Confirmation of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Candidature Guidelines & Panel Report Research Services Purpose These Guidelines are intended to assist students, their supervisors, and confirmation panels to meet the requirements established by the Academic Board for candidature to be confirmed. The purpose of the confirmation process is to provide: A formal mechanism for the provision to the candidate of sound advice on the viability of the proposed research project approximately one third of the way into candidature. Evaluation of, and feedback on, the quality of the proposed research project to the candidate by his/her peers in the discipline. A means of ensuring that the key questions, scope and objectives of the project are clearly articulated, that the study design is in accord with discipline conventions, and that the project is not over-designed beyond the scope of the resources available to support its execution. A means of ensuring that the candidate is making satisfactory progress and has a high probability of completing the degree requirements within the time period allowed. An early warning mechanism for the detection of difficulties with the proposed research project or that the candidate might be experiencing. A means of applying natural justice in the termination of candidature in the situation where such candidature clearly has a low likelihood of success. Regulatory Requirements Regulation 5.1 The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, section 6 addresses the broad requirements for confirmation of candidature. Applications for confirmed candidature must be made within 12 months of commencing full-time provisional candidature or within 24 months of commencing part-time provisional candidature. Section 6 of Regulation 5.1 also stipulates that for candidature to be confirmed a candidate must... prove that he or she has developed a viable PhD research program, made satisfactory progress, and is able to complete degree requirements within the period allowed.... Data collection should not be commenced until the appropriate Ethics approvals have been obtained where necessary. Timing of Confirmations Where possible, and if appropriate (for example, large numbers of confirming HDR students), confirmations should be held on fixed dates and coordinated to allow for multiple confirmations on the same day. Individual schools may decide if this approach is appropriate. Due to the HECS census dates, it is suggested that coordinated confirmations should be held at the following 4 intervals per year: late February-early March, June, September and Late November-Early December. The actual dates for confirmation meetings are flexible within the months indicated. If the coordinated confirmation approach is adopted students should be advised at the commencement of candidature when the dates are likely to be. Should a student not be ready for confirmation at any particular interval they may defer Page 1 of13
their confirmation until the next round of panel meetings. The coordinated confirmation option should allow the facilitation of up to 3 confirmations per day, and would provide the option of utilising some of the panel members across more than one confirmation. Where the coordinated confirmation approach is adopted Research Services can facilitate organisation by provision of a room for the entire day(s) with online streaming facilities for panel members unable to attend in person. Notification of Application for Confirmed Candidature The Principal Supervisor will be responsible for alerting the candidate to the requirements for confirmation of candidature and assisting the student with the preparation of the written proposal and oral presentation. On the advice of the Principal Supervisor and the candidate the Associate Dean (Research) of the School will notify Research Services of an application for confirmation at least three weeks before the scheduled oral presentation. The School Administration Officer Research, in conjunction with the Associate Dean (Research), will be responsible for organising the process. The Associate Dean (Research) will be responsible for conducting the process. Students and their Principal Supervisors are notified automatically by Research Services, through Research Master, at the six-month (FTE) stage as a reminder of the confirmation date. Confirmation Processes A candidate will be required to: Prepare and make available to a Confirmation Panel at least two weeks prior to the oral presentation, a written proposal which addresses the requirements specified in Annex A. Make an oral presentation of no more than 25 minutes in duration to a Confirmation Panel (and any additional audience) addressing the requirements specified in Annex A. Answer questions from members of the Confirmation Panel (or other members of the audience) on any matters arising from either the written proposal or the oral presentation. Preparation for In preparation for, students are encouraged to: Work closely with their supervisor(s) to ensure that their written proposal and oral presentation are progressing in a timely way and that the confirmation requirements are being adequately addressed; Attend other confirmation of candidature oral presentations; Participate in Graduate Centre sessions relating to confirmation of candidature; and Avail themselves of opportunities to make oral presentations in other forums. E.g. School seminars, conferences, rehearsal with supervisor(s) etc. In preparation for the Principal Supervisor is responsible for: Ensuring that the candidate is made aware of the requirements for as specified in Regulation 5.1 and these Guidelines; Assisting the candidate with the preparation of their written proposal and oral presentation; and, Page 2 of13
Alerting candidates to, and encouraging them to participate in, opportunities for developing their presentation skills. For example, attendance at seminars, or conferences. Confirmation Panel A Confirmation Panel will deliberate and recommend to the Research Higher Degrees Sub-Committee on confirmation of candidature in accordance with the directions contained in Annex B. The Panel will consist of: Dean of the School in which the candidate is enrolled or nominee (attendance is optional; the Dean may attend or provide written comments to the panel prior to the presentation). The Associate Dean (Research)* (Chair) # or nominee (approved by the DVC (R) in exceptional circumstances). The Principal Supervisor and, where applicable, the Director of Provisional Principal Supervisors**. Associate Dean (Research) from another Higher Education School or nominee. An academic staff member of the School nominated by the Associate Dean (Research). Linkage industry partner if appropriate and required. External and independent expert. The external expert is either in attendance (in person or by online streaming) or provides written comments to the panel prior to the oral presentation. The Associate Supervisor(s) who will have speaking, but not deliberative, rights. A member of Research Services can be invited by the Associate Dean (Research) if required. * If the Dean of the School or the AD(R) is the Principal Supervisor, the Associate Dean (Research) of the School will nominate an alternative Member selected from the members of the School Research Committee and approved by the Dean. # Unless the Chair is Principal Supervisor, in which case the Dean of the School or nominee will be Chair. ** While the Principal Supervisor might be expected to clarify certain issues arising from the written and oral presentations, they are not to be advocates for the candidate. Page 3 of13
