrees Committee has the following options: to approve the recommended outcome, to ask for further clarification (e.g. in relation to a discrepancy between outcome and report, in relation to the work to be done by the student (e.g. to request a more detailed report) or confirmation that the changes can be completed within the time period set by the regulations, to ask the Examining Board to consider the outcome again (e.g. when it seems to members of the Research Degrees Committee that it will not be possible for the student to complete the required changes within the time period specified by the outcome), to reject the recommended outcome of the Examining Board. The recommendation must include an outcome selected from those available in the regulations; it is not possible to adapt an outcome (e.g. the time period associated with a particular outcome). In the case of a requirement for corrections or re-submission, this should include minimum time periods before such re-submission may take place. There must also be clear indications of what students must complete before re-submission, and of the form of the re-submission. In such circumstances a further oral examination may, or may not, be held, at the discretion of the examining board of the resubmission. Examiners must provide a full report where the examination concerns a re-submitted thesis, and recommend whether or not the need for a second oral examination should be waived. The chair of the re-submission Examining Board will make a decision in relation to the holding of a second oral examination based on the report and recommendation from each of the examiners. In instances where the 51

composition of the examining board has been changed or where initial reports indicate that there are any concerns in relation to the resubmitted thesis beyond corrections a second oral examination will always be held. Students will be required to pay a fee for any re-submission period. During the re-submission period, students will continue to receive supervision at the normal specified frequency of meetings. Following the oral examination, all copies of the thesis must be left with the Chair of the examining board for return to the Postgraduate Research Office together with the appropriate form. Further guidance for chairs is available in the Guidelines for Chairs (see Appendix 2). 11. Rights and responsibilities of students 11.1 Leave, absence, and authorised absence approval for international students requiring visas All full-time students are expected to be engaged in their research programmes for 35 hours during the normal working week. For part-time students, attendance requirements are reduced; the expectation is that they will be undertaking work related directly to their research for 17 hours during the normal working week, as agreed with the student s Director of Studies. When planning leave, arrangements must be discussed in advance with the Director of Studies to obtain their approval. Where students are away from the campus without prior notification to the Director of Studies, they should inform their Director of Studies at the earliest opportunity of the duration of the absence and the reasons for it. Students who have a legitimate reason for unplanned absences must produce evidence to explain these. If a student is unable to attend classes or supervisory sessions, for example because of ill health or accident, he/she (or, in an emergency, a friend) must contact their tutor or supervisor before the class or supervisory session take place. In the case of London campus students, students should inform the Student Services Officer. Authorised absences will not be included when a student s attendance is assessed for disciplinary action. The University has an obligation under its UKVI Visa Sponsor Licence to monitor and keep records of academic attendance of international students. If a student is unable to provide evidence or an acceptable justification for repeated or sustained periods of unauthorised absence (as described in section 7.7. of this Code of Practice for Research Degrees), this may lead to withdrawal from their studies and, if necessary, the curtailment of their visa. For international students on Tier 4 visas, all authorised absences and planned periods of leave that have been agreed by a Director of Studies must then also be reported to the Postgraduate Research Office, ensuring the provision of emergency contact details and, where possible, a travel itinerary. Students must obtain written permission even for short periods of absence (maximum of one week), for example to return home due to bereavement or an illness. Longer absences require more detailed guidance and may require the suspension of a student s studies for a specified period. In such cases it is a requirement that students book an appointment to discuss this with the Postgraduate Research Office. 52

