University of Leeds

1. University of Leeds PhD Degrees in the University of Leeds: 1 Presented by Nick Marler Institute for Transport Studies File:ERSSScience0106-mod(010506).ppt

2. Overview of Part 1 • The University of Leeds’ perspective on PhD Degrees • Admission and the first year • Administration and the University’s Code of Practice

3. 2. The University of Leeds’ Perspective on PhD Degrees

4. Research degrees: clarification • Three main types of research degree in UK: - PhD/EdD/other doctorates - MPhil - Master by Research (MRes) • Most of this seminar will be concerned with PhD degrees • Note that a PhD degree in the United Kingdom is wholly by research: there are no taught components

5. A PhD Degree • Research Project • Training Programme • Performance Indicator • Submission rates and “qualification” rates • Influence on RAE • Numbers • Degrees awarded • Publications • Source of funds for University and Schools • Quality Assurance Agency Audit

6. Expectation A thesis for a PhD degree: • Represents research that may reasonably be expected of a capable and diligent student after the appropriate period of study e.g. 3 years for a full-time PhD. Learning Outcomes for research degrees are published in all the booklets produced by Research Degrees and Scholarships Office.

7. Research Degree Assessment Criteria Learning Outcomes for all Research Degree Programmes • PhD/EdD/other doctorates • Originality • Independent critical ability • Matter suitable for publication • MPhil • Independent contribution • Material at a level suitable for publication

8. Formal criteria for success • To qualify for the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy each candidate must meet the required learning outcomes, and satisfy the examiners that his/her achievement is of sufficient merit and that his/her thesis contains evidence of originality and independent critical ability and matter suitable for publication through: • (a) presenting a thesis or alternative form of thesis as prescribed under Regulation 30 on the subject of his/her advanced study and research; and • (b) presenting him/herself for an oral examination and other such tests as the examiners may prescribe. University of Leeds Ordinance X, Regulation 29

9. Examiners’ View • In Leeds, examiners for the degree of PhD are asked to report under the following headings: • On the nature and purpose of the investigation • On the evidence of originality with an indication of the nature of any such evidence • On the evidence of independent critical ability with an indication of the nature of any such evidence • On the extent to which the thesis contains matter suitable for publication • On the written style and overall presentation of the thesis • On the performance of the candidate in the oral examination

10. Periods of Study

11. New Entrants at Leeds: Trends * *Reduction caused by the transfer of MRes degrees from research to taught prog categories

12. Numbers of Research Students (continued in next slide) December 2005

13. Full-time PhD submission rates within 4 years (continued in next slide) 2000 starters

14. Full-time PhD submission rates within 4 years 2000 starters

15. PhD completion rates • HEFCE* will monitor “completion rates” (and ‘qualifications’) in HESA** returns • If concern, QAAHE*** to investigate • Will publish the information (HESA) • Funding implications (next slide) * Higher Education Funding Council for England ** Higher Education Statistics Agency *** Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

16. Research Councils (AHRC, ESRC etc.) • National bodies which award money to universities and departments for studentships (and for other things) • Sanctions against Universities for poor PhD submission records • AHRC: Where university’s 4 year full time submission rate is <50% then university is ineligible for doctoral student awards for 2 years • ESRC: Where University’s 4 year submission rate by full-time scholarship holders is <60% then no new studentships may be held for 2 years

17. Funding for UK/EU PhD students • Census date for registration • Those registered 1st December ‘qualify’ for funds • No income unless student registered • Allocation to resource centres based on • Cost weight of subject (more expensive research receives more) • Subject to School receiving at least grade 4 in RAE 2001

18. Year 4 of a Full-Time PhD • ‘Overtime’ Period • No HEFCE funding for the University • No funding for schools • But candidate still entitled to supervision!

19. 3. Admission and the first year

20. Admission • Supervisor should interview the potential student • Consideration of the suitability of the student • Take up references on student / check qualifications • Appropriate expertise of supervisor • Identification of adequate resources for the research • The English language abilities of non UK students should meet the University requirements • Careful matching of expectations of supervisor and student • Universities make formal offers to students centrally, typically offers are made by the Registrar

21. The first few days • There must be a clear induction process • Induction should include: both social and research facilities; health and safety regulations; the research degree process in terms of • monitoring progress • transfer at the end of 1st year • time scale for thesis submission • Set clear immediate objectives • Require the student to get into the habit of writing regularly • Identify training needs – make use of available training (training needs to be reviewed regularly) • Inexperienced supervisors should be supported