Panel Recommendation The Confirmation Panel will recommend to the Research Higher Degrees Sub-Committee that candidature should be confirmed, confirmed subject to conditions or not confirmed. In instances when the recommendation is that candidature is not confirmed, the Panel will provide a written report outlining the reasons for its decision. If the Panel is of the view that the candidate should be given a further opportunity to apply for confirmation of candidature, its report will include details of what tasks will need to be completed (for example, revisions to the written proposal and a further oral presentation, or revisions to the written proposal only) with associated timelines. Only in exceptional circumstances will more than two attempts to gain confirmation of candidature be permitted. Feedback to Candidate Feedback will normally be provided to the candidate by the Principal Supervisor, and if necessary also by the Confirmation panel chair (the Associate Dean (Research) or Dean if the Associate Dean (Research) is the Principal Supervisor, or nominee) as soon as is practicable after the candidate s oral presentation and within one week (5 working days). The feedback should, as far as possible, be constructive and encouraging and contain the following two elements: 1. The Confirmation Panel s recommendation to the RHDSC (i.e. candidature confirmed, candidature confirmed subject to conditions, or candidature not confirmed ); and, 2. Any feedback on the substance of the candidate s research. In cases where conditions are set, including a recommendation that the candidate be required to re-present either the written proposal and/or the oral presentation for confirmation, the feedback will include details of what needs to be addressed, what will be the timing and nature of the next step in the confirmation process. 3. A copy of the completed Appendix B will be provided to the student. Research Services will: Confirm the anticipated date of during the enrolment process. Notify the appropriate Associate Dean(Research) and the candidate of the candidate s time limit for confirmation of candidature eight weeks prior to the deadline; Notify research postgraduate students and academic staff of forthcoming confirmation presentations; Receive recommendations from the Confirmation Panel and forward them to the RHDSC for consideration; Formally notify candidates of the outcome of RHDSC decisions on confirmation; and, Upgrade student records to reflect RHDSC decisions. Page 4 of13
Annex A (for student) Written Proposal Guidelines Proposals should be written within the guidelines below and should be between 5,000 and 10,000 words. Words in excess of 10,000 will not be considered. The literature review and bibliography are included in the written proposal word count. Students are encouraged to run their proposal through a plagiarism detection program such as Turnitin before submission, to assist in establishing academic integrity. Title of thesis. The title should be as brief as possible whilst giving a clear indication of the major thrust of the thesis. The Title given at the time of confirmation may be subject to change as the work on the thesis progresses and nears completion; any change in Title will be the subject of a formal request for a Change in Title (Miscellaneous request Form). Brief overview of the research project. A concise description of the project, which sets out the background to the study, the proposed area of research enquiry, the planned study design, and the anticipated contribution of the study to existing knowledge. This description should briefly clarify the epistemological basis of the study, and the underpinning theoretical perspective. The research question or questions. A precise statement of each of the research questions to be addressed in the study. Brief overview of relevant literature. An outline of sufficient relevant literature to clarify the context of the study which highlights the paucity of knowledge in the area addressed by the research question(s). Contribution to the literature provided by the project. A description of the anticipated contribution to knowledge of the project and a summary of the anticipated body of knowledge arising from the study. Justification of the significance of the research and how it will contribute to knowledge. This section should explain why the study is important, what significant problems it will address, and what the expected outcomes are likely to be. This explanation should focus on the beneficial nature of the theoretical and/or applied outcomes resulting from the expanded knowledge base. Research approach and method (s) to be used. A description of the overall study design, and the methods to be used in the collection and analysis of data. This section should include a brief statement of the methodological framework that governs the use of these methods. Justification of the research approach and methods. A brief explanation of the rationale behind the choice of research methodology and a justification of the data collection methods. This explanation should make it clear why the chosen methodology is the most appropriate for investigating the research problem and answering the research question(s) and why the chosen methods are most appropriate for the data collection. For creative works, computer software etc., demonstration of the links among the practical works and the exegesis. Page 5 of13