If there is a need to apply for authorised absence then the appropriate processes must be followed and the AA1 form accompanied by verifiable documentary evidence must be submitted so that the request for authorized absence can be considered and, if appropriate, authorized and approved in advance. Acceptable reasons for authorised absences include: illness; having to return to one s home country unexpectedly, for example as a result of a close personal bereavement or serious illness (first circle of family); to leave the UK to carry out fieldwork; to attend a conference; to complete a dissertation/thesis in the student s home country; to attend employment interviews or assessments. Student visas are granted for the primary purpose of study in the UK and attendance is a critical requirement to assure the best-possible academic outcome for every student. We do not expect students to ask for approval to be absent from, for example, teaching sessions during term-time or from a number of supervisory meetings for the purposes of tourist travel or social occasions (e.g. weddings) outside the UK. Students, who make this type of request when teaching or supervision is occurring, should not be offended if a request is refused where it is felt that absence may significantly damage academic progress. If an authorised absence is approved and the student is to travel outside the UK, the University will provide a letter which should be carried in their hand luggage when leaving and returning to the UK. This can be shown to an Immigration Officer(s) should they ask for proof that a student is studying on an academic programme and has permission to travel outside the UK. 11.2 Employment Where students undertake placements that are embedded and assessed as part of their Professional Doctorate programme the conditions governing the placement, including any remuneration, should be clearly specified and agreed in writing and in advance by the student, the University, and the placement provider. For any other paid, unpaid, voluntary, or charitable work the conditions below will apply. In general, although engaging in additional academic or other work may be helpful to the career development of students, it is important that this does not interfere with the progress of their research. It is strongly recommended that full-time students undertake no more than six hours of paid or unpaid work during the normal working week. International students must also ensure that they meet any requirements stipulated by their visa. In addition, where students are sponsored by research councils or other sponsors, they must comply at all times with any stipulations with regard to employment as laid down by such sponsors. If full-time students should decide to work for more than the recommended six hours per week, academic progress will be very closely monitored and, if progress is unsatisfactory in any way, the student may be required to reduce the number of hours worked or, where permitted by status or visa conditions, to change study mode and study part-time for their degree. It is therefore a 53

condition of study at the University that full-time students who elect to work for more than six hours per week will forfeit all rights to request an extension to their end date of their candidature. If Faculties would like to employ Graduate Teaching Assistants in order to provide their students with a valuable opportunity to gain teaching skills, they need to ensure the following: 1) that they report their list of graduate teaching assistant annually to the Research Degrees Committee; 2) that all graduate teaching assistants have either completed or are enrolled on the University s accredited programme for graduate teaching assistants; 3) that an appropriate selection procedure is followed and that a contract is set up with HR. 54

Appendix 1 of the Code of Practice for Research Degrees Guidelines in relation to the format, word count and binding of the thesis Code of Practice for Research Degrees: Appendix 1

Appendix 1 of the Code of Practice for Research Degrees Guidelines for the Format, Word Count, and Binding of the thesis 1. Format of the Thesis 1.1 A student s research for a research degree is to be completed by the presentation of a thesis embodying the methods and results of the research. 1.2 The thesis is to be written in Welsh or English. The use of brief quotations in other languages is permitted. 1.3 The length of a research thesis must be appropriate to the subject area but does not include the abstract, acknowledgments, table of contents, tabulated data, diagrams, essential footnotes or endnotes, references, notes on transliteration, any appendices, and the bibliography. See for the appropriate regulations in relation to the word count chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook. Where appendices are included, these may, where appropriate, be presented as a separate volume to the thesis. 1.4 There is no specification for the internal format of the thesis, but the structure should be discussed with the supervisory team and is to be the structure most appropriate to the subject area. Examiners will expect a thesis to be well presented with a consistent system of indexing and referencing throughout the work. 1.5 The student holds copyright as author of all work submitted for assessment. Each student must grant the University the right to publish the thesis, abstract or list of works, and/or to authorise its publication for any scholarly purpose with proper acknowledgement of authorship. Students own the copyright to their thesis and the rights to publish and distribute it, unless they have made arrangements to transfer copyright to a third party (e.g. a sponsor). By depositing the thesis in the library or the University Repository, students are not transferring copyright: they are allowing UWTSD to store a copy of their work, but they remain free to publish the thesis elsewhere. 1.6 Standard formatting of thesis: a) All copies of theses, whether for the purpose of examination or for deposit in libraries, must be presented in permanent and legible form in typescript or print and electronic format. All students must submit one electronic copy as well as the required number of hard copies. The electronic copy should be in Adobe PDF format (see section 4 below). b) The characters employed in the main text (but not necessarily in illustrations, maps, etc.) shall be not less than 12pt; characters employed in all other texts, notes, footnotes, etc., shall be not less than 10pt. Typing must be capable of photographic reproduction and of even quality with clear black characters. c) Only one side of the paper may be used. d) Double or one-and-a-half spacing is to be used in the main text and single spacing is be used in the summary and in any indented quotations and footnotes. Code of Practice for Research Degrees: Appendix 1

