guidebook for supervision of university of sydney higher ...€¦ · the contribution of dr. d. al...
TRANSCRIPT
Guidebook for Supervision of University of Sydney Higher Degree Research Students
at Charles Sturt University
Orange Campus
1
Originally prepared by Dr. Mary Jane Mahony
March 1999
Updated by Professor Geoff Gurr and Mrs. K. Gilchrist
June 2009
SAWS, Charles Sturt University
Acknowledgements
The contribution of Dr. D. Al Bakri to the original development of materials included in this
manual is particularly valued.
2
CONTENTS Page
Contacts 4
Resources 5
Forms and Printed Advice
Other References
Academic Board Polices and Procedures
INTRODUCTION 6
GETTING TO KNOW THE INSTITUTION 6
The Rural Management Research Institute (RMRI) Management
Committee
The Library
OTHER FACILITIES 7
Library – Electronic Journals
Offices for Research Students
Payment of Travel and Consumables for Research Students 8
Campus Vehicles
Airline Bookings
ETHICS 9
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 10
APPOINTMENT OF POSTGRADUATE SUOERVISORS 11 -12
PROGRESS: RESEARCH PROPOSAL 13-15
PROGRESS: PROBATION 16
PROGRESS: TRANSFER FROM MPHIL TO PHD
CANDIDATURE 17-18
PROGRESS: MONITORING AND SUPPORTING THE
CANDIDATE 19-21
EARLY SUBMISSION OF PHD 22
THESIS: SUBMISSION 23
3
THESIS: EXAMINATION – MPHIL (RurMgmt) 24-27
THESIS: EXAMINATION – PHD 28-34
Appendices:
Appendix 1 – Higher Degree Form Downloads 35
Appendix 2 – Supervision: Appointment of Associate Supervisors 36
Appendix 3 – Transfer from MPhil to PhD Candidature 37
4
CONTACTS
Sub Dean (Sydney Research
Students)
Prof. Geoff Gurr Tel (02) 6365 7551
Fax (02) 6365 7590
Administrative Assistant
(Research)
Dr Amanda Warren-
Smith
tel (02) 6365 7852
fax (02) 6365 7590
Mrs Karilyn Gilchrist tel (02) 6365 7603
fax (02) 6365 7590
5
RESOURCES
Forms and Printed Advice
Forms referred to in this document may be accessed on-line at:
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/research/usyd/
Other References
University of Sydney Postgraduate Studies Handbook.
The document is now available on the World Wide Web.
http://www.usyd.edu.au/handbooks/handbooks_admin/postgraduate.shtml
Academic Board Policies, USyd
Under the “Research” link at
http://fmweb01.ucc.usyd.edu.au/FMPro?-db=POL_Main.fp5&-format=/pol/pol_search.html&-
lay=www&-view
6
INTRODUCTION
The University of Sydney‟s Faculty of Rural Management (FRM) on the Orange campus
transferred to Charles Sturt University (CSU) in mid-2006 and was subsequently absorbed into
the School of Agricultural and Wine Sciences.
All current higher degree research (HDR) students who were enrolled as of Second Semester
2005 remain University of Sydney candidates. This requires that their candidatures are in
accordance with University of Sydney policy along with FRM specific resolutions and practice.
The aim of this booklet is to provide a guide to management of higher degree research students
in this context. Thus it serves as a complement to the University of Sydney‟s „Postgraduate
Research Studies Handbook‟.
Forms commonly used in the management of higher degree research students can be accessed at
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/research/usyd/
GETTING TO KNOW THE INSTITUTION
THE RURAL MANAGEMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE (RMRI) MANAGEMENT
COMMITTEE
The RMRI is the research arm of the FRM and has oversight of research students.
The RMRI Management Committee is chaired by Professor Geoff Gurr, who has been
appointed by C.S.U as Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) to oversee candidates
until mid-2010.
THE LIBRARY
The Orange Campus CSU Library specialises in agriculture, agribusiness, and land resources
management; all USyd students have access to it through their CSU student card.
In addition all continuing USyd students are entitled to apply for a USyd library card - see
procedure under Remote/Distance students on this page (for 2009):
http://www.usyd.edu.au/current_students/student_administration/student_cards/how.shtml
This card is useful for making visits in person to the USyd library, and enables the use of all
libraries within the University of Sydney.