An explanation of the links between the various practical works, and between the practical works and the thrust of the exegesis. Ethical issues raised by the project and details of progress through ethics approval if appropriate. An outline of any ethical issues associated with the conduct of the research and a brief description of how these issues will be addressed, and progress towards obtaining ethics approval. Timetable for completion of the project. A listing of the major milestones of the study including the literature review, ethics approval, data collection, data analysis, thesis write-up, and thesis submission, and the estimated target date for completion of each item. A one page Proposed Project Budget and anticipated Funding Source(s) (Note: confirmation of candidature does not constitute approval of the proposed budget). A listing of the major budget items involved in conducting the study (such as travel, equipment, expendables (e.g. survey distribution, chemicals, glassware), research support (e.g. assistance in administering surveys, transcription) and the anticipated costs associated with each item. Details of confirmed or anticipated sources of funding to meet these costs should also be included where possible. Note: Research is taken to include scholarship and creative works as appropriate to the discipline, as well as empirical research. Note: If the proposal contains confidential material the candidate and his/her supervisors should seek advice from the Dean of Graduate Studies. Page 6 of13
Annex A (cont) Please complete and submit the following (pages 7&8) along with your proposal to Research Services. Student Name: Student ID: Please select your Faculty: Federation Business School Faculty of Education and Arts Faculty of Health Faculty of Science and Technology Oral Presentation Guidelines The oral presentation will be for no more than 25 minutes and should: Be clearly and succinctly presented so as to be understandable to those not necessarily expert in the specific discipline. Indicate a clear engagement with, and understanding of, the research topic. Engage the audience: this is not likely to be achieved by a straight reading from a prepared script. Make use of technology, as appropriate, to assist with the achievement of the previous three points. Be cross referenced to the written proposal with a view to elaborating on and clarifying important aspects of the research, in particular: o the research question and associated objectives/questions/hypotheses; o how the research will address gaps in the literature and make a substantial contribution to knowledge; o why the chosen research approach and methodology/methodologies is most appropriate; o o the theoretical basis of the research where appropriate; the systematic line of enquiry and investigation being developed in cases where the research component of the program will consist of a series of research reports and an exegesis. The presentation will be followed by a period (of approximately 15-20 minutes duration) of questioning. It is important that answers are concise and directed at the question(s). All final documentation (electronic and hard copies of the written proposal together with this page with the completed checklist and signatures) must be provided to Research Services at least three weeks prior to the date of the oral presentation. Page 7 of13
Checklist Completed Written proposal completed as per guidelines Written proposal is between 5000 and 10,000 words. Word Count. Seminar details and a copy of this checklist to be forwarded to Research Services It is confirmed that all necessary documentation has been provided. / / Print Name in Full Candidate Signature Date / / Print Name in Full Supervisor Signature Date Page 8 of13
Annex B (for Confirmation Panel) The Confirmation Panel s task is to determine if the candidate has developed a viable PhD research program, made satisfactory progress, and is able to complete degree requirements within the period allowed (Regulation 5.1 Doctor of Philosophy, section 6). The following statements are presented to assist the Panel with their deliberations: (Please circle the appropriate response) 1. The candidate is working with a significant/important research issue. 2. The candidate has developed a clear and focused research question, and sub -questions where appropriate 3. The candidate has displayed a critical and detailed knowledge and understanding of the relevant literature, and theoretical constructs where appropriate Page 9 of13
4. The candidate has demonstrated that the research will make a substantial contribution to knowledge. 5. The candidate has chosen a suitable research approach and methods, and justified the choice convincingly. 6. The candidate has shown awareness of ethical issues and addressed them appropriately. 7. The candidate has provided a clear and realistic timeline for the project. Page 10 of13
8. The standard of the oral presentation is appropriate for the degree of the Doctor of Philosophy. 9. The standard of the written proposal is appropriate for the degree of the Doctor of Philosophy, including appropriate use of referencing systems as applicable to the discipline. 10. Optional: Where applicable, the candidate has demonstrated the systematic line of enquiry being developed with the practical work(s) and has indicated how those works will link to the exegesis 11. The Panel is confident that the candidate has the capacity to complete in the minimum period. Page 11 of13
Panel Report: (An additional written report may be attached if required) Page 12 of13
Having considered the above questions and taken an overall view the Confirmation Panel recommends to the RHDSC that: Candidature to be confirmed Candidature to be confirmed subject to conditions The Chair of the panel will be responsible for the completion of this process. The date for completion of all improvements to the written proposal is to be not more than 3 months (FTE) from the date of delivery of the panel s report. Sign-off of successful completion of all improvements is to be undertaken by the Chair of the Panel. Alternately the candidate may be required to re-present to the whole panel within the three month period. The Chair has the authority to consult with the DVC(R) on any unresolved issues brought up during the course of a confirmation of candidature. *The student will be advised as soon as is practicable and within one week (5 working days) of the outcome of the confirmation process. Date for re-submission of additional information: Candidature not be confirmed The panel recommends that the student be invited to Show Cause on why candidature should be terminated. Chair of Panel: Print Name in Full Signature Date Dean or nominee: Print Name in Full Signature Date Principal Supervisor: Print Name in Full Signature Date NOTE: / / / / / / 1. A copy of this report must be provided to the student within one week of the oral presentation 2. This completed form and a copy of the written proposal must be returned to Research Services within one week of the oral presentation Page 13 of13