e) Pages are to be numbered consecutively. f) A contents list and table of illustrations (if any) must be provided. Drawings and sketches must be in black ink; unnecessary details are to be omitted and the scale is to be such that the minimum space between lines is not less than 1 mm. Colour graphics for charts, diagrams etc. and colour photographs may be used, but students must in all cases ensure that material is capable of being photocopied and microfilmed. Scanned images may be included in the electronic copy. Copies produced by xerographic or comparable permanent processes are acceptable. Theses are to be produced on UK A4 paper (297mm x 210mm) of good quality and sufficient opacity for normal reading. When the thesis is added to the e-repository and / or made available in the library, it is considered published by copyright law. It is the author s responsibility to ensure copyright is cleared and / or permissions granted. If the thesis contains copyrighted material and the author is unable to obtain permission for the deposit e-copy / library copy then contact copyright@uwtsd.ac.uk for advice and to discuss options. 1.7 The minimum widths of margins are to be: Inside margin Top and outside margin Bottom margin 40mm 15mm 20mm 1.8 The thesis must contain within its binding: i. Front title page (see below for wording) ii. The declaration page signed by the student (see below for wording), a) showing to what extent the work submitted is the result of the candidate s own investigation; b) certifying that the work has not already been accepted in substance for any degree and is not being concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree; c) regarding the availability of the thesis (see paragraph 1.11). iii. an abstract not exceeding 300 words to be located at the front of the thesis; iv. Table of contents v. Abbreviations / Translations (if applicable) vi. Table of Illustrations (if applicable) vii. Main body of thesis viii. Bibliography (depending on the nature of the discipline) ix. Appendixes (if applicable) 1.9 The thesis must contain on its title page PLEASE SEE EXAMPLE AT THE END OF DOCUMENT i. the title; ii. the author s full name and degrees; iii. the degree for which it is offered and the name of the awarding body; iv. the discipline or disciplines to which it pertains; v. the date of submission; vi. the names of the Director of Studies and any other supervisors or advisers; vii. the name(s) of any collaborative partnership institution; viii. a statement that the research was EITHER undertaken under the auspices of the Code of Practice for Research Degrees: Appendix 1

University of Wales: Trinity Saint David and was submitted in partial fulfilment for the award of a Degree of the University of Wales (for UW students) OR undertaken in partial fulfilment of a Degree of the University of Wales Trinity Saint David (for UWTSD students). 1.10 Students may submit material not bound with the thesis if such material constitutes the most appropriate method of presenting the information concerned. Such material could include diagrams, maps and similar documents, or other material such as audio or video recordings, slides, films, etc. A list of such separate items is to be provided in the thesis. Electronic copies of this additional material should be included alongside the electronic copy of the thesis. See chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook and Code of Practice for Research Degrees for the regulations and protocols in relation to the inclusion of nontextual artefacts. 1.11 A thesis submitted for a research degree shall normally be openly available and subject to no security or restriction of access. Regulations in relation to the request of restriction of access to the thesis can be found in chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook. On submission of the thesis, a student is to be required to sign a statement indicating: i. that the thesis, if successful, may be made available for inter-library loan or photocopying (subject to the law of copyright), and that the title and summary may be available to outside organisations; ii. that the University may store electronically, copy or translate the thesis to any approved medium or format for the purpose of future preservation and accessibility. That the thesis deposited in the digital repository will be accessible to a wide variety of people and institutions, including automated agents and search engines. That once the thesis is deposited, the item and its metadata may be incorporated into public access catalogues or services, such as national databases of electronic theses. Or iii. that the thesis, if successful, may be made so available after the expiry of a bar on photocopying and/or access. The title and summary of the thesis are normally freely available. * Please note that in relation to the electronic storage of theses in the field of Creative Writing only the abstract would be stored in a separate Eprints (e-repository) collection and that such theses would be indexed electronically as abstracts only. 2. Binding of the Thesis 2.1. A student submitting a higher degrees thesis for examination may submit the thesis in temporary binding. After examination all copies of the thesis for library storage are to be permanently bound. 2.2 Temporary binding (see first example) will enable the candidate to complete any corrections required by examiners without having to unbind and then rebuild the thesis. Theses in ring binding, spiral binding or other non-approved bindings will not be Code of Practice for Research Degrees: Appendix 1