A common online catalogue allows you to identify where the items are held within the
university http://www.library.usyd.edu.au/
7
For students located outside of Sydney the easiest method to borrow books from the USyd
library is however to apply through CSU online as an inter library loan.
For students who have submitted:
Students who would like to continue borrowing from the library should complete the form and
follow the instructions on how to obtain a card at (for 2009):
http://www.usyd.edu.au/card_centre/applications/temporary.shtml
This type of card is available only to postgraduate students.
If you would simply like continued access to the library‟s electronic resources then you should
check to ensure your Unikey continues (see below).
Troubleshooting: for 2009 the Card Co-ordinator at USyd is Samantha Hutchinson, tel 02 935
17191
OTHER FACILITIES
USYD LIBRARY – ELECTRONIC JOURNALS
As a postgraduate student you will find it essential to learn to access specialist databases. These
databases can be accessed from the USyd Library homepage (www.library.usyd.edu.au). You
will require a Unikey - see more information at
http://www.library.usyd.edu.au/databases/wam.html
Unikey access must be renewed by USyd each year; an updated list of eligible students
(including their logins) must be sent with accompanying explanation to USyd I.T. Help
desk at [email protected] by the Sub Dean in early March of each year. After this has
been done , renewal as of March 31st should proceed automatically although renewal
warning notices will continue to be automatically generated to students during March.
Troubleshooting: Orange IT staff cannot assist with this. As long as the above list has been
provided to USyd I.T., any residual problems should then be referred to a supervisor at USyd
through their Help desk (tel: 02 9351 6000; email: [email protected]).
OFFICES FOR RESEARCH STUDENTS
Full-time research students based at the Faculty are provided with office accommodation,
usually on a shared basis.
8
Part-time research students and all research students usually based away from the campus will
be provided with office accommodation appropriate to meet their needs when at the campus for
extended periods (that is, periods beyond the length of a residential school). Your supervisor
will be responsible for recommending such an arrangement for you to the Sub Dean if space is
limited.
PAYMENT OF TRAVEL AND CONSUMABLES FOR RESEARCH STUDENTS
The appropriate manager, usually your supervisor, must approve all orders and payments.
Students working in grant funded projects should liaise with their supervisors regarding
operating costs.
CAMPUS VEHICLES
Use of Campus pool cars by postgraduate research students for fieldwork related to their studies
must be negotiated with and approved by their Primary Supervisor. Extensive use of a vehicle
must be discussed prior to commencement of activity especially if a vehicle will be required to
be taken out of Orange. All requests for car bookings must be made in the C.S. U. travel book
and approved by the Head of School.
All Faculty pool vehicles are fitted with first aid kits. You should check the kit is in order before
commencing any fieldwork trip.
Please see Piumika Perera (ext. 57881) for the travel book.
Students are reminded that travel (and all other research activities) require a risk management to
be completed. A number of emergency beacons and mobile phones (including a satellite phone)
are available for loan when you are in the field.
All campus-based postgraduate students are allocated pigeonholes in the Administration
Building for receiving mail.
AIRLINE BOOKINGS
Airline travel is arranged through Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga Campus.
Appropriate Charles Sturt University travel forms must be completed prior to travel, and in the
case of overseas travel you should allow approximately eight weeks for the approval process.
9
ETHICS
Every researcher is responsible for considering ethical issues arising in research with humans
and with animals. Community expectations of due process are high. Please become familiar
with the University‟s web site http://www.usyd.edu.au/ro/ethics/default.shtml
RESEARCH WITH PEOPLE
Any student carrying out research which involves humans (even survey and interview work)
must seek ethics approval. Application for approval must be made on the appropriate forms.
Please refer to the website http://www.usyd.edu.au/ethics/human/
There is no local contact person and enquires are currently (in 2009) addressed to Ms Gail
Briody whose contact details are shown at http://www.usyd.edu.au/ro/ethics/default.shtml
RESEARCH WITH ANIMALS
Any student carrying out research with vertebrate animals must seek ethics approval.
