HANDBOOK CONTENTS
The purpose and aims of this handbook
Purpose of the doctorate
Role of supervision
p.1
p.3
p.7
p.8
SECTION 1: OVERVIEW OF DOCTORATES AT QMU
1.1
1.2
1.3
Research Degrees at QMU: Quality and standards
Supervisory structure
Respective roles and responsibilities
p.9
p.11
p.12
SECTION 2: PRE-ARRIVAL, RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION PROCESS
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
Attracting students
Advising prospective students
Application / Interview process
Offering places
p.13
p.14
p.14
p.16
p.20
SECTION 3: THE FIRST YEAR; BUILDING THE SUPERVISORY RELATIONSHIP
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
Orientation
Establishing the supervisory working relationship
Supervisory meetings
Training needs and development
Specialised support
p.22
p.23
p.25
p.27
p.29
SECTION 4: PROGRESS & ANNUAL REPORTS
4.1
4.2
4.3
Monitoring progress
First Year of Ph.D. progress; to probationary assessment
Subsequent progress
p.30
p.31
p.33
p.36
SECTION 5: PREPARING STUDENTS FOR THEIR RESEARCH WORK
5.1
5.2
5.3
Ethical approval
Key considerations
Academic integrity
p.39
p.40
p.42
p.42
SECTION 6: SUPPORTING THE WRITING PROCESS
6.1
6.2
6.3
Good practice
Providing feedback on written work
English language issues
p.44
p.45
p.46
p.47
SECTION 7: DEALING WITH CHALLENGES
7.1
7.2
7.3
Challenges
Changes to registration
De-registration
p.48
p.49
p.51
p.52
SECTION 8: THESIS SUBMISSION AND FOLLOW-UP
8.1
p.21
Timeline to submission/viva/amendments
1
p.53
p.54
8.2
8.3
Role of supervisor
Resubmissions, fails & appeals
p.56
p.59
SECTION 9: TEACHING AND EMPLOYMENT
9.1
9.2
9.3
p.60
Post-doctoral careers
Employment whilst a doctoral student
Teaching duties
p.61
p.61
p.62
SECTION 10: REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF DOCTORAL PROVISIONS
10.1
10.2
Evaluating personal performance
University level review and evaluation
p.64
p.65
p.65
APPENDICES
p.67
READER GUIDANCE
The handbook is written to assist both Ph.D. and professional doctorate supervisors. Both
doctoral programmes share numerous similarities, but there are also major differences in
programme structure and supervisor roles (as discussed throughout the handbook).
Both Ph.D. and professional doctorate supervisors are advised to read and consider all sections
of the handbook. However, depending on your role within the supervisory team (as outlined
below) you may wish to pay particular attention to the following sections:
Award
Role
Director of
Studies
Ph.D.
Second
Supervisor
External
Advisors
Professional
Doctorate
Thesis
Director of
Studies
Programme
Director of
Studies
1
2
3
4
Section
5
6
7
8
9
10
         
         
         
         
         
2
i. THE PURPOSE AND AIMS OF THIS HANDBOOK
Overview
This handbook is designed first and foremost to improve the quality and consistency of Queen
Margaret University’s doctoral student experience. Encompassing the Research Degrees and
Professional Doctorate Regulations, the Code of Practice, a variety of information on the
existing information from University-wide services and current sector ‘best practice’, the content
is specifically focussed towards Ph.D. and professional doctorate supervisors of all experience
levels; providing detailed guidance for all QMU academics in a research supervisory role.
In collaboration, staff of the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement, the Centre of
Academic Practice and a host of academics, students and support staff have contributed to this
handbook to achieve the following aims:

To provide an overview of the roles and responsibilities of students, doctoral supervisors
and the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement

To bring together in one document links to QMU information and regulations pertinent to
doctoral programmes

To point doctoral supervisors to key people involved in supporting doctoral programmes,
and present ideas for strategies to respond to a wide range of supervisory situations and
challenges

To highlight good practice and to illustrate the student perspective.
In addition to consulting the handbook, it is important that all supervisors are fully
acquainted with the appropriate regulations and webpages, available via the ‘Quality’
website.
At present (September 2013), QMU has almost 200 registered doctoral students, of which
almost one third are studying on a professional doctorate programme. The University has a well
established research identity, dedicated to improving the quality of life and building the
evidence-base for policy and practice through interdisciplinary research and industry relevant
knowledge exchange. Doctoral students are of central importance to the University’s aims both
in terms of our research strategy, and in the prestige of high-quality graduates making a
significant contribution within, and beyond academia.
Supervisor Development Training
This handbook has been developed in tandem with Centre for Academic Practice (CAP) run
workshops for research supervisors. Any member of staff new to supervision is strongly advised
to attend these sessions. More experienced supervisors may also wish to attend these
sessions, to update themselves with developments in the University and the wider higher
education sector.
1
If you require training tailored to the needs of supervisors within your Research Theme, or
covering a specific area of the regulations please contact staff of the Division of Governance
and Quality Enhancement at [email protected].
Further guidance
Current supervisors with specific academic queries are also guided towards contacting the
appropriate academic leader in their strategic Research Themes. The Themes are as follows:






Rehabilitation Sciences
Nutrition and Metabolism in Health and Disease
Social Determinants of Health
Media and Film, Applied Communication and Culture
Speech and Communications
Sustainable Business.
Doctoral supervisors are reminded that each Theme is aligned with the University’s
overall mission: ‘to enhance the well-being of individuals and the communities we serve
through socially and economically relevant education and research’.
Queries of a general nature should be directed to ‘Research Degrees’ staff based in the Division
of Governance and Quality Enhancement.
Additional texts
In addition to this handbook there are also a number of useful resources available in the
Learning Resource Centre (LRC) on research supervision. Some suggested titles you may like
to read are listed below.







Delamont, S. Atkinson, P. and Parry, O. 2009 Supervising the Doctorate: A Guide to
Success Open University Press
Eley, A.R. 2005 Effective postgraduate supervision: improving the student/supervisor
relationship Maidenhead, Open University Press
Gosling, P. 2011 Mastering Your Ph.D.: Survival and Success in the Doctoral Years and
Beyond Springer Berlin Heidelberg
McAlpine, L. 2011 Doctoral Education: Research-Based Strategies for Doctoral Students,
Supervisors and Administrators Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands
Phillips, EM. and Pugh, D.S. 2005 How to get a Ph.D.: a handbook for students and their
supervisors (4th ed) Maidenhead, Open University Press
Taylor, S. and Beasley, N. 2005 A Handbook for Doctoral Supervisors Routledge, Abingdon
Wisker, G. 2005 The Good Supervisor Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.
2
ii. PURPOSE OF THE DOCTORATE
Overview
Doctoral degrees are the most individually distinct of the academic qualifications available
because of their roots in research and the pursuit of knowledge, and their requirement for the
candidate to produce work requiring original thought, based on independent study.
UK doctorates have developed to reflect the range of academic and professional purposes for
which candidates register. Development has also been influenced by sponsors and employers,
with continuing professional development being a key reason for the emergence of professional
doctorates.
Since the 1990s, sector-wide organisations such as the Research Councils, Quality Assurance
Agency (QAA) and government have encouraged doctoral candidates and institutions towards
greater emphasis on skills development to prepare graduates for the next stage in their careers.
As a result, particularly in the first decade of this century, doctoral candidates in the UK were
expected to engage with skills development programmes and activities designed to enhance
their employability and career prospects.
UK doctoral graduates are expected to reach a comparable level of intellectual achievement
irrespective of the programme and subject.
The Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) Level 12 descriptors summarise
succinctly the principal attributes of doctoral graduates. For Scottish Higher Education
Institutions (HEIs) the descriptors provide a regulatory and guidance framework for doctoral
degrees and show the differences between doctoral, masters and undergraduate studies.
UK Quality Code for Higher Education
The UK Quality Code for Higher Education (the Quality Code) is an important reference point for
all UK HEIs. The Code makes clear what HEIs are required to do, what they can expect of each
other, and what the general public can expect of them.
Chapter B11: Research Degrees sets out the following “Expectation” about research degrees
which higher education providers are required to meet:
“Research degrees are awarded in a research environment that provides secure academic
standards for doing research and learning about research approaches, methods, procedures
and protocols. This environment offers students quality of opportunities and the support they
need to achieve successful academic, personal and professional outcomes from their research
degrees.”
3
Current doctoral studies in the UK
Doctoral studies in the UK may take many different forms. However, there are a number of
characteristics attributed to this type/level of study:






The student very often sets their own question or focus of enquiry, although this may vary
depending on a student’s discipline or funding status
The student may rapidly become more knowledgeable on this question than the supervisor
There is a tension between what the student may decide to do (e.g. change direction
minimally, or substantially) irrespective of what the supervisor may wish, or indeed feel
competent, to supervise
What the student wants out of the process and what the student gets out of the process is
not well-defined
The ‘predictors’ of success are much less certain than for earlier educational phases
The number of students who drop-out of research study is significantly higher than
withdrawal rates at undergraduate or taught postgraduate level.
Most of the characteristics listed above have long been associated with doctoral studies, and
will continue to be part of the make-up of UK doctorates. It should also be recognised that the
changing landscape of higher education in the UK is leading to some changes in the way
doctoral programmes are run. These include:



A stronger focus on research and other training as part of the Ph.D.
Emphasis on timely submissions and completion of research degrees
Greater emphasis on student satisfaction, as a result of the national Postgraduate Research
Experience Survey (PRES).
Types of doctorate at QMU
At Queen Margaret University there are currently two doctorate level programmes: the Ph.D.
and the professional doctorate. Below is an overview of these awards placed in the national
context, which highlights the range of differences and the numerous similarities shared.
What is a Ph.D.?
In the UK, a Ph.D. award stands for ‘Doctor of Philosophy’, sometimes referred to as a
‘doctorate’. It is the highest level of degree that a student can achieve.
Main characteristics:
-
The most common form of doctorate in the UK, Ph.D. programmes are based largely on
a supervised research project over three to four years (full-time; part-time candidates
normally take up to twice as long), during which the candidate is registered at a higher
education institution. All Ph.D. candidates are required to make an original contribution
to knowledge by conducting an independent research project; the form this takes
depends on the candidate's academic discipline and degree.
-
More recently, greater emphasis and investment has been given to personal and
professional development within Ph.D. programmes, following the publishing of Chapter
4 of the Robert’s Report (2002). Increasingly structured development programmes that
4
include both research and transferable skills training have become common-place
across HEIs. Acquisition of these skills, together with evaluation of the candidate's
discipline-specific research skills, is generally monitored or assessed through annual
progress reviews. Whether or not the structured elements are formally assessed,
examination of the research degree itself focuses on the quality of the candidate's thesis
or equivalent and his/her defence of it at the viva.
Assessment:
-
In the final assessment, candidates are assessed on their thesis (or in some Arts based
subjects their portfolio or composition), and by an oral examination, the viva. A minimum
of two examiners are usually present, one internal and a minimum of one external. Some
universities allow the supervisor to attend the viva, with the candidate's agreement, to
assure fairness and adherence to assessment regulations.
Ph.D. by publication
QMU offers suitable staff members the opportunity to complete a Ph.D. by publication.
The Ph.D. by publication shares most of the characteristics of the Ph.D. and is normally
awarded on the basis of a series of peer-reviewed academic papers, books, citations or other
materials that have been published, accepted for publication, exhibited or performed, usually
accompanied by a substantial commentary linking the published work and outlining its
coherence and significance, together with an oral examination at which the candidate defends
his/her research.
More information on Ph.D. by publication at QMU can be found here.
What is a Professional Doctorate?
This qualification is for those who normally already have Masters level qualifications and two or
more years expertise in a professional field, and want to conduct Ph.D. level study related to
their professional area whilst working. The course takes a minimum of three years part-time and
the research is usually carried out at the place of employment.
Professional doctorates normally include structured elements such as lectures, seminars, and
workshops, with an emphasis on the candidate acquiring skills relevant to their professional
practice, in addition to producing original research. Some programmes may also provide other
forms of learning support such as e-learning, tutorials, peer learning and assessment.
Main characteristics:
-
Professional doctorates are based on a supervised research project and usually contain
significant lecture and seminar elements. In some programmes, these elements are
assessed and either a pass/fail or a mark or grade is given; such assessments may act
as incremental stages for the candidate as part of his/her progress towards the
independent research project. UK professional doctorates are designed to meet the
5
needs of the various professions in which they are rooted, for example education,
nursing or psychology.
-
Research projects in these degrees are normally located within the candidate's
profession. In clinical practice-based doctorates, the research is likely to draw on clinical
work involving clinical trials or other work with patients in the practical/clinical setting; the
clinically based and academic research are then combined in the candidate's thesis.
Assessment:
-
As for the Ph.D., professional doctorates are assessed through submission of a thesis,
and in the majority of cases, an individual oral examination (viva). The thesis is of a
shorter length than for the Ph.D. to reflect the other assessed work completed by
candidates during the programme. In the assessment of professional doctorates,
examiners' criteria may include the extent to which the candidate understands current
techniques in the discipline, for example through demonstrating engagement with and
use of research methods and how they inform professional practice.
Doctorates at QMU
The structure of doctorates at QMU is outlined in the table below:
Ph.D.
Professional
Doctorate
SCQF
Level
Credits
Structure
Examination
Thesis
Length
Level 12
540
Independent
study
Thesis & viva
70,000 to
100,000 words
540
Taught
modules &
independent
study
Modular,
thesis & viva
30,000 to
40,000 words
Level 12
6
iii. ROLE OF SUPERVISION
Throughout the UK doctorate's history, the supervisor has been fundamental to the support and
development of the doctoral candidate, whether in the 'apprenticeship' tradition or as part of a
larger support team. The candidate's relationship with his/her supervisor is key to a successful
doctoral programme. More recently, the role of the supervisor has been under scrutiny in the
same way as the doctorate itself, with a view to assuring consistency of supervision while
allowing flexibility of operation to reflect discipline differences.
Effective supervision is often linked to a candidate's ability to complete on time and to
maintaining a high quality learning experience in doctoral programmes. The UK Quality Code for
Higher Education, Chapter B11: Research Degrees emphasises the fundamental role of
supervisors in maintaining quality and consistency across doctoral programmes. Chapter B11:
Research Degrees sets out four indicators concerning supervision which represent best practice
for UK higher education providers. QMU’s Research Degrees and Professional Doctorate
Regulations (most recently updated in 2012-2013, taking full account of the Quality Code) align
with these Indicators.
Chapter B11: Research Degrees
Four Indicators related to Supervision (9-12)
Indicator 9
Higher education providers appoint supervisors with the appropriate skills and subject
knowledge to support and encourage research students, and to monitor their progress
effectively.
Indicator 10
Each research student has a supervisory team containing a main supervisor who is the clearly
identified point of contact.
Indicator 11
Higher education providers ensure that the responsibilities of research student supervisors are
readily available and clearly communicated to supervisors and students.
Indicator 12
Higher education providers ensure that individual supervisors have sufficient time to carry out
their responsibilities effectively.
7
8
1.1 Research Degrees at QMU: Quality and standards
Regulations
Research students and their supervisors must read the appropriate Regulations cited below,
and also the Code of Practice for research students and supervisors.