22. During the first year • Have regular formal supervision meetings and keep written records • Give formal feedback in writing (see next slide) • In a good research environment students should receive support from other staff, such as the postgraduate tutor, and fellow students, not just the supervisor • Too much teaching? -teaching hours should not exceed maximum limits, typically six hours per week - it is a requirement for postgraduates who teach to be appropriately trained

23. Monitoring Progress Stages of a progress review meeting. • Student and supervisor review objectives set out in the report of the previous meeting. • Student reports either verbally or in writing on the extent to which these objectives have been met. • Supervisor acknowledges achieved objectives. • Discuss unachieved objectives. • Supervisor and student negotiate new targets. • Within a day or so of the meeting the student hands (emails) a written report of the meeting to supervisor. If both agree to content then both sign and keep copies. If for any reason the meeting was particularly difficult the supervisor should make private notes

24. The end of the first year • Notification of the review procedure to student well in advance • Submission of a written report • Formal review meeting (‘upgrade’): can the student continue towards the PhD? • Independent assessor • Assessment of progress towards meeting the learning outcomes • Identification of thesis title • Formal written feedback to student to identify concerns where appropriate • Student may wish to extend deadline (indication of problems?)

25. 4. The administrative process and code of practice for research degrees

26. Administrative Framework Senate Graduate Board Research Degrees Office Senior Assistant Registrar – Mrs J Y Findlay - Makes formal offer of a place and final award of degrees - Publishes the Research Student handbook and Ordnances and Regulations for Research Degrees - Keeps Student file Faculty Postgraduate Research Committee School Postgraduate tutor Student file Supervisor Student file Student

27. Code of Practice for Research Degree Candidatures: 1 • Defines responsibilities of • Deans • Faculty Postgraduate Research Committees • Postgraduate Research Tutors • Supervisors • Students • At least two members of staff to consider an application* • Supervision by a lead supervisor and at least one other co-supervisor or adviser • Statement of minimum standards of facilities • Training plan to be agreed within one month of start and to be reviewed at least annually* * new from 2005/06

28. Code of Practice for Research Degree Candidatures: 2 • Students encouraged to keep Personal Development Plans • Students to consult their supervisor before undertaking any additional work at the University* • At least 12 supervision meetings a year for full-time students who first registered before September 2005. At least 10* supervision meetings a year for those who first register in or after September 2005. • Supervisors responsible for ensuring that there are written records of formal supervisory meetings* • ‘Transfer’ panels to include at least one person not included in the supervision • PGR Tutor or Head of School (or senior member of the School) to meet with student at least annually without supervisors* * new from 2005/06

29. Code of Practice for Research Degree Candidatures: 3 • Reading and commenting on the whole of the draft thesis prior to submission • “Mock viva” to be provided when requested by the student* • At least one internal and one external examiner • Examiners required to submit independent reports prior to the oral* • Supervisors may be an observer at the examination but if not present must be available for consultation * new from 2005/06

30. University of Leeds PhD Degrees in the University of Leeds: 2 File:ERSSScience0106-mod(280406)

31. Overview • Quality assurance • Additional training • The final stages

32. 5. Quality assurance

33. Quality assurance for PhD degrees Quality assurance (QA) is through: • Formal & informal practices within departments • formal procedures within the university • QA from outside bodies (especially QAAHE & HEFCE) Many of the codes of practice and procedures mentioned elsewhere in this lecture may be regarded as part of the QA process

34. QA: documents to guide the research degree process: 1 The Research Degrees and Scholarships Office (RDSO) in Leeds University produces a number of booklets containing information on Research Degrees. Including: • Guide for Research Degree Supervisors, which contains a copy of the Code of Practice for Research Degree Candidatures • University of Leeds Research Student Handbook, which also contains a copy of the Code of Practice for Research Degree Candidatures • Ordinances and Regulations and Programmes of Study for Research Degrees • Departmental handbooks for PhD students & supervisors (based on University code of practice)

35. QA: documents to guide the research degree process: 2 The RDSO and SDDU also provide the following: • Thesis Format Regulations • Examination Entry Forms for Research Degrees • Resubmission Guidelines • Eligibility to Act as Internal Examiner • Eligibility to Act as External Examiner • Internal Examiners Checklist • Examiners’ Report Forms • Composition of the Examining Team and the Role of the Supervisor • Training Opportunities for Research Students booklet