accepted. For examination, all copies must have the leaves securely fixed in a spine (i.e. fixed so that the pages remain secure in the covers when the volume is opened fully). A thesis that is temporarily bound must be sufficiently secure to withstand transit. It must bear on the front cover of the theses in a form that cannot easily be erased or detached, the student s name, the names of the University of Wales (for UW students) and of the University of Wales: Trinity Saint David (for UWTSD students), and the degree for which he or she is a candidate. Code of Practice for Research Degrees: Appendix 1

Temporary bound thesis title cover: TITLE OF THESIS FULL NAME, PREVIOUS QUALIFICATIONS (e.g. Joe Blogs MA) DIRECTOR OF STUDIES & SECOND SUPERVISOR (e.g. Dr Good & Dr Better) *the name(s) of any collaborative partner institution (only applicable if you studied through a collaborative partnership) STATEMENT: This research was undertaken under the auspices of the University of Wales Trinity Saint David and was submitted in partial fulfilment for the award of a [insert appropriate degree e.g. PhD] in the Faculty of. to the University of Wales Trinity Saint David [Delete Trinity Saint David if undertaken through the University of Wales and replace by University of Wales]. MONTH & YEAR OF SUBMISSION (e.g. November 2012) 2.3 Permanently Bound thesis: Following a successful examination and/or the satisfactory completion of revisions to the thesis, the thesis must be permanently bound for library deposition. Permanent Code of Practice for Research Degrees: Appendix 1

binding requires that the thesis is bound in the manner of a hardback book. The boards are to have sufficient rigidity to support the weight of the work when it is standing upon a shelf. The permanently bound volumes must bear on the spine the surname and initials of the student, the full or abbreviated title of the work, the name of the degree for which it was submitted and the date of submission in a form that cannot be erased or detached. This information must be printed along the spine in such a way as to be readable when the volume is lying flat with the front cover uppermost. If the work consists of more than one volume the spine must also bear the number of each volume. The same information is to appear on the front cover of the thesis again in a form that cannot be erased or detached. The thesis cover should be a dark colour with printed lettering on the spine and front cover in gold. Code of Practice for Research Degrees: Appendix 1

SURNAME, INITIAL, TITLE (if it will fit), level of award, Institution and date FULL TITLE OF THESIS SURNAME, INITIAL, level of award, Institution and date Code of Practice for Research Degrees: Appendix 1

3. Submitting your Theses or Dissertations for Printing and/or Binding Students can submit their thesis to the University Print Unit for binding in two ways; either by supplying the hard copy for the Print Unit to bind or by sending a digital copy for the Print Unit to print and bind. Please note, as page setup, pagination and fonts are inconsistent between machines students should only submit their digital copy as a PDF file (see section 4). The University Print Unit offers two kinds of binding: a. Temporary: a heat sealed adhesive strip is wrapped around the spine. This is particularly used for binding reports and thesis submissions for easier access and use. A maximum of 275 pages (depending on thickness of paper) can be bound into each volume. Price per volume 2.50. b. Hardback including gold foil: This is used for the final submission of thesis. The cover and spine can have gold foil print applied within certain limitations (see example, Fig 2) and a maximum of 270 pages (depending on thickness of paper) can be bound into each volume. Price per volume 20.00. 3.1 Printing your PDF The University can offer a choice of black and white or colour printing. All files will be printed in black and white unless students indicate otherwise. 3.2 Timescale Students should endeavour to check with the Postgraduate Research office in advance of their deadline the required timescale for the binding and printing of your thesis. 3.3 Payment The Postgraduate Research Office will be able to give students a quotation upon receiving the files. Payments need to be arranged with the Finance Department and the printing/binding will be carried out on receipt of payment. 4. Submission of the thesis Before the maximum end date students must submit to the Postgraduate Research Office: i. two copies of the thesis, whether in temporary or permanent binding, and any separate material such as non-textual artefacts (as approved by the Research Degrees Committee); ii. iii. one electronic copy of the thesis in PDF format; an additional loose copy of the abstract, referred to in paragraph 1.8, transcribed onto the Notice of Candidature form; Code of Practice for Research Degrees: Appendix 1