Research Degree Regulations
Professional Doctorate Regulations
If questions of procedure arise, and especially in the case of any appeal, students and
supervisors will be deemed to have read the Regulations and all relevant institutional Codes of
Practice and Handbooks. It is therefore essential that you take the time to familiarise yourself
with these publications.
Students should also be advised to read the Student Diary. The Diary points to key policies,
procedures and regulations, all of which are available from the Quality website.
Code of Practice
The Code of Practice for research supervisors and students has two functions.
First, it contains advice on all stages of a research degree to complement the Regulations. If
you are unsure how to approach a situation, the Code of Practice is your first port of call after
the Regulations. The Code is supplemented by links to further material, wherever possible.
Second, it establishes the University's view of good practice and defines expectations in respect
of staff and student responsibilities. Although the Code doesn't have the force of regulations, it
serves as a useful reference point in the event of a disagreement.
Committee structure and remits
The Research Strategy Committee (RSC) is responsible for formulating policy and setting
standards in respect to research degrees. It works to ensure the quality of research degree
programmes and processes. Any considered amendments or additions to the Regulations or the
Code of Practice should be submitted to the Secretary of the Research Strategy Committee.
The RSC delegates matters concerning individual students to the Research Degrees Panel and
the School Academic Boards. Broadly speaking, the Research Degrees Panel is concerned with
the end of the student’s programme, while the School Academic Board is responsible for most
decisions up to that point. The Research Ethics Panel is another sub-committee of RSC, mainly
concerned with the consideration of research ethics governance.
The Figure (1.1) below illustrates the committee structures which chiefly concern doctoral
supervisors and students. The Director of Studies is normally the key contact for all
administrative matters; therefore the Director of Studies is required to liaise on the student’s
behalf with the relevant University committees.
9
Figure 1.1: Overview of research degree committee structure at QMU
1
Research degrees forms
All relevant research degree and professional doctorate forms, from an Application Form
through to a Thesis Submission Form can be found on the ‘Research’ page of the Quality
website. Completed forms should be submitted to [email protected].
1
Professional doctorate supervisors should note that * items are either not part of the programme
requirements, or processed outwith the Research Degrees structure. It should also be noted that
‘extension requests’ for professional doctorates are considered by the University Secretary, not the
Research Degrees Panel (RDP).
**The Research Degrees Panel consider recommendations on de-registration, which if appropriate are
recommended to and considered separately by the Research Strategy Committee.
10
1.2 Supervisory structure
Queen Margaret University operates ‘team’ supervision for its research degrees and the thesis
work of professional doctorates. In most cases, the minimum supervisory team is one Director
of Studies and one second supervisor. Often there will be two second supervisors. In addition,
one or more advisors may be attached to the team. The purpose of additional team members is
to provide support for the student in the absence of the Director of Studies and to give access to
a wider range of expertise, especially in specific topics or methods of research.
A supervisory team can take a variety of formats, but will typically consist of the following:
Title
Role
Director of Studies
The Director of Studies (DoS) will normally be selected during the
application process of a research degree candidate. The chosen
individual should have been involved in the supervision of previous
research degree candidates to successful completion. If the DoS has no
completions there must be at least one person on the team with two, or
more completions in the DoS role. It is usually recommended that the
staff member with the most experience takes on the role, as it involves
primary responsibility for formal and sometimes complex processes
such as managing progress and dealing with unexpected difficulties.
The DoS is the key contact for all administrative matters, and is required
to liaise with the Dean of School and support departments to ensure the
student has access to resources and facilities; and to advise the student
on regulations. For this reason the role, in all instances, will be filled by
a current member of QMU staff.
The DoS has primary responsibility for monitoring the student’s
progress and identifying when further support is needed. Normally the
DoS will take the lead role in guiding the academic direction of the
project, but this may vary depending on the make up of the team.
Second Supervisor (1)
Second Supervisor (2)
A major part of the Second Supervisor’s role is to provide advice as
required, to read draft work and give feedback. It is the student’s
responsibility to set up appointments with Second Supervisors and
proactively gain their input. Second Supervisors should be consulted
about any decisions affecting the student’s progress, as this will help
maintain continuity of support whenever the DoS is absent.
Second Supervisor(s) have less formal responsibility for the student but
are required to stand in for the DoS in his or her absence. If the Second
Supervisor(s) become aware that the DoS may be absent for a long
period of time (e.g. through illness) they should contact the Dean of
School and the student to make sure alternative supervision
arrangements are in place. Similarly, if a Second Supervisor is likely to
be absent for a long period of time the Dean of School should ensure
adequate alternative arrangements are made.
11
External Advisor
Advisors are appointed only for their input on specific areas of
expertise. They do not form part of the formal supervisory team and
have no responsibility for progress. An External Advisor should not be
asked to read draft work.
External Supervisors
The Director of Studies and preferably one Second Supervisor should be members of staff. This
ensures there is nearly always somebody on the spot at the University who can be available to
meet the student, or who can liaise with another part of the University on the student’s behalf.
However, it is not uncommon for external supervisors to be part of the team, either as part of a
collaborative project or because of that person’s particular expertise. Equally, staff who leave
the University may continue as Second Supervisors if that is acceptable to their new employer.
External supervisors are eligible for honoraria according to an agreed scale – please see Code
of Practice (p.24) for more detail.
1.3 Respective roles and responsibilities
Ultimately, a research student has responsibility for his or her own work, the production of a
thesis, its submission on time, and its quality. Supervisors, primarily the Director of Studies,
should provide the support and guidance, expertise and experience, help and advice, and
criticism and encouragement necessary for their student’s development as a scholar capable of
achieving a doctorate and pursuing independent research. A Dean of School needs to ensure
that the environment, in terms of facilities and supervisory resource, is conducive to the goal of
a successful and timely completion.
Appendices 1.1 and 1.2 describe fully the respective roles and responsibilities of individuals
involved throughout the doctorate process. The roles and responsibilities specific to the
teaching and administration of professional doctorates can be seen in Appendix 1.3.
12
13
Being a supervisor at QMU is a significant commitment and requires long-term investment. A
Ph.D. student will be at the University for a minimum of three years if they are full-time and for at
least six years if they are part-time, and on-going work with former students often long outlasts
the formal requirements of the registration period. Over this period supervisors will find working
alongside research students stimulating and rewarding, and in many respects challenging.
There will be numerous highs and lows, but many supervisors will recognise that the benefits
typically outweigh the difficulties encountered.
2.1 Attracting students
Having made the commitment, it is worth thinking about what can be done from the outset to
attract the best students to come and work with you. In many research areas it is not uncommon
for students to approach you and ask you to supervise them. Most likely, these students will be
aware of your research interests and profile, and see you as the expert who can best advise
them. It is worth reviewing the ways in which you can raise your research profile, especially via
the internet, so that prospective students are better aware of what you do.
Academics aiming to attract new research students should consider what they are looking for in
a student. Depending on a variety of factors some academics may be more interested in
supervising applicants whose proposal looks quite straightforward and achievable – essentially
building on their own knowledge in the discipline. Others may be interested in someone who is
proposing striking out into less known, riskier, more challenging directions where there may well
be greater uncertainty of success – where the rewards (e.g. publications) and prestige for the
supervisor and the University may be greater.
Key considerations for attracting students:
- Do you have a personal webpage on your departmental website?
- What does it say about your research interests, experience and approach to supervision?
- Is the list of conferences, publications and projects up to date?
Beyond the University webpages you may consider using professional networking websites,
such as LinkedIn to develop your research profile.
2.2 Advising prospective students
If either your current Master’s students or interested external applicants contact you to enquire
about doctoral study, point them to the QMU Graduate School website and also to your
Research Theme and Divisional webpages. The latter should provide them with details of the
Division’s research and study activities, staff and students, and current projects, events and
collaborations. In these initial stages, it may also be useful to encourage prospective students to
think long and hard about whether doing a Ph.D. or professional doctorate is really the right
thing for them and to realise how different doctoral study is to earlier forms of education.
14
The Quality Assurance Agency and the National Union of Students have collaborated to provide
a useful guide for current and prospective students; The UK doctorate: a guide for current and
prospective doctoral candidates. This details the different forms of doctoral qualification in the
UK and the national standards that students are expected to meet, as well as providing
guidance on what they can expect by way of supervisory and institutional support.
What should you advise applicants to consider?
The following questions are proposed as a way of getting prospective students to think through
the reality of engaging in doctoral study. If an applicant progresses their initial inquiry to study at
QMU, it might be worthwhile directing applicants to these questions before they complete the
Application Form.
1. What does the institution expect of its research students in terms of time spent researching,
undertaking training or attending ‘taught’ elements, and other responsibilities?
2. What are the roles and responsibilities of doctoral supervision at the institution, and what
provision is there for change of supervisor if my supervisor leaves or takes a sabbatical?
3. What facilities and resources am I likely to need for my project and will I be able to access
them?
4. What costs am I likely to incur that are not included in the annual tuition fee, such as travel for
research purposes, conference attendance, bench fees or specialist equipment?
5. How will I be supported in finding opportunities to attend conferences, give presentations and
publish?
6. Will I be given opportunities to teach, and if so, how much teaching is available/expected, and
what support will be available to me as a novice teacher?
7. What support is available (in my subject) for research and professional transferable skills
development?
8. How does the institution promote an engaging and interdisciplinary postgraduate research
environment?
9. How are the concerns of doctoral students represented at the institution?
10. What provision is there for arranged suspension of study (for example, for parental leave)
and will I be able to return to my research if I suspend my study for some reason?
11. What happens if I don’t complete my research?
12. What employment opportunities are available for someone researching in my field and how
will this doctoral qualification enhance my career prospects?
Source: The UK doctorate: a guide for current and prospective doctoral candidates, QAA and
NUS.
15
In addition, a student considering coming to QMU may want to think about the pros and cons of
living and studying in Edinburgh. The richness of the local academic community, and the
cultural vibrancy of the city, need to be balanced against the cost of living and other essential
considerations. Among the many sections of the QMU website that prospective doctoral
students might be pointed to, these may be particularly useful:
The Graduate School: http://www.qmu.ac.uk/post_research/graduate_school/default.htm
Postgraduate Research: http://www.qmu.ac.uk/post_research/default.htm
Research Themes: http://www.qmu.ac.uk/research_knowledge/default.htm
2.3 Application / Interview process
A Ph.D. application is generally a multi-stage process.
1. Informal contact. At QMU, as noted previously, many students thinking of applying for a
Ph.D. will initially approach potential supervisors directly. Use this opportunity to start to get a
feel for the person and their interests and possible synergies with you and your work. However,
avoid giving any definite indication that you are willing and in a position to take them on and
point them to the formal application process. If prospective students have questions about that
process, these should be directed to [email protected].
2. Formal application. It is essential that all students make a formal application (on a QMU
Application Form) and that they are assessed to ensure that they meet the basic criteria set by
the University. All Divisions will involve academics in the selection process and also take into
consideration the availability of staff able to supervise any student that meets the essential
criteria and has put forward a potentially interesting research proposal.
Ph.D. application: Formal requirements
The formal selection criteria for Ph.D. students at QMU are:
 A fully completed Application Form
 Two academic references
 Transcripts of degree courses undertaken to preferably demonstrate minimum of 2(i)
undergraduate degree classification and merit level or above at Masters level, normally in a
subject appropriate to the research, to include merit in the dissertation (where one exists) or
equivalent
 A minimum score of IELTS 6.5 or equivalent, with no element of performance lower than
IELTS 6.0, is the entrance requirement. Completion of a Masters degree delivered in
English may count as evidence of English language ability
 Evidence of funding options and provision of the application fee
 Indication of visa situation, including making application in sufficient time to allow for visa
processing.
3. Interview. Candidates are interviewed, with preliminary offer made pending confirmation of
funding and other relevant conditions. Following assessment and shortlisting on the basis of the
16
completed Application Form, the University now requires that all shortlisted applicants are
interviewed prior to being offered a place.
4. Bursary applicants. Every year (usually in April/May) the University makes available a
number of studentships, in key research themes. The successful candidate will (as of 2012/13)
receive; a full waiver of tuition fees, an annual stipend of £11,500 for 3 years, and £2000 over
the course of the project for expenses and travel. Bursary holders will be liable for any
continuation fee and for the examination fee - in common with all other Ph.D. students.
5. Offers to students not funded by QMU. Students who are not offered funding through the
University, but who meet the basic criteria and are interested in undertaking research in an area
where there are supervisors available, may be offered places conditional on the understanding
that they will finance themselves. It is important to make clear to such students both the likely
costs of doctoral study at QMU in your given discipline (including costs for fieldwork, conference
attendance and so forth), and to emphasise that there are unlikely to be any sources of funding
available through the University should their own funding source(s) prove insufficient once they
have started the programme.
In most Divisions, the Research Theme Lead and Director of Studies have a key role to play in
the selection process, and second supervisors may have only a limited role. Whatever your
situation, it is worth familiarising yourself with the process of interviewing students and offering
places.
Professional Doctorate Application Process
Applications for professional doctorate programmes go through the same admissions process
as taught programmes at QMU. Applicants are advised to contact Admissions
([email protected]), or the Programme Lead to discuss their application further.
Candidates should have a postgraduate diploma or masters qualification, which includes
research methods, and strong evidence of personal and professional development. Candidates
should normally have at least two years post qualification experience, and show evidence of
development in an area of expert practice, and /or management and leadership skills. As with
the Ph.D. programme there will be an interview process.
For more information please refer to the Professional Doctorate, Health & Social Sciences
webpage.
Interviews
As noted earlier, all Divisions are expected to interview all students they are considering
accepting. The QAA Quality Code Chapter B11: Research Degrees recommends that at least
two members of staff are involved in the decision to offer a place to a student. The primary aim
of the interview is for you to gain further information about the candidate’s motivation,
commitment and potential for study at the doctoral level. It also provides the opportunity to find
out more about a student’s personality and approach, so that you get a sense of how easily a
productive working relationship could develop. It is important to remember that a strong
17
candidate may be applying to a number of institutions, so it may be necessary for you to ‘sell’
the benefits of doing a research degree at QMU.
For those candidates for whom English is not a first language, the interview also gives an
opportunity to establish the candidate’s English language competence.
What are you looking for in the interview?
Doctoral students are expected to have particular attributes and the interview will be an
opportunity for you to get further information on the candidate’s:
 Ability to process complex concepts, reason analytically and critically (at SCQF Level
12)
 Ability to evaluate own work and the work of others
 Capacity to conduct independent research as well as to accept guidance from others
 Enthusiasm for research and for situating research more broadly
 Motivation and perseverance in achieving objectives
 Organisational skills
 Capacity to establish good working relationships
 Personal and academic integrity.
Organising the interview?
Responsibility for making arrangements for an interview generally rest with the proposed
Director of Studies, interview arrangements will generally include:
 Establishing the format in which the interview will be conducted - in person, by telephone
or by Skype/video conference
 Contacting the student to inform them of the interview time, place and date
 Asking the candidate if they have any special requirements due to a disability
 Giving the candidate information about the format and schedule of the interview and who
will be involved
 Booking rooms, catering, audio-visual equipment, etc.
 Ensuring there are people who can meet and greet candidates on the day and give
guided tours of the campus - if appropriate.
Conducting the interview
A key point to remember is that the interview is a two-way process – you are interviewing the
candidate but in many respects the candidate is also interviewing you. Consider how you will
put the candidate at ease so that an open and honest conversation can take place.
It is helpful to begin the interview by welcoming the candidate and giving them some information
about the doctoral programme, the Division/School and the University - before beginning to ask
questions. You could then start with some relatively open questions, so that a rapport is
established, before moving on to more specific and demanding questions (see ‘sample interview
questions’). You will also want to use the candidate’s written application and documentation to
decipher some individual questions, and to draw out how successfully the candidate meets any
of the selection criteria that were not evidenced clearly in the application form.
18
Sample interview questions
Motivation for doctoral study (at QMU)
 Please tell me something about you, what you have been doing/studying/working on during
the past year?
 What made you apply for this programme at this particular time? Why did you choose QMU?
 Where do you anticipate/hope a Ph.D. will lead in terms of your career development?
 What contribution do you think you will be making to your chosen field of research?
Readiness for doctoral study
 What is the relevance of your previous study to your proposed research?
 What potential areas of research have you identified? How did you arrive at these? What
interests you about them?
 How do you intend to fund your study?
Depending on specific circumstances
 Are you aware of the requirements of the programme?
 What are you expecting by way of supervisory arrangements?
 How do you anticipate combining the demands of doctoral study/completing a Ph.D. with
other commitments you might have?
Taking notes
The importance of keeping detailed notes of the interview cannot be over-emphasised. They
provide not only a prompt for your memory of a particular applicant but also proof of a fair and
proper selection process, should this ever be challenged. An interview pro-forma (see Appendix
2.1) is the easiest and best way of ensuring equality in the process and provides a standard
template for recording detail and outcomes. Completed pro-formas should be kept in a secure
and confidential place and seen only by relevant people and used for relevant purposes, in
accordance with University obligations under the Data Protection Act.
Equal Opportunities
Queen Margaret University is committed to equality of opportunity and believes in a culture of
diversity and inclusion. Each application received by the University is considered carefully on its
own merits. The University seeks to open access to a wide range of students, subject to the
essential principle that there is a reasonable expectation of completion within the normal
duration of registration.
QMU Equal Opportunities Policy: http://www.qmu.ac.uk/equal/policy.htm
19
2.4 Offering places
Formal offers of places will be sent out via the Division of Governance and Quality
Enhancement, along with any information on funding awards and visa requirements where
relevant. Please do not offer informal advice/feedback on offers. If an applicant chases up their
application with you advise them they will receive feedback from the Division of Governance
and Quality Enhancement in due course. In most cases, successful students will start their
programme in the last week of September, when a formal induction event takes place. In some
cases, there may be difficulties related to confirmation of visas or funding – hence entry may be
delayed.
New students may wish to start as quickly as possible, and the University will try to
accommodate this - where possible. The University expects that students will start in either
September or January (when formal inductions are arranged), so that they do not miss out on
training and initiatives designed to aid academic and social integration at the institution.
When a student is admitted a provisional Director of Studies is appointed. The University should
not admit any student to a research degree programme if not satisfied that suitable
arrangements can be put in place. Second Supervisors will be discussed by the Director of
Studies and Dean of School once it becomes apparent what the research project will involve.
For instance, if the student decides to focus on a particular aspect of the topic it may be
essential to identify a Second Supervisor with expertise in that area. The full supervisory team is
‘officially’ appointed once School Academic Board approves the outline proposal.
Support for international students is supplied by the Recruitment and International Liaison
Office.
Overseas students will not normally be eligible for a student visa unless they are registered fulltime. The University has certain responsibilities under law as a sponsor of visa applications.
This may require us to pass on information to the UK Border Agency should a student drop out
of contact with his or her supervisors.
Inheriting students
For some staff, their supervisory relationship with a student doesn’t start until part-way or well
into the doctoral programme. This may happen as the result of one or more of the following:
- An existing supervisor leaving or taking sabbatical/research buy-out
- A breakdown of an earlier supervisory arrangement
- Or, a student transferring from another HEI.
More information for supervisors inheriting students can be found in the Code of Practice (p.29)
20
21
3.1 Orientation
Doctoral students’ orientation at QMU takes place at three different levels:
1) Induction to the University
2) Orientation to the Division/School
3) Orientation to the supervisory team (and associated staff and students).
Induction to the University
All doctoral candidates who have accepted a place on a Ph.D. or professional doctorate
programme are invited to an induction day held annually in the last week of September and
January. New students will receive a letter 3-4 weeks in advance of the induction event which
provides information on matriculation, the induction schedule, accessing the University and
other important information (e.g. links to the appropriate Regulations and Code of Practice).
The induction day is hosted by the Deputy Principal, with the support of the Professional
Doctorate Programme Lead, staff of the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement and
the Centre for Academic Practice. Typically the induction event covers the following:





Campus Health & Safety
Campus Tour
Student Representation (i.e. the Doctoral Students’ Association and the Students’ Union)
Overview of the Research Degree / Professional Doctorate Regulations
Research Skills Training Programme overview.
At the end of the day students are taken to collect their student and staff Smartcards, and
shown their desk arrangements – if applicable.
Following the induction day, doctoral students will participate in the Research Skills Training
Programme – which is run by the Centre for Academic Practice. To help new students integrate
with each other, a number of social events will be arranged by the Division of Governance and
Quality Enhancement and/or the Doctoral Students’ Association.
Orientation to Division/School
Directors of Studies are responsible for organising initial Divisional or School orientations.
Orientation activities could take many different forms, and Director of Studies are advised to
liaise with the appropriate Research Theme Lead and Heads of Division to identify activities
which will be of relevance for doctoral students.
Continuing doctoral students can be an incredibly useful source of support for new students,
both in terms of transmitting key information about practical issues and in helping them to feel
part of the research community within the Division/School. Directors of Studies should try their
best to facilitate interactions between doctoral students in these early stages.
Orientation to the supervisory team (and other research contacts)
The Director of Studies plays a key role in helping doctoral students access the required
resources and facilities. When a new student starts at the University, staff of the Division of
22
Governance and Quality Enhancement will put in motion processes to set up IT accounts,
arrange for issue of Smartcards and the allocation of a desk and computer terminal. If any of the
standard facilities listed under Section I, Facilities and Support of the Code of Practice are not in
place, the Director of Studies should negotiate on the student’s behalf with the School Manager
and / or Dean of School.
The Director of Studies has general responsibilities in terms of supporting the student’s career
development. Depending on the direction the student hopes to take after graduation, the
Director of Studies may be able to support the student in a number of ways:





Inviting the student to research seminars
Introducing the student to key contacts in the profession
Encouraging the student to submit papers and abstracts to conferences or journals
Co-publishing with the student
Encouraging the student to become involved in activities such as teaching, conference
organisation, or literature reviews.
Practical considerations
Directors of Studies may be required to liaise directly with the Dean of School, Head of Division
or the Laboratories & Technical Services Manager, regarding the following:
- Access to laboratory facilities / specialist equipment within QMU
- Consumables
- Bench fees
For more information please see the Code of Practice, Section 5: The Supervisors’
responsibilities – practicalities.
3.2 Establishing the supervisory working relationship
Once the supervisory team has been agreed (see Section 4: Progress & Annual Reports) it is
important that the full team meets to discuss the project and their respective roles. Ideally, the
team should agree who will lead on different aspects of the project, the number of meetings to
expect and timescales for reading drafts and providing feedback. It may be useful to consider
whether one member is likely to take on a more pastoral role in relation to non-academic
support. Ownership of the project direction should also be discussed. For instance, do the team
expect the student to define the project with the supervisors merely acting as critical friends, or
will the supervisory team work more closely to define the parameters of the research project?
It is good practice for the student and supervisors to discuss their expectations of the
supervisory relationship early on. In particular, attention should be given to:




Frequency and location of meetings
Communication arrangements
Responsibility for arranging, recording and disseminating outcomes of meetings
Timetable of written work to be produced by the student
23

Turnaround time for feedback on written work.
Appendix 3.1 provides a useful exercise for exploring research students’ expectations of their
supervisor. As a supervisor you may find this exercise useful to stimulate discussion of each
others’ expectation in one of your initial supervision sessions.
Supervisors should be alert to the differences between individual students. An approach which
has worked with other students in the past may not be appropriate to the current student.
People from countries other than the UK, for instance, may have experienced different
educational cultures which can alter their view of how the supervisory relationship should work.
Open dialogue between the student and supervisor can help to resolve any mismatch in
expectations.
For full-time students, it is expected that meetings between the student and the full supervisory
team are held at least every six months. The frequency of such meetings will depend on the
location of the supervisors and the student, and the needs of the student. It is particularly
important that the full team should meet to review progress at key stages such as probation and
preparation for submission.
Key considerations: How will the supervisory team operate?
1) Clarifying supervisory norms. Student dissatisfaction can arise when students within a
Division talk to each other and realise that, for example, speed or quality of feedback on written
work or supervisor accessibility is very different. It is worth open discussion of this among
colleagues and Theme Leads, with reference to University regulations.
2) Establishing arrangements in the supervisory team. Prior to the first meeting with the
doctoral student, those staff involved in the supervisory team can usefully meet to discuss their
differing supervisory styles, their respective roles and responsibilities, and how supervisory
meetings can best be organised/attended/recorded.
3) Establishing arrangements between the supervisory team and the student. At an initial
meeting between student and supervisor(s) some time needs to be spent addressing the
following questions:
- How are we going to work together?
- What do you [the student] expect from us individually/collectively?
- How often shall we meet?
- How can we best contact each other in between scheduled meetings?
Different students will have different opinions, experiences and preferences and although the
general aim should always be to be fair and equal with all of your students this does not
necessarily mean working with everybody in exactly the same way. Agreeing such day-to-day
supervisory arrangements can be very useful for aligning expectations. Once in place, these
arrangements should be periodically reviewed to align to the student’s needs at the various
stages of their studies.
24
3.3 Supervisory meetings
After the initial orientation period, there are likely to be at least two kinds of meetings that take
place regularly between students and supervisors.
Informal meetings
Informal or unscheduled meetings are very important for the supervisory relationship and help
communicate the interest and enthusiasm of those involved. Informal meetings can happen in a
number of ways, including face to face, via the telephone or Skype, or in written formats such as
email. If such meetings result in an agreed action point or if important matters are discussed,
the supervisor and student should exchange emails afterwards to confirm the substantive
points. It is expected that there will be regular email correspondence between meetings and
supervisors should keep emails for future reference.
Formal meetings
Formal meetings which take place in person are planned in advance according to an agreed
schedule and timeframe. It is expected that full-time students will normally have some form of
formal meeting with their Director of Studies at least once a month (on average) after initial
more frequent meetings in the early stages. A part-time student will have contact with their
Director of Studies every two months. However, the frequency of meetings will need to be
greater at the beginning and end of the student’s programme.
Supervisory meetings should take place in an environment free from distraction and interruption,
where both student and supervisor feel able to discuss the research project in greater depth. It
is also essential that the outcomes of these formal supervisory meetings are accurately
recorded in some way acceptable to student and supervisor. It is recommended that the student
writes up notes of the meeting, paying particular attention to agreed action points. The notes
should be sent to the Director of Studies for confirmation. These records will form an essential
resource allowing the student and supervisory team to review progress and ensure actions are
being followed up.
Having supervisory meetings is important to provide support and guidance for your students but
it also provides a means to monitor progress. This aspect of the supervisor’s role is considered
further in Section 4; Monitoring & Annual Progress.
25
Table 3.1: Guidance for formal/informal contact between doctoral students and supervisors
Expectation Full-Time
Time devoted Approximately 35 hours per week
to studies
Part-Time
Approximately 18.5 hours per week
Time
campus
No set expectation
A minimum of one day on campus
per week is recommended – for
participation in activities and
becoming part of the research
culture
Progression landmarks.
-
No set expectation
Formal supervisory meetings
Progression landmarks.
Formal meeting at least once a
month with DoS
Phone & email regularly.
-
Formal meeting at least once every
two months with DoS
Phone & email regularly.
No contact for 4 weeks, DoS must
ask for an explanation
No contact for 6 weeks, formal letter
must be written to student by DoS
Still no contact, Dean of School
write to student (see de-registration
process).
-
on
-
Formal and
informal
contact
-
Maximum
periods
without
contact
-
-
-
-
-
No contact for 2 months, DoS must
ask for an explanation
No contact for 3 months, formal letter
must be written to student by DoS
Still no contact, Dean of School write
to student (see de-registration
process).
Supporting students based off-campus
Some QMU students are registered as non-resident or off-campus students. This means they
will spend very little time on campus, and the bulk of supervision will be done by email and
telephone. Studying off-campus is an essential element of being a professional doctorate, or
part-time distance Ph.D. student. However, it presents a number of difficulties and logistical
issues. Most significantly, students based at a distance can feel isolated from the rest of the
University and do not benefit from being around other researchers. This means they will
(potentially) learns less than they would if on campus. It can also be detrimental to motivation.
What can be done to support off-campus students?
1) Maintain regular communications
2) Encourage the use of staff/student Outlook account
3) Time students’ visits to QMU to coincide with research seminars and events
4) Visit the student from time-to-time – if appropriate
5) Encourage students to make full use of the range of resources available via the remote
desktop
6) Promote Doctoral Students’ Association events, including attendance at the Student
Conference – which takes place every November.
For more information please see Section 6: Non-resident and off-campus students of the Code
of Practice.
26
3.4 Training needs and development
This sub-section covers the training needs of research students. It is recognised that students
need training of different sorts at various stages of their degree, and that this training should
encompass general personal development, as well as the more focussed needs of the research
project.
Research Skills Training
There are three levels of research training internal to QMU: the generic Research Skills Training
Programme (compulsory for all Ph.D. students), more specific training arranged through
Schools, and that provided by the supervisory team.
The Research Skills Training (RST) Programme, which is delivered centrally through the Centre
for Academic Practice (CAP), has the following aims:




To develop students’ skills in retrieving, managing, analysing and assimilating
information
To foster communication and presentation skills
To introduce students to a variety of research methodologies
To enhance students’ understanding of the importance of ethics in research.
It is important for all research students to complete the generic RST Programme, and therefore
only in exceptional circumstances will exemptions be given (via School Academic Board).
Exemption may be allowed where the student can provide evidence of prior learning at an
appropriate level (e.g. an appropriate Masters level research degree).
Professional doctorate students are expected to attend the equivalent classes as part of their
doctorate research module.
The University expects research students to attain a breadth of competencies through the RST
Programme and the wider experience of their supervised research study. A Director of Studies
should ensure that a student has opportunity to acquire appropriate knowledge in the following
areas:







Relevant research skills and techniques
Understanding of the research environment
Research management
Personal effectiveness
Communication skills
Networking and team working
Career management.
Specific training
The Centre for Academic Practice also provides other opportunities for training, for example;
SPSS and NVivo8, career planning, grant writing, writing for publication, designing and
delivering effective presentations, and preparing for the viva. If you wish to learn more about
these training opportunities please see the CAP website.
27
Further help is available to encourage the student to develop relevant professional skills and to
undertake appropriate development activity. The Vitae Researcher Development Framework
(RDF) is a professional development framework for planning, promoting and supporting the
personal, professional and career development of researchers in higher education. It articulates
the knowledge, behaviours and attributes of successful researchers and encourages them to
realise their potential. Students and supervisors can easily access the RDF via the Vitae
website.
Additional help can be offered to students by persuading them to complete a Training Needs
Analysis Form (available as Appendix 3.2). The Training Needs Analysis Form should be
completed at the beginning of the doctoral study and revisited regularly to ensure that all of the
student’s training needs are being met.
The University endorses the Joint Funding Councils’ Statement regarding the skills training
requirements for research students across these areas, and expects training provision and
supervision to support attainment of these competencies.
Conference attendance and publication
Presentation of papers at conferences can provide an excellent opportunity for research
students to rehearse the presentation and defence of their work. The appropriateness and the
timing of such presentations will vary with the discipline and the nature of the programme of
work. The student should consult with their Director of Studies before offering or accepting any
offer of presentation of material at any meeting. While conventions vary across disciplines, the
role of supervisors (and other contributors) in supporting the work described in such
presentations should normally be acknowledged.
The Code of Practice, in Section VI – Training and Professional Development, sets out the
University’s expectations of the student and supervisor around the dissemination of
collaborative work.
As part of the initial planning with the research student, a supervisor may choose to create a
clear ‘publication plan’ to maximise the impact of the research project.
Professional development
A research degree is principally a training programme that aims to equip an individual with the
skills and experience necessary to act as an independent researcher. This could lead to a range
of careers: in academia, in scientific research, in business or in clinical practice.
In consequence, it is appropriate that supervision of a research student includes some
consideration of broader professional development issues. These are potentially addressed by
a number of actions. Within the context of the approved programme of work there will often be
opportunities for professional networking and dissemination activity of relevance both to the
project in hand, and future work in the field. Students should be encouraged to take part in
research seminars or professional workshops and to develop contacts with professionals
working in the discipline. For those students on bursaries, the duties performed as part of the
contract can be learning opportunities. The student and Director of Studies should discuss how
to make the School duties as relevant as possible to the student’s likely future career path.
28
Non-bursary students may also be offered teaching work, if appropriate. Please note that
approval from the Protecting Vulnerable Groups Scheme must be obtained by individuals
working with taught students. All students who teach must also take the QMU Short Course in
Learning, Teaching and Assessment.
Specific career advice may also be relevant. The University’s Career Advisory Service is
available to all postgraduate research students. Directors of Studies and other supervisors may
also be in a position to offer advice on training and employment opportunities, and should see
this as part of their wider responsibility to students.
Personal Development Planning (PDP) / e-portfolio
Doctoral students are encouraged to make use of the e-portfolio facility. This can be used both
as a record of progress for the benefit of supervisors and as a record of career development.
Advice on this is available from the Centre for Academic Practice.
3.5 Specialised support
The Graduate School contains links to a range of support services, including administrative,
professional and academic support.
Students with disabilities
Information for students with disabilities, including contact details for the Student Disability
Advisor, is given in the Student Diary. It is recommended that a student makes contact with the
Academic Disabled Students Co-ordinator for their area as early in their programme of study as
possible.
29
30
This Section refers solely to the progress of Ph.D. students at QMU. Professional doctorate
supervisors should refer to the Professional Doctorate Programme Regulations for examples of
the route through the programme.
4.1 Monitoring progress
Research degrees present particular challenges when compared to a taught degree. Students
often struggle to adjust to the relative lack of deadlines and milestones, and it is not uncommon
for students to develop a significant dependency on the research supervisor in order to
understand and judge their progression. Supervisors have an important role to play in promoting
time-management skills, not only through negotiating and monitoring the overall study
programme but also in encouraging students to break down their work and set short-term
objectives. Supervisors should not assume that students can immediately take responsibility for
this without support.
Nevertheless, as the student moves into the mid-stages of their programme, he or she should
assume more control over their studies and act with increasing autonomy. Every student is
different, but as an approximation, the Table 4.1 sets out the broad expectations of progress:
Table 4.1: Outline of progress expectations for full-time and part-time Ph.D. students
Full-time
Part-time
End
Research questions identified;
End
Research questions identified;
Year 1
methods of investigation agreed; Year 2
methods of investigation agreed;
ethical approval applied for
ethical approval applied for
Early
Ethical approval secured; data
Early
Ethical approval secured; data
Year 2
collection started
Year 3
collection started
End
Significant proportion of data
End
Significant proportion of data
Year 2
collection complete; decision
Year 4
collection complete; decision made
made as to whether follow up
as to whether follow up studies are
studies are needed; introductory
needed; introductory and literature
and literature review chapters
review chapters drafted
drafted
Mid
Data collection complete;
End
Data collection complete; analysis
Year 3
analysis started
Year 5
started
End
Most of thesis drafted
End
Most of thesis drafted
Year 3
Year 6
Mid
Thesis submitted
Year 7
Thesis submitted
Year 4
Well organised students who experience no major obstacles should progress more quickly than
this and submit by the end of the prescribed period. However, it is recognised that a slightly later
submission is not uncommon.
Supervisors will be monitoring progress informally and continuously through supervisory
meetings and the regular contact they have with their students. It is important that supervisors
ask to see written work regularly throughout the period of study. This allows any problems with
academic writing to be addressed early. It also helps the student to spread out the amount of
writing that needs to be produced, particularly if drafts can be incorporated into the thesis.
31
Where a student is based at a distance or is conducting fieldwork abroad it can be particularly
difficult for the supervisory team to monitor progress. This makes regular meetings and the
production of written work especially crucial.
The relationship between the student and supervisor will evolve over time. Initially, students will
depend heavily on their supervisors for guidance and direction. By the end of the first year
students should have a detailed knowledge of research in their chosen area (which will often be
more detailed than that of individual supervisors) and a clear view of the contribution of their
own proposed investigation to this field of research. Students should be developing confidence
and independence, and engaging in discussion with their supervisors rather than merely
seeking advice. This gradual shift of control to the student should be encouraged, with the
supervisor assuming a counselling rather than an advisory role.
Supervisors should take action if any of the following concerns arise:
- The student misses meetings or fails to respond regularly to messages
- The student regularly misses targets set at supervisory meetings
- The quality of the student’s writing consistently falls below the level required
- The student appears unable to understand key concepts
- The student is still looking to the supervisors to tell them what to do, even in the mid and later
stages of the degree
- The supervisor finds evidence of plagiarism, unprofessional conduct or research malpractice.
For more guidance please see the following Sections:
- Section 5: Preparing students for their research work
- Section 7: Dealing with challenges.
The Director of Studies is not the student’s line manager. However, it is important to keep an
eye on the student’s attendance. If a student falls behind with study it is crucial to intervene as
early as possible before the problem becomes serious. The University also has particular legal
responsibilities in terms of checking the attendance of students who are non EU/EEA passport
holders (see; International Doctoral Student Visa & Immigration Policy).
International Doctoral Student Visa & Immigration Policy
The University’s International Doctoral Student Visa & Immigration Policy and the subsequent
registration and attendance procedures were implemented in October 2012.
The procedures aim to ensure that doctoral students and the University remain compliant with
the visa and immigration requirements set by the UKBA. They also look to promote positive
progression and the proactive engagement of students, ensuring that they have access to
support services, both academic and non-academic, in support of successful completion of their
doctoral studies.
Students who are not on a British or EU/EEA passport must register fortnightly with the
Recruitment & International Liaison Office (RILO) at the Student Services Reception. Doctoral
32
students may be granted an ‘authorised absence’ for one (or more) attendance registration
periods. This means that students will not be required to register on campus. All international
students must formally request an Authorised Absence From [email protected]
directly. Research Degrees staff will then contact the student’s Director of Studies to confirm
that this absence is supported.
Doctoral Student Absence Form - Application form for authorised absence from QMU
Absence Form: Data Collection - Absence for data collection – to be completed monthly.
4.2 First year of Ph.D. progress; to probationary assessment
Outline proposal
The first major task for the student is to plan the research project and complete an outline
proposal. The Outline Proposal Form should contain enough detail to establish what methods of
investigation will be employed, and therefore what resources will be required, including the
specific blend of expertise needed in the supervisory team. It is accepted that it is not possible
to have a detailed plan at this early stage and that initial ideas may need to be modified once
research starts. However, it is important to plan for any unusual resource demands as early as
possible.
Essential considerations
Planning a research project of this scale is not easy and students will normally require
considerable input from the supervisory team. Some common pitfalls to avoid include:
Over-ambition - it is not unusual for students to start with a very broad set of research
objectives which need to be pruned down to a manageable research question. Supervisors
should take care not to force the student to focus on the elements which most interest them at
the expense of the elements which most interest the student.
Unrealistic timescales - students often under-estimate the amount of work involved in data
collection and fail to appreciate the difficulties of accessing participants, setting up meetings and
recording data. Supervisors can usefully draw on their own experience of similar projects to
advise the student about what to expect.
Lack of data management skills – students may need support in developing practical skills
such as recording and filing results, keeping lists of contacts, diary management, making the
best use of reading and managing references. Supervisors should take steps to find out what
level of skills the student has and help them to address any gaps.
Problems with collaborators – many projects rely upon co-operation with another
organisation, for instance an NHS Board or another University. It is essential that clear
statements of support be obtained at an early stage so that the student knows whether or not he
or she can definitely do what is planned.
33
It is advisable that consideration be given to ethical issues at an early stage. Supervisors may
wish to use the prompt questions on the Ethical Approval Form to make sure the student has
thought about all the possible risks to both the participants and the researcher. Supervisors
should not countersign the Ethical Approval Form unless they are content that the application is
sound. It will cause unnecessary delay if the student has to resubmit a poorly explained
application. For more information on the ethics application process, please see Section 5:
Preparing students for research work.
The planning stage can feel very frustrating for students. Supervisors should encourage
students to submit interim pieces of writing during this period. These could take the form of
drafts of early chapters of the thesis, such as the introduction and literature review. This will
allow the student to have tangible evidence of achievement that can be used towards the final
thesis. It also allows the supervisors to assess the student’s writing skills and address any
potential problems early. Supervisors should be particularly alert to poor referencing or
plagiarism so that the student can learn to avoid poor academic practice in the future.
All work put forward for assessment must be in the student’s own words (see Section 6:
Supporting the writing process).
Key information: Outline proposals
When?: Three months after matriculation (for full-time students) or six months after
matriculation (for part-time students)
What?: An Outline Proposal Form should be submitted to the Division of Governance and
Quality Enhancement prior to being considered by the appropriate School Academic Board. A
Short CV Form for each proposed supervisor must also be submitted to allow the Board to
assess whether the team meets the requirements of the project and satisfies the Research
Degree Regulations.
Why?: The School Academic Board’s role is to confirm that the necessary facilities and
resources can be put in place to support the project and to confirm the supervisory team. It is
recognised that not all students will be in a position to provide much detail on their projects at
this stage. However, it is important to establish the supervisory team as early as possible.
In framing the outline proposal, students should provide enough information to allow the School
Academic Board to judge:
1. The resource implications of the project (laboratory facilities, consumables, software, travel)
2. Any specialist expertise that is required in the supervisory team
3. Any input required from organisations outside QMU and whether permission has been
secured from those organisations
4. Any additional training that the student will require.
What next?: Once the School has approved an outline proposal it is committed to supporting
the research project as described. Any changes to the project which affect the resource
requirements must be discussed with the Dean of School.
34
Probationary assessment
The first formal assessment for Ph.D. students is the probationary assessment. This normally
takes the form of a research proposal of 5000 words, which is followed by a short viva
examination. The submitted proposal is considered by a panel of two or three experienced
research-active members of staff. Often, the assessors will not be subject experts, as
academics are selected from across a range of Divisions, in both Schools. This means the
written assignment should explain the project and choice of investigative methods in terms that
a non-expert would understand.
Many students choose to have one of their supervisory team attend the probationary viva as an
observer – in most cases this is the Director of Studies. The observer may not speak unless
addressed directly by the assessors. His or her role is to listen to the discussion and make
notes on behalf of the student. The observer can also offer helpful feedback to the student on
their performance.
The probationary assessors may make comments or suggestions regarding the project design
but cannot demand the student to make changes. However, the student and supervisory team
should consider the assessors’ advice carefully as it often takes an outsider’s perspective to
notice a potential flaw in the project design.
If, following the grant of ethical approval, any significant changes are made to the project
design, the Secretary to the Research Ethics Panel must be consulted. It may be that a further
form needs to be completed to secure approval for the revised protocol. For further information
please refer to Section 5.1: Ethics Approval.
Data collection may start before the probationary assessment has been passed. Data collection
may not start before ethical approval has been granted. For more information on the ethics
approval process, please see Section 5: Preparing students for research work.
Key information: Probationary assessment
When?: The probationary assessment will normally take place eight months after initial
matriculation for full-time students, or sixteen months for part-time students. All Ph.D. students
must undergo a probationary assessment.
Students may apply to the Research Degrees Panel for permission to delay the assessment,
but may not delay beyond 14 months full-time or 28 months part-time.
Why?: The purpose of the probationary assessment is to give the student and supervisor an
independent assessment of the student’s progress and to highlight any potential weaknesses at
an early stage so they can be rectified. It is essential that any progress issues are addressed
promptly and not left unresolved until the student submits the final thesis. The inclusion of a
short viva-voce examination also provides the student with practice for the final viva.
How?: The panel should consist of two or three experienced researchers. One panel member
will act as chair-person and produce the panel’s Joint Report.
Students should not be expected to be at Ph.D. level at this stage, but they should demonstrate
that they are working towards the Ph.D. criteria. Assessors will consider:
35
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Clarity of research aims
Grasp of research methods
Understanding of possible limitations of study
Depth of literature review (if applicable)
Quality of writing and presentation.
The meeting between the student and panel should take no more than one hour. One member
of the supervisory team may accompany the student but may not speak unless directed to by
the Chair. At the end of the meeting the panel will meet privately to agree the outcome. The
student and supervisor(s) will then be called back to hear the recommendation and discuss any
issues.
What next? Resubmission by written work only should be allowed in cases where the student
has demonstrated good understanding of the project in their oral defence. Weaker students may
be asked to retrieve both elements. Only in exceptional circumstances would the panel
recommend de-registration before the student had been offered three attempts.
Once the panel Chair-person has confirmed a student’s registration as a Ph.D. student, the
outcome will be communicated to the student and supervisory team by Division of Governance
and Quality Enhancement. The outcome will be noted by the School Academic Board.
Further guidance:
Probationary assessment guidance for students
Probationary assessment guidance for assessors – available on request.
4.3 Subsequent progress
Monitoring progress
After the student has passed probation, responsibility for monitoring progress lies entirely with
the supervisory team and the Dean of School. Every September, Directors of Studies (on behalf
of the supervisory team) are required to submit an Annual Progress Report Form to the Division
of Governance and Quality Enhancement. These reports form a useful record in the event of
any problems later on, so it is important that supervisors complete them honestly. For instance,
if a student has experienced delays due to circumstances beyond their control, it is important to
have a note of this, as it may be possible to offer the student a suspension of study or extension
to final registration date. Equally, if there are concerns about the student’s academic ability or
commitment, these need to be flagged up. Early intervention may help to resolve a problem
before it becomes serious; if not, records such as annual reports will be essential in the event of
an appeal or de-registration.
If a student has been unable to study for a month or more due to extenuating circumstances, a
suspension should be applied for. This has the effect of extending the student’s final registration
date by the length of the suspension. Bursary students should be aware that payment of the
bursary is normally stopped during the period of suspension (unless for a very short
suspension).
36
Suspensions are agreed by the School Academic Board. The student must complete the form
and the Director of Studies must indicate support.
If a student is unable to submit before final registration date an extension must be applied for.
Research Councils have strongly urged universities to enforce registration periods rigorously so
extensions cannot be granted lightly. Students must apply to the Research Degrees Panel,
providing reasons for why the thesis will not be submitted on time and indicating a realistic
timeline for completion. For more information on suspension of study and extensions to the
registration period, please see Section 7: Dealing with challenges.
Annual progress reports
Every year, a doctoral student and the Director of Studies will be asked to provide a short
progress report. Reports are collected by the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement,
who provide a summary of issues for consideration by the School Academic Board.
Each report should be completed separately. The student’s report will not be shared with the
Director of Studies without the student’s consent. The supervisor’s report will not normally be
shared with the student unless the student specifically requests it in terms of the Data Protection
Act.
The purpose of the annual progress report system is to alert the School to any problems or
issues. This allows action to be taken as appropriate. Students may wish to use the report to
highlight any difficulties with supervision or facilities. Equally, it is important that supervisors
record any concerns they may have about slow or inadequate progress.
If more serious difficulties arise, annual reports should form a useful record of how and when
issues have arisen and what action was proposed to deal with them. It is worth bearing in mind
that annual reports may form part of the evidence in an appeal.
Ph.D. Supervisor - Annual Progress Report Form
Professional Doctorate Supervisor - Annual Progress Report Form
Maintaining progress
It is not unusual for students to experience periods of lack of motivation in the middle of the
degree. Supervisors can help by talking things over with the student and perhaps encouraging
the student to take short breaks when appropriate. It can also be useful to set short-term
deadlines for tasks in order to provide milestones.
Students may find it helps their morale to attend conferences or submit papers for publication.
This type of activity should be encouraged, as long as it doesn’t conflict with writing up the
thesis in good time.
Although data collection may take longer than anticipated, the period of writing up can also
account for substantial delays in submitting theses. Many students underestimate the amount
of re-drafting that will be required to provide a coherent, cogent and comprehensive thesis.
37
Such difficulties are minimised if students have drafted the literature review and methods
sections during the preliminary stages, although the review in particular will require updating
and refining in the light of a student's own results and discussion. It is also important to update
the review to incorporate recent publications in the field.
By the end of the period of study, it is normal for the student to know more about the specific
topic than the supervisors do. The supervisory relationship will need to adapt to this shift in the
balance of knowledge. However, the supervisor will usually still have a broader knowledge of
the general field, and will have a clearer idea of what makes a good thesis. Supervisors
therefore play a crucial role in helping the student produce a thesis that is likely to meet the
standards for the award. For more information on the final thesis and submission, please see
Section 8: Thesis submission and follow-up.
38
39
Doctoral students across both Schools at QMU are engaged in a wide variety of research
activities, which may use one or multiple approaches. Whatever the chosen approaches and
arrangements decided upon, before embarking on the chosen research project, supervisors and
students must acknowledge the important considerations in this Section. From the very start of
the research project supervisors must work alongside students to develop clear milestones, with
set deliverables, to enable a student to see their progress – and allow the supervisor to track
developments.
5.1 Ethical approval
Formal ethical approval is required for ALL research conducted by QMU students. It is vital that
students and supervisors read the University’s Research Ethics: Regulations, Procedures and
Guidelines, which explains how to make an application for ethical approval for a research
project.
Most research projects can be approved by a Head of Division, Theme Lead or delegated
persons. The application only needs to be referred to the Research Ethics Panel if (a) it involves
vulnerable people; (b) it has the potential to cause pain or emotional distress; or (c) there are
non-standard considerations of confidentiality. Depending on the nature of the research, ethical
approval may need to be sought from another external body. Research involving the use of
NHS patients, NHS staff or NHS data must be approved by the relevant NHS committee.
NHS R&D approval or ethical review
QMU is committed to stringent principles of scientific, ethical, financial and personal integrity.
Any research involving the following must obtain a favourable opinion from an NHS Research
Ethics Committee (REC) and management approval from an NHS R&D Office before it
commences:
- Patients or users of the NHS
- Relatives or carers of NHS patients/users
- Access to the personal data or bodily material of NHS patients
- Foetal material and IVF involving NHS patients
-The recently dead in NHS premises
- NHS staff recruited as research participants by virtue of their professional role
- The use of, or potential access to, NHS premises/facilities.
All applications for ethical and management approval must be made online using the Integrated
Research Application System (IRAS). For guidance only, the IRAS ethics form checklist outlines
the documentation that should be submitted to the REC. A summary of the ethical review
process is available and an outline of what happens at a REC meeting is also available.
Link: www.nres.nhs.uk/applications/approval-requirements/nhs-rd-approval/
Any student undertaking research that is likely to require NHS approval is strongly encouraged
to complete the online IRAS training module which takes approximately 1 hour to complete.
https://www.myresearchproject.org.uk/ELearning/IRAS_E_learning.htm
40
QMU offers regular NHS Ethics and Governance training sessions in conjunction with the East
of Scotland Research Ethics service. An annual QMU Research Ethics Training Day runs every
autumn.
Ethics Application Forms and Notification of Change Forms are available on the Research
Ethics page of the Quality website. If a research protocol changes following initial ethical
approval you will need to report this to whoever granted the approval (and to the REP
Secretary). If the change is significant it may be necessary to complete a fresh application. It is
recommended that supervisors guide students to submit their ethics application once the
process of probationary assessment is complete. This way, major revisions may not be
necessary. In some cases, this is not always possible and ethics application will need to be
submitted during the probation period.
Students commonly report that it takes longer to secure ethical approval than they had
anticipated, especially when applying to an external ethics committee. Supervisors should
advise students on the appropriate timeframes for ethics application, and make sure this is
incorporated into the research project timeline. Students should also be made to consider the
information required by those individuals or committees reviewing ethics application, including
what safeguards will be in place in the event of problems, and if permission has been
ascertained to work with certain groups of participants (e.g. from a school or education
authority, or an employer).
The University considers ethics training to be an important part of research development and it
is expected that events organised by the Convenor of the Research Ethics Panel and/or the
Research & Knowledge Exchange Unit (RKEU) will be attended by supervisors and students
alike. As a supervisor, you will need to work closely with your doctoral student(s) when they are
considering the ethics of their research proposal and how they can ethically gather and work
with research data. Students should particularly consider ethics when devising research
proposals that involve human participants, personal, medical or other sensitive data and/or the
use of methodologically controversial approaches.
Health and Safety
Health and Safety information is given in the Student Diary. It is extremely important that
students observe the University Health and Safety policy and any health and safety precautions
which may be prescribed. It is also important that students are sensitive to issues of risk in the
Health and Safety context.
Students working in laboratory or clinical areas must take particular care to familiarise
themselves with the safety procedures for that environment. In most cases, specific guidance
will be available from technicians.
QMU Health & Safety Policy:
www.qmu.ac.uk/quality/documents/Health%20and%20Safety%20Policy.pdf
Health & Safety Intranet site:
http://intranet.qmu.ac.uk/sites/humresources/healthsafety/default.aspx
41
5.2 Key considerations
In addition to thinking through ethical issues, it is worth considering how other people may be
involved in your student’s research, how permissions can be sought to undertake particular
activities (e.g. sending out surveys or accessing large scale data sets), and how your student
safely maintains their data (and thesis drafts). For Ph.D. students, these considerations will be
reviewed by academic staff at both the outline proposal and probationary assessment stage.
Data protection
The University is subject to Data Protection legislation and the University’s policy can be found
on the Data Protection webpage. Students undertaking research must also take cognisance of
the principles under the policy during the ethics application process and throughout the period of
research. Should any data protection questions arise, please contact the University’s Data
Protection Officer for assistance.
Confidentiality
It is essential that researchers take measures to ensure the confidentiality of all personal data
relating to participants. The Research Ethics: Regulations, Procedures and Guidelines contain
useful advice on how to approach confidentiality and data protection
Intellectual property
The University’s Intellectual Property Policy and Regulations are available on the Quality
website. Under the Policy, any intellectual property generated by doctoral students will belong
to the University except where agreed otherwise. Please discuss any matters concerning
intellectual property in your project with the Research and Knowledge Exchange Unit (RKEU) in
the first instance.
External partners
Doctoral students may have funding from external partners (or sponsors) interested in the
outcomes of their research. In such cases, it is vital that the student, the sponsor and you are all
clear that the sponsor has no rights over the research approach or the nature, analysis and
publication of the findings. Supervisors should be aware that the involvement of external
partners may have an impact on doctoral students ethics approval, data protection
considerations and the intellectual property arising from the research project. Please discuss
any matters concerning external partners Research and Knowledge Exchange Unit (RKEU).
5.3 Academic integrity
Academic integrity is the moral and ethical code by which people within academia work. It
includes values such as honesty and rigour in research. Most universities subscribe to some
code of academic integrity and organisations such as the HEA have a wealth of information
regarding approaches to maintaining academic integrity.
Plagiarism and cheating can have significant negative implications with regard to the value and
integrity of an institution’s reputation and can seriously impact on the perceived standard of
education being offered by that institution. Technology is changing the way in which people
42
gather information. Online material means that students can access anything from a blog to a
complete thesis and with easy access comes the temptation to “borrow” work from different
sources without correctly referencing or citing it.
Encourage your student to develop good citation and referencing habits right from the start of
their studies, there will be a lot of reading and analysis of the work of others and developing
different ideas, therefore if your student develops good habits from the start it can save them a
huge amount of time later.
Students will need to read widely and draw on the works of others, it is therefore of paramount
importance that your student keeps track of what they have read and where they have read it. It
can be incredibly frustrating for a student to identify a useful quote, only to find that they cannot
locate the original source of the quote and are therefore unable to use it within their own work.
Literature searching and literature management skills will need to be developed. You can
encourage your students to make use of relevant software (such as RefWorks) to keep track of
their references and to help them develop good referencing and citation practice. The Centre for
Academic Practice and the Library offer workshops that can support your students with this
aspect of their study.
Making your student aware of exactly what academic misconduct is will be helpful.
Academic dishonesty such as plagiarism, personation, falsification of data, computer and
calculation fraud, examination room cheating and bribery are considered acts of academic fraud
and are considered offences. Please see the University’s Assessment Regulations and the
Code of Practice for further information.
Plagiarism is defined in the Assessment Regulations (25.1.2) as:
“The presentation by an individual of another person’s ideas or work (in any medium, published
or unpublished) as though they were his or her own.”
Plagiarism can be a deliberate attempt to cheat or an honest mistake whereby the student has
incorrectly cited the true author of the work. Either way it is a serious offence. You can
encourage your student to get into good habits when citing their work right from the start. There
are also some very good reference books available from the library that will guide your student
through citation and referencing.
Students should take care when using their own work. A piece of work may only be submitted
for assessment once. Submitting the same piece of work twice will be regarded as an offence of
‘self-plagiarism’ and will be subject to the relevant University regulations.
It may be necessary for supervisors and students to become conversant with plagiarism
detection software such as Turnitin. You can suggest that your student submit their final draft
thesis to Turnitin before they submit it to the examiners.
43
44
6.1 Promoting good practice
Encouraging your student to start writing early on in their studies will pay dividends in the long
run. As your student begins to examine the different methodological choices available to them,
they could begin by writing short essays. Writing essays will help your student to navigate their
way through the often confusing terminology associated with doctoral studies. It will help your
student to determine the approach they plan to take in their research. The process of writing
stimulates thinking and the development of ideas even at the very early stages of the study.
Getting into good writing habits at the start of the study can save you and your student a lot of
grief further down the line. Tutorials and supervisory team meetings will be more productive if
they are based around a piece of written work that has been read before the meeting. It
provides the student and you with a topic for discussion if nothing else. It also allows you to
identify if there are potential problems with grammar, spelling or writing style that your student
needs to improve on further. It may also highlight misunderstandings regarding academic
integrity at an early stage.
If your student is used to writing regularly then when they begin to gather their data and start the
process of analysing their data, they will be comfortable writing. It is good practice to encourage
your student to write their analysis as they go along rather than collecting all of their data first.
Being faced with what may seem like a mountainous amount of data at the end of their fieldwork
will be daunting and often frightening. This can lead to the student feeling overwhelmed which
can then become a vicious circle that has potential consequences in terms of finishing the study
on time.
As your student progresses with their study they will be revising their chapters, reports or thesis
and honing their writing skills. Nobody ever wrote a thesis in one go without making alterations,
corrections or amendments. It is good practice to encourage your student to keep all versions of
their work; they should not simply overwrite an existing document but give each revision of a
document a different name or number, for example “chapter3v5”. This will save confusion and is
more helpful to you and your student rather than naming a document “thesis final final version”.
Students will then be able to tell at a glance which version of their document they are working
on.
Encouraging your student to write in the early stages may not pose too many problems,
especially if you are in regular contact with them but it may be a different story once they start
their field research. More often than not they will be away from the university for prolonged
periods of time, they may even be conducting their field research abroad. When this happens it
is important to remind your student to keep writing on a regular basis. Keeping a fieldwork diary
or researcher’s log is a good way for your student to maintain their good writing habit. Arrange
with your student to have them send you their work on a regular basis.
It may be helpful if you can arrange for your student to do a presentation of their work. This
could initially be to their peers and supportive members of staff. Even if they are in the early
stages of their study they will be able to share the methodological approach they plan to take.
Once your student has started to develop their work they should be encouraged to present
papers at conferences and to write for publication. The Centre for Academic Practice (CAP)
provides workshops that will assist your student in writing for publication and also in delivering
effective presentations and students should be encouraged to find out when these training
sessions are being run.
45
Students can also be encouraged to support each other in developing writing practice. For
example by creating informal writing groups, members produce material that is constructively
criticised; this has the added benefit of creating a supportive community amongst doctoral
students.
Remind your student that the more they write the better they will get!
6.2 Providing feedback on written work
The QMU general assessment regulations suggest that it is good practice for supervisors to
provide their students with some form of feedback on their work within four weeks. If for any
reason supervisors are unable to provide feedback within this (or another agreed) timeframe
they should let the student know as soon as possible and suggest a time when they will be able
to give feedback.
Feedback can be provided both orally and written. If your student has sent you a piece of work
you may decide to provide them with written comments in the margins and then provide them
with oral feedback when you meet for a tutorial. Students often find it helpful to have comments
written on their work as it gives them an editorial basis from which to progress.
There are a range of feedback options that you can use. You may decide to print out the
student’s work and write directly in the margins or highlight areas that may be particularly good
or that you feel may need clarification. You may decide to read their work electronically. If so
you may then decide to make suggestions by way of the “comment boxes”. In the early stages
of writing, you may decide to use the Microsoft Word “track changes”. This however, would not
be appropriate in the later stages of writing, as it is the student’s voice that needs to be heard
not the supervisor’s. Track changes can be used if you are providing your student with detailed
guidance on their writing style, you will need to ensure that your student does not simply hit the
“accept all changes” button. Otherwise they will not learn from your feedback.
If two supervisors are providing feedback it makes sense to work on the same document. It is
then possible for the student and the supervisory team to see what comments have been made
against which area of the work. Keeping a note of the feedback you provide is helpful so that
you are not repeating yourself; also keep a track of the date on which you provided the
feedback.
The student should be made aware that the work written in their thesis is solely their own work they cannot employ a “ghost writer” to write sections for them. Some students may feel that they
need to employ the services of a professional copy editing or proof reading company. In this
instance the company need to be made aware that they are not permitted to alter or change the
work in any way, simply to point out inconsistencies in grammar or spelling that the student
needs to be aware of. The same applies to fellow students or friends that the student may
approach for help. The student’s supervisors are not regarded as a “third party” in terms of
suggesting changes; however they would not be expected to be writing parts of the student’s
thesis either.
If a student decides to make use of a professional copy editing or proof reading company there
are some things that are permissible and some that are not. For example, a company should
not be used to change the text of the work in order to clarify or develop the ideas and
arguments. They should not be used to correct information, or change the content of the work in
46
any way, or reduce the word count and they should not translate the work into English. They
can be used to highlight mistakes in spelling and grammar and punctuation. They can provide
guidance on formatting footnotes and endnotes and ensuring that page numbers are consistent
throughout the thesis.
The professional copy editing or proof reading company should only be used to highlight
potential problems within the thesis. It is then up to the student to make the necessary
corrections and alterations to their work.
The only exception to this would be in the case of a student with a specific disability that may
rely on the services of someone to transcribe their verbatim dictation.
6.3 English language issues
During the selection and interview process outlined in Section 2.3, English language proficiency
is one of the basic criteria set by the University and the School for doctoral students. However
some non-native (and indeed some native) English speakers may require further assistance
with aspects of the English language. It is possible that some students who are proficient in
English may still face issues such as:



Writing in the passive voice
Over-worked prose
Over-use of jargon.
Encourage students to make full use of the facilities in word processing packages to check their
grammar and sentence structure. In addition, where appropriate, encourage them to make use
of the additional services provided by the Effective Learning Service.
47
48
7.1 Challenges
During the course of a student’s doctoral studies a wide range of challenges can arise which
can slow down progress, halt studies or in some cases lead to withdrawal or de-registration. In
terms of challenges, doctoral students may face academic, personal or professional difficulties
which negatively impact on their ability to progress and may in turn lead to tension between
supervisors and the student. Some of the academic, personal and supervisory challenges that
arise are discussed in more depth below.
Academic
A new Ph.D. student will normally spend the first months at QMU attending the Research Skills
Training Programme (run by the Centre for Academic Practice) and working to develop an
outline proposal for submission to the School Academic Board. In these initial stages, the
expectations of the Director of Studies, Second Supervisors and student should be clarified and
any issues arising openly discussed. Following the initial stages, if a supervisor has concerns
about a students academic abilities, they should make this known to the other members of the
supervisory team, and if deemed necessary, the Division of Governance and Quality
Enhancement.
For Ph.D. students, the probationary assessment provides a key formal mechanism for dealing
with doubts about the student’s academic level. A student who fails to pass after three attempts
(or within the defined time limits) will be recommended to the Research Degrees Panel for deregistration. The supervisory team should support the student to submit the probationary
assessment in the same way that they support a student writing the thesis. In other words, they
should provide comments on drafts but not suggest specific revisions.
Post probation, if a Director of Studies is concerned about a student’s lack of progress, this
should be discussed first with the rest of the supervisory team. A formal meeting should be held
with the student explaining the consequences of failure to improve. Normally the outcome of the
meeting would be an action plan to address the problems, for instance a timetable of more
frequent meetings, or assignments the student agrees to do to demonstrate improved
understanding of key points. It is essential that the outcome of this meeting is documented, in
case of future appeals. Students may not realise the seriousness of the problems unless they
are given something in writing.
If the Director of Studies remains concerned or if the student fails to comply with the agreed
action plan, he or she should consult with the full supervisory team to agree whether a report
should be made to the Dean of School. In any case, problems must be recorded in the annual
progress report and this may trigger action from the Dean if the problems are still unresolved.
If the Dean of School believes the supervisory team have taken all reasonable steps to improve
the student’s performance but without success, he or she will normally arrange an immediate
meeting with the student. The Dean will discuss with the student whether the project can
continue. Where students are based overseas alternative arrangements for this meeting will be
applied. This meeting may result in one of three outcomes; a) the student continues in
registration; b) the student continues in registration conditionally on the attainment of certain
agreed targets; or, c) recommendation is made to the Research Degrees Panel, and
subsequently the Research Strategy Committee that the student’s registration be terminated.
49
Personal
The prescribed period of studies for full or part-time doctoral students is a significant period of
time, and it is not uncommon for a student to experience a change in personal circumstance.
Personal ‘events’, for example ill health, pregnancy and personal problems, may significantly
affect progress and in some cases cause studies to stop completely.
The Director of Studies (and the wider supervisory team) has pastoral responsibility, and is
encouraged to be alert to emerging problems. The University provides Student Support and a
Counselling Service, as detailed in the Student Diary.
QMU Doctoral Students’ Association
All Doctoral Students at QMU are members of the Doctoral Students’ Association (DSA). Every
year Doctoral Students elect their peers to act as DSA Co-Chairs. The role of the DSA CoChairs includes:
- Acting as student representatives on the Research Strategy Committee
- Arranging the annual QMU Doctoral Students’ Conference
- Organising and promoting appropriate doctoral student activities/events
- Providing general support to doctoral students across the University.
The Doctoral Students’ Association Co-Chairs may be contacted directly at; [email protected].
Supervisory
The supervisor-student relationship can seem intense, and sometimes difficulties will arise.
Students are encouraged to make use of other members of the supervisory team to discuss any
difficulties with an individual supervisor, as they may be able to intervene informally to help.
If the matter cannot be resolved within the supervisory team, the Theme Lead should be
consulted. If the student is still dissatisfied the matter may be raised with the Dean of School.
The Dean may decide to change the supervisory team if necessary. Sometimes the problem
may reflect an issue with the supervisor’s overall workload which is preventing them from
devoting sufficient time to the student, and the Dean may be able to resolve this through
discussion with the supervisor.
Students may feel reluctant to approach senior staff to complain about their supervisor. An
alternative option is to meet with an appropriate member of staff from the Division of
Governance and Quality Enhancement. The Doctoral Students Association may also be able to
offer advice. It is important to raise problems early so they can be addressed before they
become insurmountable. The Annual Progress Report Form provides an opportunity to raise
any concerns confidentially and students should not be afraid to use this.
Many difficulties arise out of a mismatch of expectations about the way the supervision process
should work.
50
When a Director of Studies has concerns about a student’s progress this naturally leads to
tension within the relationship. It is important that the student and supervisor agree that the
ultimate aim is to achieve a successful result and that any criticism of student performance
should be offered and taken only in the spirit of helping to achieve that aim.
Complaints procedure
The University has established procedures, outlined in the Student Diary, for the making and
hearing of complaints and grievances. Students are encouraged to seek resolution of such
matters informally first, if at all possible, with their Dean of School. Staff in the Division of
Governance and Quality Enhancement can also offer advice.
Resources: QMU Complaints Procedure http://www.qmu.ac.uk/quality/gr/default.htm
7.2 Changes to registration
In a variety of situations supervisors may advise student to change their registration. Below are
the options available to supervisors and students should circumstance dictate a change in
registration.
Change in mode of study
Applications for a change of mode of study from full-time to part-time status or vice versa may
only be made for good cause and normally within the prescribed period of study. The application
must be made by the student to the School Academic Board on the appropriate form, countersigned by the Director of Studies. If approval is granted, then the appropriate School Manager
will inform the student and supervisory team.
Suspension of studies
If a research student is prevented from making due progress by ill-health or other significant
cause, the student may, with the support of the Director of Studies, ask the School Academic
Board to suspend the student’s registration for a maximum of 24 months (normally, less than 12
months in the first instance). A request for suspension on medical grounds must be supported
by a letter from the student’s doctor that supports the length of the full suspension period. The
maximum total period of suspension is normally two years.
Extensions
Only in exceptional circumstances will the Research Degrees Panel (or the University
Secretary, if a professional doctorate student) agree to an application for extension of the period
of study of a student beyond the maximum period. This application must be made, on the
appropriate form, by the student with the support of the Director of Studies.
51
Withdrawal
If a student wishes voluntarily to withdraw from their programme of study, this must be indicated
on the appropriate form to the Dean of School. The student must inform his or her Director of
Studies of the decision to withdraw. Whenever possible, the student should meet with staff of
the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement before making any firm decision.
7.3 De-registration
All doctoral students are required to pursue their programmes of study with due diligence. If a
student wilfully and/or persistently neglects their academic work, or in the case of seriously
inadequate progress being highlighted in the probationary period or in the annual reports, the
student’s registration may be terminated.
De-registration may be pursued by the University under any of the following circumstances:





The student is not in contact with his/her supervisory team
The student has not matriculated
The student is making seriously inadequate progress, as determined by the supervisory
team and/or the terms of the Research Degree Regulations
The student fails to submit the final thesis within the prescribed period of registration
The student fails to comply with conditions set by the Research Strategy Committee,
Dean or Supervisory Team.
The steps for de-registration in a variety of different circumstance are described in Section 6.11
in the Research Degrees Regulations, and Section 10.2 in the Professional Doctorate
Regulations. These steps must be followed in full by all parties. If further guidance is required
the Director of Studies should contact the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement.
52
53
Timely and successful completion of a doctoral thesis is the most obvious indicator of success
within the Ph.D. or Professional Doctorate process, and generally the cause for celebration by
the student, supervisors, peers and colleagues in the University, not to mention friends and
family, and quite possibly collaborators or external funders.
This final period may also generate levels of high anxiety, as both the student and supervisor
will be aware of the consequences of failure at this stage. Those involved should however
remain positive, as few students fail outright. The majority of students are expected to make
minor or major corrections within two or six months. Fewer than 1 in 8 students at QMU (in
2011/12) achieved a straight pass without the need for any revisions.
8.1 Timeline to submission/viva/amendments
Research Councils UK (RCUK) recommend that a student should be able to complete a Ph.D.
in three years if full-time, six years part-time. This timescale will only be met if no unforeseen
obstacles or delays occur. As such unforeseen delays are not uncommon, many students do in
fact submit during the course of their fourth year (FTE).
Supervisors have an important role to play in helping students to meet this deadline, and in
identifying students who may need to apply for an extension to their registration period sufficiently far enough in advance (see Section 7: Dealing with challenges). The final stages of
the process can take quite a long time to organise, so it is worth planning out the steps well in
advance. The following timeline is based on a full-time student.
The Professional Doctorate timeline for submission is similar to the one outlined below for Ph.D.
students; however the forms required differ. Professional doctorate supervisors and students
are asked to use the appropriate professional doctorate forms – available here.
Table 8.1: Timeline to submission of thesis and subsequent actions
Time
Task
Prior to submission of thesis
Start of student’s
Review/plan for completion, wider dissemination of research findings and
third year
post-thesis career plans.
6-7 months before
submission deadline
Expect submission of major parts of the thesis for final review. Watch out for
procrastination on the part of the student/anxiety/likely difficulties with
analysis/writing, possible impact of other research being published, etc.
3-4 months before
submission deadline
Begin process of considering potential examiners. Please note: The choice
of examiners rests with you as Director of Studies, with the ultimate approval
of the Research Degrees Panel, not the student.
2-3 months before
submission deadline
With the Dean of School’s approval contact potential examiners and, on the
basis of negotiations with them, complete the Nomination of Examiner Form,
making the nomination case for the external(s).
Between submission
of Nomination of
Following submission of the form to Research Degrees, the Research
Degrees Panel (RDP) considers nominations and approves examiners.
54
Examiners Form and
actual thesis
submission
Once Research Degrees has confirmed with you that the examiners have
been approved, you can make preliminary arrangements with them and the
candidate for the examination, usually once it is clear when the thesis is
likely to be ready for submission.
1-2 weeks prior to
submission deadline
It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that their thesis is soft bound
in a timely fashion.
Submission date
It is the responsibility of the student to submit one electronic copy, and two
soft bound copies (formatted as required), to the Division of Governance
and Quality Enhancement. The submitted copies should be accompanied
by a Declaration Form completed by the student and signed by each
member of the supervisory team.
Shortly after
submission
Research Degrees will contact examiners, sending them a copy of the
thesis, providing them with necessary guidance regarding the viva
examination procedures at QMU and making them aware of any special
circumstances that may be relevant (e.g. disability requirements). The viva
arrangements/dates are negotiated and confirmed.
Within 1-2 weeks of
the viva
Each examiner will prepare a preliminary report and reach a tentative
conclusion. No later than two days before the viva the examiners must
submit their preliminary reports to Research Degrees, these reports will then
be made available to each examiner.
The viva takes place
After the viva
Examiners provide an oral indication of their decision on the day. The
decision is confirmed examiners must submit a Joint Report Form to Research Degrees indicating
the outcome they recommend to the Research Degrees Panel.
Within 3 days of viva
Examiners are also required to provide typed feedback for the candidate (via
Research Degrees) including a formal statement of any necessary
amendments, as an attachment to the final report.
1-2 weeks after the
viva
The Research Degree Panel review the chosen outcome to make sure it is
appropriate.
Further follow-up
The supervisor should arrange to meet with the student, particularly if there
is further work to be undertaken.
If the candidate receives a pass or a request for minor amendments, then
the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement will inform them of
any further official actions required, and the student and supervisor will also
often wish to meet and discuss and where necessary agree further steps.
Students who have between 2, 6 or 12 months remain registered students
and the supervisory team is expected to continue. In some cases,
particularly where extensive revisions are recommended, the Director of
Studies and/or student may want to seek advice and guidance from the
Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement.
55
Thesis submission
Full guidance for the format and binding of thesis higher degrees awarded by Queen Margaret
University can be found here:
- Research Degrees Regulations – see Section 10 (p.27)
- Professional Doctorate Regulation – see Appendix 2 (p.27)
8.2 Role of supervisor team
The process of gaining a doctorate is one of transition from an apprentice status to that of a
mature scholar who has fully demonstrated the capacity for independent professional research.
It is the task of the supervisory team, led by the Director of Studies, to manage this transition to
the stage of final examination. Supervisors should note that at this ‘final’ stage the candidate is
independently responsible for the quality of the thesis, and that the responsibility for the defence
of the thesis is the candidate’s alone. Nevertheless, it should not be forgotten that in this final
examination, the standards and procedures of the institution are under external scrutiny as well
as the achievements of the candidate. The University is required to monitor and report on viva
outcomes and has a vested interest in gaining a reputation for producing strong graduates.
Below are five areas where the Director of Studies (and other members of the supervisory team)
plays a key role in the submission and examination process.
1) Advising your student on when to submit
For students, the decision to submit the thesis can be a difficult one, but ultimately it is a
decision they must make themselves. The role of the supervisor here is to give encouragement,
whilst also providing fair and honest feedback on the student’s work. At the same time it is
essential that students’ attention is drawn to the set deadlines (see Table 8.1) and the
appropriate regulations of the University. It may be useful for the supervisor in particular to:





Formally meet with the student on entry into the final year of the prescribed period to talk
through the timeline to completion – if there are concerns, then the supervisor may
encourage the student to discuss their situation with the Division of Governance and
Quality Enhancement
Advise the student on the examination entry processes
Watch out for evidence of procrastination or possible blocks, such as postponement of
submission of drafts, or the student taking on “distracting” duties, e.g. heavy teaching
load or external employment
Encourage the student to apply for (academic and other) jobs to provide a clear
incentive to complete
Provide clear advice on finishing tasks such as checking references, final editorial work
and proof reading.
Should a student decide to press ahead with submission against your advice, please ensure
that you discuss this with other members of the supervisory team, Division of Governance and
Quality Enhancement and (if appropriate) the Dean of School. At this point, you may want to
check back on notes/minutes from supervisory meeting and any guidance you have given your
56
student that explains why, in your opinion, their work is not yet ready for submission. You may
wish to present this evidence to the student formally in a written format.
If the student decides to submit, then Supervisors will be able to indicate their own opinion on
the work when signing off the Declaration Form (see below).
Declaration Form
All members of the supervisory team must sign the Declaration Form to confirm that the work is
the candidate’s own. On the form the supervisors should indicate whether they:
(a) Believe the thesis is worthy for consideration for the award of Doctorate
(b) Do not believe the thesis is worthy of consideration, or hold reservations about its quality.
In the event of (b) the student will be given the option to delay submission and make further
revisions (assuming there remains sufficient time in the student’s period of maximum
registration). Should the student prefer to submit the thesis without revision, he or she must sign
the declaration form to confirm this.
2) Preparing your student for viva
In thinking about supporting your student’s viva preparation, it is worth considering both longterm and short-term. Throughout doctoral studies, many of the activities that you may
encourage your student to engage in can assist with this final hurdle and hone relevant skills.
Not least, the student’s active engagement in the probationary assessment viva, which may be
their first formal experience of an oral examination.
Other activities which may help students develop essential skills for the viva include teaching,
conference presentation, submitting work for critical review, written probationary assessment
submission and Divisional research seminars.
Viva – skills students need to develop:
- Perform/communicate to a high level of specificity and depth under pressure
- Explain, justify and defend their research position
- Situate their research in the wider disciplinary/social/political context
- Cope with challenges to their ideas from other experts in their field
- An ability to explain to someone from outside their discipline how their work connects to other
disciplines.
Wisker, G. (2005) The Good Supervisor; Chapter 20
Closer to the actual viva examination, supervisors should consider meeting with their student to
discuss the purpose of the examination and the criteria that apply. Supervisors should also
consider conducting a ‘mock viva’ with their student, potentially using appropriate colleagues as
panel members.
57
As the viva approaches, it is sometimes important to listen to any concerns the student may
have and to offer reassurance to counteract the unnerving stories of fellow students and
academics. Supervisors should point out that the majority of examiners are fair and keen to see
the student succeed; if the student is prepared, they should have every confidence in attaining a
satisfactory outcome.
3) Selecting internal and external examiners
Finding the right examiners can take time, and busy schedules can mean that arrangements
become protracted. If you are a Director of Studies who has never done this before, make sure
you seek the advice of experienced supervisory team members, your Theme Lead, and the
Dean of School. You may discuss ideas with the student, but they should not have control or the
final say in selection. In seeking out examiners, you are looking for people with breadth of
experience in the field as well as depth. Examiners should also meet the institutional
requirements and restrictions set by QMU. These include:





There must be an internal and an external examiner. Candidates who are members of
staff must have two external examiners. Examiners should have a Ph.D. or equivalent
experience
preferably, an external examiner should have experience of examining at doctoral level
so that he or she is in a position to confirm that the award is comparable with similar
degrees awarded at other universities
the external assessor should be a subject ‘specialist’, although the internal examiner
does not necessarily need to be an expert in the research area
no member of the candidate’s current or previous supervisory team (including any formal
advisors), research collaborators or anyone with a close association with the candidate's
research, may act as an examiner
if the Research Degrees Panel feels there is insufficient examining experience within the
team it may appoint a Chair-person (- usually someone of Professorial level at QMU).
As Director of Studies you are responsible for facilitating the viva arrangements, therefore it is
important that you work closely with the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement to
make sure all the appropriate arrangements are in place.
4) Your role during the viva
The University recommends that Directors of Studies (or another member of the supervisory
team – if appropriate) attend the viva, although you should discuss attendance with the student
prior to the event. In some cases the student may ask that you do not attend - you must respect
this request.
If you do attend, then you are expected to take the role of observer, remaining silent unless
specifically asked by the examiners to contribute. As an observer, you can act as a ‘scribe’ for
your student - noting down examiner questions, student responses and any thoughts you might
have should amendments/re-submission be needed. It may be clear from the outset that the
candidate will be successful. However, it is always useful to listen for suggestions on how to
take the research forward, or possible avenues for publication.
58
5) Post-viva support
The outcome of the examiners’ joint report will be conveyed directly to the student by GQE,
following approval from the Research Degrees Panel. The joint report might not be
communicated till 1-2 weeks after the viva, while Panel members consider the report.
If you attended the viva and the student was not successful, you can assist them in
understanding the report. The report should indicate why the thesis failed to meet the criteria for
an award; if relevant, some indication of what work needs doing; and whether the examiners
require a second viva. Where the viva outcome requires further work on the part of the student,
you will continue to have responsibility for them.
If you have supported the student to successful completion, then you may continue to support
your ‘graduate’ in their development. Certainly as a supervisor you may be asked for guidance
on publishing, job application/interviews and called on for references. The relationship may also
be mutually beneficial if you decide to explore co-publishing work, and together develop new
ideas for research.
8.3 Resubmissions, fails and appeals
The build-up to submission and the viva/examination process can be very stressful for both
student and supervisor(s), especially if there is any disagreement between the different parties
about submission, or if there is an unexpected result arising from the viva.
Doctoral candidates may appeal against the outcome of their examination, on a limited number
of grounds. The grounds for appeal are described in the Research Degrees Regulations
(Section 11), and the Professional Doctorate Regulations (Section 10). If a student approaches
you for advice about an appeal of this nature, you may wish to refer them to the Division of
Governance and Quality Enhancement.
Appeals must be in writing and should be submitted to the University Secretary within 21 days
of receipt of the examination outcome.
Appeals
Taken from Section 11 of the Research Degrees Regulations:
11.1
An unsatisfactory result does not in itself constitute a valid basis for an appeal. Those
hearing the appeal will not attempt to re-assess the student, nor to appraise the
professional judgement of those involved in making the decision.
11.2
The permissible grounds for appeal are as follows:
(a) Additional information is available that was not, and could not, reasonably have been
made available at the time of the original decision and which had it been available could
have led a different decision being made
(b) There was a material irregularity in procedures.
59
60
9.1 Post-doctoral careers
All supervisors and doctoral students at QMU should be aware of Vitae, and the work of the
organisation to champion the personal, professional and career development of doctoral
researchers and research staff in UK higher education. Recent studies conducted by Vitae as
part of the ‘What do researchers do?’ series, explore how highly-skilled doctoral graduates
contribute to UK society, culture and the economy – shedding valuable light on the employment
intentions of doctoral students.
A Vitae publication entitled ‘What do researchers want to do?’ illustrates that the primary
motivations of UK students for embarking on doctoral study are interest in the subject and in
research. However, their data on long-term career aspirations shows that only a third of
respondents in their later years of doctoral study have a definite career in mind and that 20 per
cent are still weighing up different career options at this stage. This indicates that many students
have a need for careers support throughout their doctoral study. In many instances, this may be
a case of clarifying doctoral students’ career objectives and preparing individuals for careers in
both the academic and non-academic sectors.
QMU offers a range of support facilities to assist doctoral students in locating employment
opportunities both while they are working on their doctorates, as well as for their future careers.
Where a student is particularly interested in an academic career, their supervisory team will no
doubt provide valuable assistance, through reference writing and support with applications. For
more holistic advice, the University’s Careers and Student Employability Service can help and
support students throughout their studies, and provide specialist career advice for doctoral
students specifically.
Careers guidance: What should supervisors be aware of?
- Expectations of the University and (where appropriate) funders and the UK Border Agency
concerning employment generally
- University policy on employing doctoral students as teachers
- Opportunities for employment and internships other than teaching
- Benefits for doctoral students of joining professional organisations whilst studying.
9.2 Employment whilst a doctoral student
There are numerous positives associated with doctoral students taking on employment
alongside their research. Employment may provide not only useful funds, but also experience
that contributes to skills development and future employment. For students who are unsure of
their career direction it can help them to clarify their career plans. It can also provide social
interaction with others and, particularly if the work involves teaching and/or research, can help
the student situate their work in a broader context and provide useful experience in
communicating ideas about the discipline to less experienced learners. Despite the positives,
employment can become a distraction (especially at key points in the degree process), taking
up time that would be better spent on the thesis and often providing opportunity for
procrastination and avoidance of thesis work.
61
The University’s Code of Practice recommends that full-time doctoral students limit additional
paid work to 12 hours a week, and do not exceed 20 hours per week. This is in line with the UK
Border Agency requirement for non-UK/EEA students, who cannot work more than 20 hours in
any one week; hence they may not take on full-time employment and may not be self-employed.
If you have overseas doctoral students keen to take on employment alongside their studies,
point them to the University’s Recruitment & International Liaison Office (RILO) who can provide
detailed guidance – if visa restrictions apply.
The University may offer part-time work to students but should be mindful of the danger of
distracting the student from the project. Section 11 of the Code of Practice details QMU’s policy
on offering paid work to students. The hours described are an indication of what is likely to be
manageable by a student registered for a full-time research degree.
Within the University, it is seen as good practice for all students, including those registered on a
part-time basis, to discuss their level of commitment to paid employment with the supervisory
team.
Third Sector Internships Scotland (TSIS)
The Third Sector Internships Scotland (TSIS) project is a four-year programme which aims to
support students to find paid work experience in the third sector.
TSIS is part of the Scottish Funding Council’s Learning to Work 2 initiative, is open to students
from all Scottish Higher Education Institutions, and is being delivered by Queen Margaret
University, The Open University in Scotland and the Scottish Council for Voluntary
Organisations, with support from universities across Scotland and Student Volunteering
Scotland.
Internships are paid at the Living Wage (currently £7.45 per hour) with a duration of 350 hours.
Please see the TSIS website: www.3rdsectorintern.org.uk
9.3 Teaching duties
Gaining teaching experience alongside doctoral study can prove highly rewarding for doctoral
students, be useful for future careers, and provide doctoral students with regular contact with
others and a clear structure to their working days. On the other hand, particularly for first time
teachers, it can prove quite challenging and time consuming.
At QMU, doctoral students are regarded primarily as students but have most of the privileges of
staff (e.g. staff Smartcards and email accounts). Students on a bursary contract may be
required to teach (or undertake relevant work as instructed), while many non-bursary students
will become involved in teaching at a later stage. QMU encourages doctoral students to
participate as fully as possible in the intellectual culture of the University – in which teaching
plays a vital role.
The duties of bursary students will be decided by the Head of Division/ Dean of School in
consultation with the student and the Director of Studies. The Dean of School will be
62
responsible for monitoring the quality of the student's work and providing feedback on
performance – this role is often delegated to the Head of Division. Supervisors do not have a
direct role to play in the quality control of their doctoral students who teach, but do need to be
aware that this is an important part of the University’s overall quality assurance provision and
encourage their students to take teaching seriously, and participate in the range of training
offered by the Centre for Academic Practice.
Bursary students
Bursary students will be asked to undertake duties as follows:
First year
90 hours in total (45 if part-time)
Normally first year students will not be asked to work in the first semester
Second year
180 hours in total (90 if part-time)
Third year
90 hours in total (45 if part-time)
Normally third year students will not be asked to work in the second semester
Code of Practice - Section 11 details the full requirements of the bursary contract.
All students undertaking teaching must attend the Short Course in Learning, Teaching and
Assessment organised by the Centre for Academic Practice. This 5-day course will be regarded
as skills development and will not count as part of the student’s contracted duties – if applicable.
General advice on managing and monitoring the quality of students involved in teaching should
always be sought through CAP.
63
64
10.1 Evaluating personal performance
The monitoring of doctoral supervisors is one of the least developed areas of higher education
quality assurance. At present, QMU does not undertake any detailed monitoring on the
performance of individual supervisors. Feedback on supervisors’ performance is only gleaned
through the annual progress reports completed by supervisors and students, although
performance may indirectly be inferred at key landmarks, including; the outline proposal,
probationary assessment, ethics approval and final thesis submission.
Although QMU does not employ a University-wide system, you (as a supervisor) may wish to
gain feedback from students who you are currently supervising, and discuss your approach with
more experienced supervisors in your Division/School. Personal performance should also be
evaluated periodically during the Performance Enhancement Review (PER) undertaken with
your Line Manager.
Developing your CV
To develop your CV and for promotion purposes, you should keep track of the following:
- Numbers of prospective students contacting you with research ideas
- Volume of doctoral involvement, be this in terms of numbers of students for whom you are
primary or secondary supervisor
- Time to completion for the students with whom you have some involvement
- Publication output from doctoral students working with you
- Career development/outcomes of doctoral students having worked with you.
10.2 University level review and evaluation
The Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement is responsible for the recording and safe
storage of information regarding research degrees students. For professional doctorate
students, this responsibility is shared between the Division of Governance and Quality
Enhancement and Registry, with the prior being responsible for administration of the final thesis
element.
Through the University’s robust committee structures, regular review and evaluation of the
provisions available for doctoral students takes place. This sub-section covers some of the
review and evaluation processes currently utilised by the University.
The QAA Quality Code for Research Degrees recommends that all institutions ‘monitor their
research degree provision against internal and external indicators and targets to reflect the
context in which research degrees are being offered’. It is further recommended that statistical
and other data should be provided for relevant committees to consider and act upon. The
Research Strategy Committee oversees doctoral student programme provision at QMU and
annually reviews key performance indicators, including:


Intake;
Withdrawal rates;
65

Pass, referral and fail rates.
Other more qualitative information may also be considered, including an analysis of examiner
comments (based on the joint report), and feedback from employers, sponsors and other
external funders.
As well as these ‘through-put’ indicators, QMU participates in the Postgraduate Research
Experience Survey (PRES), a national survey administered by the University and supported by
the Higher Education Academy (HEA). The biennial survey ran for the first time at QMU in 2013,
and provided extensive feedback from doctoral students on many aspects of their experience.
The PRES also provides an opportunity for the University to benchmark itself against other
similar institutions in an enhancement-led fashion.
Annual Progress Reports Forms are completed every September by Directors of Studies and
students; these are then collated by the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement. The
Deans of School are responsible for consideration of annual progress report summaries and
acting on progress. The School Academic Boards will receive a thematic overview of the annual
progress reports, and consider appropriate actions to resolve issues. If required, the Boards
may highlight issues to the Research Strategy Committee for noting - or further action.
Professional Doctorate Programmes consider key issues affecting the taught and research
elements at their own Programme Committee. Programme Committees will also consider
thematic overviews of annual progress reports prior to the School Academic Board, and
highlight actions taken at programme level.
The Student Experience Committee also occasionally deals with doctoral student business, with
the aim of improving the overall student experience.
66
67
Appendix 1.1: Overview of the respective roles and responsibilities of Ph.D. students,
Director of Studies and the supervisory team.
Student
Director of Studies
Supervisory Team
The responsibilities of the
student include:
The Director of Studies is
individually responsible for:
All members of the supervisory
team are individually and
collectively responsible for:

becoming familiar with the
University’s Regulations and
procedures

ensuring that the student is
appropriately inducted into
the School

agreeing a schedule of
meetings with supervisors,
initiating requests for
additional meetings as
required, and sharing
responsibility for the agenda
adhered to

consulting with the Dean of
School to ensure that
appropriate School facilities
are available

attendance at QMU’s
Research Skills Training
Programme

submission of
assignments(s)

ensuring that annual leave or
periods of absence for
fieldwork purposes and the
extent of teaching and other
commitments have been
agreed with the Director of
Studies and GQE



familiarisation with Health
and Safety regulations and
bringing forward, for
discussion with supervisors,
any potential hazards
discussing with supervisors
any ethical issues associated
with the research and
securing ethical approval
submitting reports and / or
forms to relevant University
committees in good time


meeting with the student on a
regular basis – within the first
semester for a full-time
student it is expected that
meetings will be held weekly,
and thereafter not less than
monthly for the duration of
the prescribed period of
study (pro-rata for part-time
students)
ensuring that there are
normally no periods in
excess of three weeks during
which the student cannot
contact one member of the
supervisory team

arranging liaison with Second
Supervisors and advisors
where necessary

arranging joint meetings of
the full supervisory team with
the student at least every six
months for full-time students
and yearly for part-time
students – it is recommended
that there be a joint meeting
before submission of the
proposal and the
probationary report
68