Application for approval must be made on the appropriate forms available at the website-
http://www.usyd.edu.au/ethics/animal/
Dr Amanda Warren- Smith on the Orange campus (ext 57852) is a local contact person,
START EARLY
Ethics approval application forms go to the Camperdown Campus of the University for
consideration, so sufficient time must be allocated in the project plan for approval to be gained
before the data collection is begun. The approval committee meets monthly. A schedule of
meeting dates for the Animal Ethics Committee is available at
http://www.usyd.edu.au/ethics/animal/AEmeeting.html
Schedule of dates for the Human Ethics Committee is available at
http://www.usyd.edu.au/ethics/human.
10
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
The University of Sydney‟s Postgraduate Studies Handbook focuses on intellectual property
and authorship
http://www.usyd.edu.au/handbooks/postgrad_hb/05_intellectual_property.shtml
The University specifically acknowledges that students own the work they produce as students.
If you are a postgraduate research student, you should read this chapter carefully and discuss it
with your supervisors. The recommendation “Agreement should be reached between the
student and the supervisor concerning authorship of publications and acknowledgement of
contributions during and after the candidature. There should be open and mutual recognition of
the candidate‟s and supervisor‟s contribution on all published work arising from the project”
is a beneficial one.
If you are a postgraduate coursework student undertaking a project or dissertation which
involves one or more supervisors (or other collaborators) you may find it valuable to have a
similar discussion to that recommended to postgraduate research students. The Faculty
encourages the publication of work by students that makes a contribution.
11
APPOINTMENT OF POSTGRADUATE SUPERVISORS1
Key People
Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)
Primary Supervisor
Student
Chair (RMRI Management Committee)
Administrative Assistant (Research)
The University's policies and guidelines on postgraduate supervision are detailed in Appendix 5
of the University of Sydney Postgraduate Studies Handbook.
http://www.usyd.edu.au/handbooks/postgrad_hb/ap05_code_of_practice.shtml
Identification of Potential Supervisors
Primary Supervisor. Identification of the Primary Supervisor (PS) occurs when a potential
postgraduate research student applies for admission to the research degree program. The student
is only accepted if an appropriate PS can be provided, and if assignment of this supervisory
responsibility is agreeable to both supervisor and applicant. The prospective PS is consulted
during the assessment of the application.
Associate Supervisor(s). Identification of appropriate associate supervisors occurs either during
the application process or during the first third of candidature. Where identified during the
application process, the nominated associate supervisor is consulted during the assessment of the
application. Associate Supervisors external to FRM are appointed in an honorary capacity.
Associate Supervisors external to both FRM and the University must be approved by the Dean
of the FRM according to University policy, on the recommendation of the Primary Supervisor
and the Director, RMRI .
Criteria for Supervisor Appointment2
General criteria for appointment of postgraduate research student supervisors are set out in the
diagram on the next page.
Change of Supervisor/s
There are many reasons for considering a change of supervisor. Any change is first discussed by
the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) with the student and the existing supervisors, and
then with the proposed new supervisor/s. If a change is agreed, it is then confirmed in writing to
the student and supervisor/s, with a copy to Client Services for the student‟s file.
1 Approved by Academic Board 12 November 2003 – Date of effect: 1 January 2004
2 Approved by Board of PostGraduate Studies March 1998
12
Existing research project initiated by FRM academic (Project awarded funding or project proposal already subjected to peer review) Project Leader is automatically appointed provided that the appointee has a research degree appropriate to the candidature. If the Project Leader does not have a research degree appropriate to
the candidature, a supervisory team is negotiated in consultation with the Project Leader and the candidate to ensure appropriate
supervision for the level of candidature.
Research project/topic initiated by prospective student
An academic staff member is identified who is currently active in relevant research and publication who is willing to supervise. The RMRI Management Committee is advised by email to enable comment. After 7 working days the appointment is confirmed by
the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students).
Person outside FRM
Primary Supervisor nominates, after consultation with the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) and candidate, using Nomination Form. Appointment is confirmed by the Sub Dean (Sydney
Research Students). The RMRI Management Committee is advised
at its next meeting.
Person inside FRM
Nominated after consultation with Primary Supervisor, candidate and the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students). The RMRI Management Committee is advised by email. After 7 working
days the appointment is confirmed.
The role is formally acknowledged on advice of the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) or Associate Supervisor by notifying
the RMRI Management Committee.
Mentor Will have some specific relevant
expertise
Primary Supervisor Must –
Be a member of the
academic staff of the University At Level B or
above
Hold a qualification at the same level, or above, as
that for which the candidate seeks to be supervised and demonstrate a record of scholarly achievement.