iv. a signed statement regarding the availability of the thesis; v. one completed Notice of Candidature forms, which is available from the Postgraduate Research Office; 4.1 For corrections and amendments students must submit one hard copy of the thesis and one electronic copy (as well as the items as specified under iii-v). For resubmissions students must submit to the Postgraduate Research Office two hard copies of the thesis and one electronic copy (as well as the items specified under iii-v). Code of Practice for Research Degrees: Appendix 1

DECLARATION SHEET This sheet MUST be signed and included within the thesis This work has not previously been accepted in substance for any degree and is not being concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree. Signed... (student) Date... STATEMENT 1 This thesis is the result of my own investigations, except where otherwise stated. Where correction services have been used the extent and nature of the correction is clearly marked in a footnote(s). Other sources are acknowledged by footnotes giving explicit references. A bibliography is appended. Signed... (student) Date... STATEMENT 2 I hereby give consent for my thesis, if accepted, to be available for photocopying and for inter-library loan, and for the title and summary to be made available to outside organisations. Signed... (student) Date... STATEMENT 3 I hereby give consent for my dissertation, if accepted, to be available for deposit in the University s digital repository. Signed... (student) Date... NB: Students on whose behalf a bar on access has been approved by the University, should use the following version of Statement 2: I hereby give consent for my thesis, if accepted, to be available for photocopying and for inter-library loans after expiry of a bar on access approved by the University of Wales on the special recommendation of the Member Institution concerned. Signed... (student) Date... Code of Practice for Research Degrees: Appendix 1

Appendix 2 of the Code of Practice for Research Degrees Guidelines for Chairs of Research Degrees Examining Boards Code of Practice for Research Degrees: Appendix 2

Appendix 2 of the Code of Practice for Research Degrees Guidelines for Chairs of Research Degrees Examining Boards 1 Chair of Examining Boards The Chair, who may not be a member of the supervisory team, shall be a senior and suitable experienced member of academic staff approved for the purpose by the Research Degree Committee. The Chair should not have any previous connection with the student s work and should not have any managerial responsibility for the student. If the Chair of the Examining Board has little or no experience of acting as a Chair of an Examining Board for research degrees, mentoring and training must be put in place. The overall balance of the Examining Board is important in this respect. See chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook for further information. Information in relation to mentoring can be found in the Code of Practice. A Chair must always have sufficient seniority and be well acquainted with the University s Research Degrees Regulations and the University s approach to research degrees. For a person specification for chairs, see the Academic Quality Handbook chapter 8. Should it be impossible to appoint an appropriate chair within the Faculty or the collaborative partnership institution of the student, a Chair from a different Faculty of the University must be appointed. For this purpose the Directory of Chairs should be consulted, a copy of which is held by the Postgraduate Research Office. The Directory also gives information as to who has experience in the chairing of examinations for the PhD by Published Works and who can chair through the medium of Welsh. 2 Responsibility of the Chair The responsibility of the Chair is to ensure that the examination is conducted in an appropriate manner, according to the established regulations and procedures in place. 2.1 Prior to the oral examination: The Chair needs to ensure that the examiners forward to the Postgraduate Research Office an independent written appraisal of the thesis prior to the oral examination. While examiners are not allowed to communicate directly between themselves prior to their independent reports being received by the Postgraduate Research Office, they should raise any concern about the thesis before the submission of the independent reports with the Chair. The Chair should read both independent reports and make a note of any differences between the reports. The Chair should also be alert of any serious problems highlighted in the reports. The Chair may consider reporting an examiner to be unreasonable, unfair, not in line with the requirements for the examining of research degrees, or contrary to the regulations of the University. In such cases it is recommended that the Chair refer any concerns to the Chair 67