36. HEFCE and QAAHE documents The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAAHE) take an overview of postgraduate research degree programmes. The following is a list of reports and documentation that they produce which has influenced the sector in recent times: • May 1996 HEFCE. Review of Postgraduate Education (The Harris Report) • June 1997 HEFCE circular 12/97 Implementation of the Review of Postgraduate Education. • October 1998 The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAAHE) Code of Practice for the Assurance of Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Education: Postgraduate Research Programmes. (Updated in September 2004). • Jan 2001 The QAAHE National Qualifications Framework. • May 2001 The QAAHE Quality Audit Report on the University of Leeds. • April 2002 The Roberts Report: SET for Success (the supply of people with science, technology, engineering and mathematical skills), Treasury, DfES, DTI, April 2002. • October 2002 Improving standards in postgraduate research degree programmes (A report to the Higher Education Funding Councils of England, Scotland and Wales). • September 2004 The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAAHE), Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education, Section 1: Postgraduate research programmes – September 2004. * * the 21 ‘precepts’ from this report given in the following slides

37. 6. Additional Training

38. QAA Code of Practice for PG Research Programmes (09/04) Re: training and development - three key precepts (18,19,20). 18Institutions will provide research students with appropriate opportunities for personal and professional development. 19Each student’s development needs will be identified and agreed jointly by the student and appropriate academic staff, initially during the student’s induction period; they will be regularly reviewed during the research programme and amended as appropriate. 20 Institutions will provide opportunities for research students to maintain a record of their progress, which includes reference to the development of research and other skills.

39. Training Considerations • Identify training needs through regular formal supervision meetings • Generic training – ‘shifting agendas’ • PDP and Personal Records

40. Many skills needed so students can PRODUCE a THESIS….. ON TIME (so they don’t run out of MONEY) and of SUFFICIENT QUALITY and PUBLISH with minimal STRESS and PRESENT THEIR FINDINGS AT A CONFERENCE or EXPLOIT THE IP in other ways while MAINTAINING A LIFE and MANAGING THEIR TIME and keeping an eye on THEIR NEXT STEPS by BUILDING A NETWORK and MANAGING THEIR CAREER all without FALLING FOUL OF ISOLATION + 2nd YEAR BLUES and without INJURING THEIR SUPERVISOR (or vice versa…)

41. Skills Statement • Research Skills and Techniques • Research Management • Personal Effectiveness • Communication Skills • Networking and Team working • Career Management (Joint Statement of the RCs’ Skills Training Requirement for Research Students)

42. SDDU Training • University of Leeds Training and Personal Development Opportunities for Research Students

43. 7. The Final Stages

44. Examination Entry • Exam entry form should be submitted to RDSO 3 months before thesis submission. • Supervisor responsible for: • authorising thesis title • recommending examiners

45. Preparation For The Viva • In recent survey of Leeds research students, the single point which was identified as potentially being of most value was the provision of a mock viva. • It is generally felt that students need to givedepartmental seminars on a regular basis as well as offering papers at specialist meetings. • Both of these measures should help the student’s ability to approach the viva confidently. • Note that the Supervisor(s) are under an obligation to read and comment upon a draft of the thesis prior to submission (with the proviso that it is presented to them in a reasonable amount of time).

46. The Oral Examination (1) • On the first occasion that a thesis is submitted the Examiners must, in all cases, conduct an oral examination at which candidates are required to present themselves and answer questions posed by the Examiners. • The examination must be conducted in English. • The Supervisor may be an observer at the examination but if not present as an observer is required to be available for consultation if necessary.

47. The Oral Examination (2) • In cases where the candidate has more than one Supervisor, normally only one Supervisor should be nominated to attend the examination. • Now: examiners will be asked to write preliminary reports prior to the oral. • The Supervisor takes no part in the decision-making process. • In the case of a resubmission a second oral examination may be held if the examiners deem it appropriate.

48. The Oral Examination (3) • It should be noted that if, after reading the resubmitted thesis, the examiners reach a preliminary view that the candidate has not fulfilled the requirements for the award of the degree, it is essential that a second oral examination be held to ensure that the candidate is given every opportunity to defend the work.

49. Examiners’ Report Form • Evidence of originality* • Evidence of independent critical ability*, with an indication of the nature of any such evidence • Performance of the candidate in the viva-voce examination • Candidates should satisfy the Learning Outcomes * How to define these?

50. . . . and finally, how well did they perform? Leeds University: PhD examination outcomes in academic year 2004/05 • Total number of examinations: 520 • Pass 11.5% • Minor Errors 41.9% • Minor Deficiencies 38.3% • Referral 7.9% • Fail 0.6%