agreeing with the student a
research project that forms a
suitable basis for a research
degree

clarifying with the student
mutual responsibilities

giving guidance concerning
the nature of research
degrees and the standard
expected, literature and
sources, and requisite
techniques

advising on and supporting
the student’s attendance at
courses as appropriate,
including the University’s
Research Skills Training
Programme

supporting the student to
prepare for probationary
assessment

maintaining contact through
regular meetings with the
student to discuss his or her
work and keeping a written
record of the occurrence of
meetings

being accessible to the
student at appropriate times

being prepared to undertake
a pastoral role

returning written work with
constructive criticism and in







clarifying mutual
expectations with the
supervisors
discussing with the
supervisors the type of
guidance and comment that
the student finds most helpful
taking the initiative in raising
problems or difficulties
relating to the work and
discussing these with the
supervisor(s) before actively
seeking other advice as
appropriate

drawing up with the student a
staged timetable for
completion of the work and
reviewing this periodically, at
least once per semester and
on preparation of reports

encouraging the student to
present his or her work to
colleagues, at seminars and /
or conferences, and to offer
advice on this and on
publication

submitting reports and / or
forms to the Research
Degrees Panel or School
Academic Board in good time

offering advice on career
development

attending training workshops
for supervisors run by the
Centre for Academic Practice
whenever possible and
familiarising themselves with
the regulations

supporting the student in
timely submission of the
thesis

preparing the student for the
viva

providing support during any
period of amendment or
revision to the thesis
following examination
consulting with the
supervisory team with regard
to submission of reports and
/ or forms
attaining skills and
competencies appropriate to
the conduct of research

ensuring that there is clear
understanding of the ethical
issues relevant to the
research and that ethical
approval is requested in time
to avoid unnecessary delay
to the student’s progress

seeking opportunities for
constructive criticism from
peers and colleagues

deciding when he or she is
ready to submit the thesis
taking due account of the
supervisors’ opinion which is,
however, advisory only
advising the student on
thesis structure and providing
prompt feedback on
submitted chapters
agreeing with the student
leave of absence and
agreeing with the student
and Dean of School
appropriate teaching (or
other duties) commitments

keeping systematic and
accurate records of all work
undertaken and complying
with standards of
professional conduct and
data protection legislation


informing the supervisors as
early as possible of any
matter that may affect
progress toward the research
degree
maintaining the progress of
the work in accordance with
the timetable agreed with
supervisors including, in
particular, the submission of
written material as required
in sufficient time to allow
supervisors to provide
appropriate written feedback
reasonable time

submitting applications for
suspensions or extensions
(with or on behalf of the
student) as soon as possible
should they prove necessary

ensuring that the student is
aware of Health and Safety
regulations and of any
potential hazards associated
with the project

in the case of students in
receipt of a bursary, alerting
the Dean of School to any
likelihood of resource
demands for the project
exceeding those originally
assumed

making every effort to ensure
69

ensuring appropriate
dissemination / publication of
his or her work, and ensuring
that the involvement of
supervisors is duly
acknowledged in such
activity

making available all raw data
to supervisors as requested

providing a final bound copy
and electronic copy of the
thesis on completion
that the student submits his
or her thesis in good time
70
Appendix 1.2: Overview of the respective roles and responsibilities of the Dean of School
and the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement.
Dean of School
Division of Governance and Quality
Enhancement
The duties of the Dean of School are concerned
with ensuring appropriate facilities; resources and
supervision are in place to support the student in
his or her studies. The Dean also has overall
responsibility for student progress prior to final
examination, as outlined below:

before accepting a research student into a
School, being satisfied that the applicant meets
appropriate entry requirements and is suited to
pursuing a research degree, and that an
appropriate Director of Studies is available

ensuring that individual members of staff who
constitute the supervisory team are
appropriately experienced and qualified and
that supervisors are allocated sufficient time to
fulfil their role satisfactorily

being satisfied that School facilities and
arrangements are in place

being satisfied that sufficient resources are in
place, or will be made available as and when
required by the research student and
authorising expenditure accordingly

where research facilities or resources from
outside the School are required, it is the
responsibility of the Dean of the School to
confirm the availability of these resources

agreeing, in consultation with the Director of
Studies, the extent and nature of duties to be
performed as part of the bursary contract

where relevant, reviewing reports / forms being
submitted to the Research Degrees Panel by
the research student and Director of Studies,
acting upon any issues arising, and
commenting as appropriate to the Research
Degrees Panel

through the School Academic Board,
monitoring student progress and making
decisions on changes of registration status,
suspension of study or changes of supervisory
71
The Division of Governance and Quality
Enhancement is responsible for the Graduate
School, administration and implementation of
policies, procedures and regulations across the
University. Duties include:

through the Research Strategy Committee,
supporting the development and overseeing the
implementation of the Research Degree
Regulations

monitoring the interpretation and
implementation of the regulations to promote
consistency between Schools

overseeing the operation of research degrees,
monitoring quality and acting as an impartial
advocate for the interests of research students
within the University

promoting an inclusive and interdisciplinary
research environment for research degree
students

promoting collaborative sharing of resources
within the University

promoting collaboration with external partners

organising induction, probationary assessments
and final examinations and supporting students
on an on-going basis at all stages of their
research degree

supporting the Research Ethics Panel and
advising students as appropriate

evaluating student feedback and
recommending enhancements as a result
thereof

collaborative working with the DSA

maintaining and developing the Graduate
School
team


attempting to resolve any disagreements that
may arise between supervisors or between
supervisors and the research student

in appropriate circumstances recommending,
following consultation with those involved, a
change to the supervisory team

the nomination of examiners to the Research
Degrees Panel for approval
72
updating the Supervisors’ Handbook and
arranging training
Appendix 1.3: Overview of respective roles and responsibilities on a professional
doctorate programme at QMU
Stages
GQE Involvement
School Office
Other roles e.g. PL,
Admissions,
Programme Committee
Application
None
None
Applies to central
Admissions Department
Application forwarded to
Programme Leader (PL)
Interview arranged by PL
Offer/Rejection
None
None
PL returns file to
Admissions Department
Admissions send out offer
letter
PL keeps list of new
students and gives to
School Office
Matriculation
PL provides GQE with a
full list of Prof Doc
students
Online Matriculation
Organising Staff Cards
and email account (no
telephone account)
None
List of students forwarded
to GQE by PL
Ensure that students can
access the timetable
online
Student files maintained
in School Office
Desk allocation
Induction
Joint PhD/Prof Doc
Induction day (planned for
Sept/Oct)
None
PL liaises with RSTP
organiser, Dr Wendy
Beautyman, to share
sessions.
Supervision
None
Records supervisors on
ISIS
PL negotiates with
individuals, Heads of
Division, and PDoS and
teams confirmed by
Dean.
Annual Progress
Sent out and received by
Sends out letter annually
Programme Committee
73
Reports
GQE
Feedback to Programme
Committee
to all students in August
alerting them to need to
proceed in timely manner.
has an overview of all
students, at Nov meeting.
Notes whether annual
report received.
Changes (e.g.
Suspension, mode
of study etc.)
GQE notes any changes.
Changes should come
through GQE - prior to
SAB
Records any withdrawals,
deferrals, suspensions.
Update ISIS
Programme Committee
notes
deferrals/suspensions/
withdrawals
Programme
Committee
Meetings (twice
yearly)
GQE in attendance
School Office arrange
meeting and take minutes
PL refers items for
agenda to school office,
confirms agenda and
chairs meeting
Exam Boards
(twice yearly)
Appending Changes
School office liaises with
external examiner,
ensures she has received
all work. Books room. If
necessary arranges
videoconference or
telephone. Module lists
and student transcripts
Registry/ school manager
takes minutes, transcripts
etc.
Head of Division to chair
Two core modules,
APP A and APP B.
None
Maintain ISIS
Collate submissions,
distribute to internal
markers, and once work
marked, sends to external
examiner.
Feedback kept
electronically and emailed
to student.
PL receives feedback
from external examiner,
addresses any issues that
arise.
Ensures timely feedback
to students.
PL chairs programme
committee where student
progress is debated under
reserved business.
Identify those students
undertaking research
work, alerts PL/GQE.
Once TDoS appointed,
notes name of TDoS on
ISIS.
When students are
undertaking research
proposal work, PL/school
office/GQE
sends request to student
and PDoS to complete a
CV Res for all on team
and outline proposal.
(Forms on quality
website).
These are returned to PL
for submission to SAB for
approval of teams.
GQE to attend
programme committee
where student progress is
debated
GQE receives feedback
on student progress for
records (e.g. if taught
modules are passed).
Appointment of
thesis supervision
teams
GQE to review SAB
minutes to identify those
students commencing
their thesis work.
74
Thesis
Examiners appointed
through RSC (3 months
minimum prior to
submission).
None
Student submits thesis to
GQE
TDoS completes
“nomination of examiners
form” and submits it to
RSC, at least 3 months
prior to submission.
GQE informed that
Taught Modules are
passed before thesis, or
going to Senate for
award.
Thesis and guidance
sent out to examiners
Arranges final
examination
Tell student outcome (and
follow up as appropriate).
List of abbreviations:
PDoS – Programme Director of Studies
PL – Programme Lead
GQE – Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement
RSTP – Research Skills Training Programme
RSC – Research Strategy Committee
SAB – School Academic Board
TDoS – Thesis Director of Studies
75
Appendix 2.1: Example Interview Summary Form
Name
Topic
Qualifications
Interviewed by:
Date:
Understanding of
topic
Clarity of proposal
Communication
skills
Motivation
General comments
References?
IELTS required?
Certificates
Recommendation: (please circle one)
Strongly recommend
Recommend
Not sure
76
Reject
Strongly reject
Appendix 3.1: Exploring researchers' expectations in supervision
Below is an exercise taken from the Vitae website, entitled: Exploring researchers' expectations
in supervision. As a supervisor, you might find it useful to use this as a stimulus for discussion
on expectation in one of your initial supervision sessions.
Read each of the 11 statements in the table below, and then estimate your position in each. For
example with statement 1, if you believe very strongly that it is the supervisor's responsibility to
select a good topic you should put a ring round ‘1'. If you think that both the supervisor and
researcher should equally be involved you put a ring round ‘3' and if you think it is definitely the
student's responsibility to select a topic, put a ring round ‘5'.
.Supervisor
1.
It is the supervisor's responsibility
to select a research topic
2.
It is the supervisor who decides
which theoretical framework or
methodology is most appropriate
3.
The supervisor should develop an
appropriate programme and
timetable of research and study
for the researcher
4.
The supervisor is responsible for
ensuring that the researcher is
introduced to the appropriate
services and facilities of the
department and university
5.
A warm supportive relationship
between supervisor and
researcher is important for
successful candidature
6.
The supervisor should insist on
regular meetings with the
researcher
7.
The supervisor should check
regularly that the researcher is
working consistently and on task
8.
Rating
Student
12345
The researcher is responsible for
selecting their own topic
12345
Researchers should decide which
theoretical framework or
methodology they wish to use
12345
The supervisor should leave the
development of the programme of
study to the researcher
12345
It is the researchers responsibility
to ensure that they have located
and accessed all the relevant
services and facilities for research
12345
A personal supportive relationship
is inadvisable because it may
obstruct objectivity for both
researcher and supervisor during
the candidature
12345
The researcher should decide
when they want to meet with the
supervisor
12345
The researcher should work
independently and not have to
account for how and where time is
spent
12345
Personal counselling and support
77
The supervisor is responsible for
providing emotional support and
encouragement to the researcher
are not the responsibility of the
supervisor - researchers should
look elsewhere
9.
The supervisor should insist on
seeing all drafts of work to ensure
that the researcher in on the right
track
12345
Researchers should submit drafts
of work only when they want
constructive criticism from the
supervisor
12345
The writing of the thesis should
only ever be the researcher's own
work
12345
The researcher is responsible for
decisions concerning the standard
of the thesis
10.
The supervisor should assist in
the writing of the thesis if
necessary
11.
The supervisor is responsible for
decisions regarding the standard
of the thesis
78
Appendix 3.2: Training needs analysis & learning plan for doctoral student skills training
Doctoral Student’s name:
Director of Studies’ name:
Academic Division/School:
Start date:
Mode:
Skills areas
Proposal(s) for attaining skill or
evidence of attaining skill
Completion date
(A) Research Skills and Techniques - to be able to
demonstrate:
1. the ability to recognise and validate problems
2. original, independent and critical thinking, and the
ability to develop theoretical concepts
3. a knowledge of recent advances within one's field
and in related areas
4. an
understanding
of
relevant
research
methodologies and techniques and their
appropriate application within one's research field
5. the ability to critically analyse and evaluate one's
findings and those of others
6. an ability to summarise, document, report and
reflect on progress
79
(B) Research Environment – to be able to:
1. show a broad understanding of the context, at the
national and international level, in which research
takes place
2. demonstrate awareness of issues relating to the
rights of other researchers, of research subjects,
and of others who may be affected by the
research, e.g. confidentiality, ethical issues,
attribution, copyright, malpractice, ownership of
data and the requirements of the Data Protection
Act
3. demonstrate appreciation of standards of good
research practice in their institution and/or
discipline
4. understand relevant health and safety issues and
demonstrate responsible working practices
5. understand the processes
evaluation of research
for
funding
and
6. justify the principles and experimental techniques
used in one’s own research
7. understand the process of academic
commercial exploitation of research results
or
(C) Research Management – to be able to:
1. apply effective project management through the
setting of research goals, intermediate milestones
80
and prioritisation of activities
2. design and execute systems for the acquisition
and collation of information through the effective
use of appropriate resources and equipment
3. identify and access appropriate bibliographical
resources, archives, and other sources of relevant
information
4. use information technology appropriately for
database management, recording and presenting
information
(D) Personal Effectiveness – to be able to:
1. demonstrate a willingness and ability to learn and
acquire knowledge
2. be creative, innovative and original in one’s
approach to research
3. demonstrate flexibility and open-mindedness
4. demonstrate self-awareness and the ability to
identify own training needs
5. demonstrate self-discipline,
thoroughness
motivation,
and
6. recognise boundaries and draw upon/use sources
of support as appropriate
7. show initiative, work independently and be selfreliant
81
(E) Communication Skills – to be able to:
1. write clearly and in a style appropriate to purpose,
e.g. progress reports, published documents, thesis
2. construct coherent arguments and articulate ideas I
clearly to a range of audiences, formally and
informally through a variety of techniques
3. constructively defend research
seminars and viva examination
outcomes
at
4. contribute to promoting the public understanding
of one’s research field
5. effectively support the learning of others when .
involved in teaching, mentoring or demonstrating
activities
(F) Networking and Teamworking - to be able to:
1. develop and maintain co-operative networks and
working relationships with supervisors, colleagues
and peers, within the institution and the wider
research community
2. understand one's behaviours and impact on others
when working in and contributing to the success of
formal and informal teams
3. listen, give and receive feedback and respond
perceptively to others
(G) Career Management - to be able to:
82
1. appreciate the need for and show commitment to
continued professional development
2. take ownership for and manage one's career
progression, set realistic and achievable career
goals, and identify and develop ways to improve
employability
3. demonstrate an insight into the transferable nature
of research skills to other work environments and
the range of career opportunities within and
outside academia
4. present one's skills, personal attributes and
experiences through effective CVs, applications
and interviews
List of courses/seminars/modules/activities to be completed/attended:
Course/seminar/module/activity to be
completed/attended
Description of course/seminar/module/activity to
be completed/attended
Date
83