of the Research Degrees Committee in writing. Similarly, if the chair becomes aware of any conflict of interest in relation to the composition of the Examining Board, the Chair needs to contact as soon as possible the Chair of the Research Degrees Committee. For further guidance in relation to serious concerns, see chapter 8 of the Academic Quality Handbook. The Chair should ensure that he/she is fully aware of the regulations governing the examination, the format of the examination (esp. in relation to practice-based programmes), and any special arrangements or needs. If the Chair has any questions or is not sure in relation to an aspect of the examination, he/she should contact staff from the Postgraduate Research Office. In case of any special arrangements such a consultation with the Postgraduate Research Office must take place. While the oral examination will normally be conducted at one of the campuses of the University, the oral examination may be conducted in exceptional circumstances and with the approval of the Research Degrees Committee at another place or by video link. In case of an oral examination held by electronic means, protocols, as set out in the Code of Practice for Research Degrees, must be followed with the request for such an arrangement being approved by both the Examining Board and Research Degrees Committee. The chair is expected to lead on the consideration of the request by the Examining Board. If the request is approved by the Research Degrees Committee, the chair will need to liaise closely with Postgraduate Research Office staff in order to make sure that all necessary, additional arrangements for such an oral examination are made appropriately and well in time for the oral examination. The chair will also need to be fully aware of who to contact and what to do in case of any (technical) problems or issues during the oral examinations and will need to be aware of all additional protocols that need to be followed before, during and after the oral examination. The Chair also must ensure that the student is able to communicate only with the examining board during the examination. Chairs need to be aware that in relation to practice-based examinations new regulations and protocols have been introduced in both the Academic Quality Handbook and Code of Practice for Research Degrees in relation to the inclusion of non-textual artefacts and the access to those artefacts prior to the oral examination so that examiners are able to reflect on these in their separate independent reports. From the 2015-2016 academic year, because of changes to the UWTSD regulations, the time periods associated with certain outcomes differ between UWTSD and UW. Different examination forms will therefore be used for UW and UWTSD students. Because of this, it is crucial that the chair is fully aware which degree awarding body the student is registered for so that the correct forms are used and the correct advice is given to the examiners in relation to recommended outcomes. The Code of Practice for Research Degrees (see section 2.2 research degrees regulations ) specifies precisely which regulations apply to which programmes of study and which students and where there are exemptions. 2.2 The oral examination During a preliminary meeting of the examining board prior to the oral examination the Chair should discuss with the examiners the structure of the questioning, confirm the initial opinion of the examiners and decide upon the main points to be raised during the 68

examination. The Chair also needs to ensure that the examiners are familiar with the regulations for the degree to be examined and that they are aware that the outcome is a recommendation to the UWTSD Research Degrees Committee and, where appropriate, the University of Wales DAAB and not a formal outcome. If the examiners do not agree with each other s recommended outcome and cannot agree joint outcome, the Chair needs to refer to the relevant regulations in the Academic Quality Handbook for guidance on the procedure to follow. While the Postgraduate Research Office books the room (usually for four hours) and catering (tea/coffee/water), it is the responsibility of the Chair to make sure that the room is ready prior to the examination. In case of a problem (e.g. no water, temperature of room, noise, missing examiner or candidate) the Chair needs to notify the Postgraduate Research Office immediately. If the Chair is aware that more time will be needed for a particular examination, the Postgraduate Research Office should be contacted as soon as possible to ensure appropriate arrangements are made. If there are any problems noticed that make a room less unsuitable for research degrees examination purposes, please do inform the Postgraduate Research Office so that this room can be avoided for future examinations. In the case of collaborative partnerships, room bookings will be done by local administrative staff, but the responsibilities of the Chair remain as outlined in the paragraph above. If there are any issues or difficulties the Chair must liaise with those administrative officers. From the start of the 2015-2016 academic year, all oral examinations, unless the student has explicitly opted out (in which case the chair will be informed of this by staff from the Postgraduate Research Office), are recorded. The recording does not include the preliminary meeting or the discussion between the examiners following the oral examination. It is only the oral examination itself that is recorded. Chairs need to ensure that they are aware of how to operate the recording equipment. A sheet with instructions will be sent to the chair by Postgraduate Research Office staff prior to the oral examinations; this will cover what to do and who to contact in case of any technical issues and difficulties. The recording will need to be sent to the Postgraduate Research Office following the oral examination and will be archived by Postgraduate Research Office staff. At the start of examinations, Chairs should ensure that student is introduced to the examiners, and that the atmosphere is reasonably relaxed so that candidates are not intimidated by the event. The Chair should offer refreshments to examiners and the student and start the recording of the examination. The Chair should remind the student of the regulations, the purpose of the oral examination and the possible outcomes. The Chair should remind the student that no pre-written statement can be brought to the oral examination (only copy of thesis, pen and paper for notes). The Chair should also highlight the procedures following the viva to the student i.e. that the recommended outcome has to go to the Research Degrees Committee and, where appropriate, the University of Wales DAAB as outlined in the Code of Practice for Research Degrees. The Chair should remind the student to ask for clarification if a question is unclear. If the student has requested that the Director of Studies or other member of the supervisory team is present at the oral examination, the Chair should ensure that the Director of Studies or other member of the supervisory team is present only as silent observer. 69

The Chair may ask the student to give a short overview of the research at the beginning of the examination. During the following examination by the examiners the Chair should take notes of the examination. When the examiners have indicated the end of the examination, the Chair should ask the student if he/she wants to add anything. At this stage the Chair should also ask the Director of Studies to leave the room in order to allow the student the opportunity to discuss their supervision in confidence if they wish. At the end of the examination the student and the Director of Studies if present will be asked to leave the room whilst the examiners decide on their recommendation. This will usually take around 10 15 minutes. The student will then be asked to return to the room for feedback on the oral examination and to be informed of the recommended outcome that will be sent to the Research Degrees Committee and, where appropriate, the University of Wales DAAB for approval. Chairs of examinations in collaborative partner institutions must ensure that students are aware that the recommended outcome will need to be considered and approved by the UWTSD Research Degrees Committee. The Chair should inform student of the approximate time when the announcement of the outcome is expected. The student has to be made aware that it can take several weeks depending on the dates of the Committee meetings. Postgraduate Research Office staff will be able to inform the Chair when meetings of the Research Degrees Committee and UW DAAB are scheduled. 2.3 After the oral examination After the oral examination, the External Examiner will be required to complete a report on the oral examination and both examiners will complete a joint report. In some cases the examiners write the reports later. However, the Chair needs to ensure that the examiners have signed the Examination Forms before they leave the room. The form asks for a brief report from the chair to reflect on the oral examination process and to confirm that all procedures and regulations have been followed correctly. The Chair also needs to ensure that the joint report draws together any disparate views on the thesis which may have been expressed by the examiners in their individual reports and that the recommended outcome is fully justified. A brief agreed view of the candidate's principal strengths and weaknesses, the approach to the topic and the performance at the oral examination should be expressed in the joint report. If examiners are unable to reach a recommended outcome, the Chair needs to explain to them the regulation as outlined in the Academic Quality Handbook. Following the viva, the Chair has to submit the reports and the signed Examination Forms to the Postgraduate Research Office on the day of, or the day following the oral examination. These reports will be submitted to the UWTSD Research Degrees Committee and, where appropriate, the University of Wales DAAB for approval. 3 Further Responsibilities 70

If the outcome of the Examination is Resubmission the Examining Board is required to examine the resubmitted thesis. The resubmitted thesis will be re-examined by both examiners again and both examiners have to submit independent reports. For guidelines in relation to whether a second viva should be held, please see the Code of Practice for Research Degrees. This decision cannot be made by the original Examining Board. If the Examining board of the resubmission wants to waive the second viva, the Chair needs to justify the decision in the Chair s Report. The Examiners reports will then need to be signed by all members of the Examining Board including the Chair. The report form will be submitted to the UWTSD Research Degrees Committee and, where appropriate, the University of Wales DAAB with a recommended outcome. 71