Have acted as a supervisor
or an asociate supervisor for al least 12 momths duration at a recognised tertiary institution, and
have completed the University of SydneyITL PG Supervision Development Program.
Have acted as a supervisor
for the successful completion of at least one candidature at a recognised tertiary institution.
Meet criteria as per first
two dots points for Primary Supervisors or have been appointed as an honorary associate of the University
Demonstrate ability to
successfully supervise a candidature to completion, or
Meet such other specific
requirements as the head of department/school
may determine.
13
PROGRESS: RESEARCH PROPOSAL3
Key People
Student
Primary Supervisor
Associate Supervisor/s
Chair (RMRI Management Committee)
Administrative Assistant (Research)
Research Proposal Development
The student prepares a Research Proposal in consultation with the supervisor/s and according to
the published guidelines - the form „Guidelines for Preparing Research Proposals‟ can be
downloaded at http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/research/usyd
Where the candidature is part of an externally funded research project, the student‟s proposal
will be expected to demonstrate both the student‟s familiarity with the subject matter and his/her
own intended intellectual contribution. The development of the research proposal should be
completed within 6 months of commencement of candidature for full-time students (12 months
for part-time students). It is the responsibility of the student to meet this time requirement.
Research Proposal Review Process
The proposal review process contributes to:
evaluating the project‟s value and achievability in terms of producing the necessary
outcomes for a successful thesis
reviewing the calibre of the student
determining that the probationary period has been satisfactorily completed
developing the student‟s research management skills.
All the stages of the review process should normally be completed within eight (8) weeks from
the date of proposal submission by the student to the PS. The review process will be carried out
according to the following steps:
1. The student formally submits his/her proposal with a cover letter to the designated PS.
2. The PS nominates three proposal reviewers to the Administrative Assistant, RMRI
Management Committee. The three reviewers shall among them include one discipline
expert, one FRM experienced researcher, and one experienced supervisor of research
students at the candidature level. The associate supervisor of the student is normally one of
the three reviewers. The PS will be responsible for selecting reviewers who can provide
feedback in a timely manner and for ensuring that feedback is obtained.
3 The substance of this section was accepted by the FRM Board of Postgraduate Studies March 1998.
14
3. Agreement of the RMRI Management Committee to the nominated reviewers is sought by
the Administrative Assistant (Research) via email within a set time limit of two (2) weeks
following receipt of advice of reviewers‟ names and details from the PS. The proposal will
be available from the Administrative Assistant supporting the RMRI Management
Committee at this time for review by any member of the Board.
4. The reviewers provide written feedback to the PS on the proposal as per the proforma (refer
Appendix 1, Form Downloads, Research Proposal Review Report) within a period not
normally exceeding four (4) weeks.
5. On receipt of the written feedback and after appropriate consultation with the student, the PS
will submit in writing to the Chair of the RMRI Management Committee at least ten (10)
days before a scheduled Committee meeting the following
an abstract of the student‟s research proposal,
a short statement outlining issues raised by the reviewers and how these have been
accepted into the proposal, and
a recommendation to the Committee on the proposal.
6. The Committee considers the recommendation at its next in-person or by circulation
meeting. Distributed papers will include the abstract of the student‟s proposal, and the PS‟s
statement and recommendation.
The Committee makes a decision on the recommendation based on circulated and available
documents, and any discussion in person or electronically, and will be one of the following three
options:
a) Approve the proposal and confirm candidature, OR
b) Approve the proposal subject to the satisfaction of the PS that the student has
addressed the Committee‟s specified recommendations. In this case the PS will
advise the Chair in writing when this has been achieved and the Chair will then
ensure that the student is advised that the proposal is approved and candidature
confirmed, OR
Refer back to the PS for further action and resubmission of the proposal as specified by the
Committee. This decision will only be made if there are fundamental problems with the
proposal that may inhibit the successful completion of the research project.
7. Students planning to seek conversion to PhD later in candidature may wish to indicate
that their MPhil proposal has been developed with this in mind. The following wording
is placed on the front cover of the proposal if this applicable.
This proposal outlines the plans for the postgraduate research project in the subject
area. Under the current rules for postgraduate students in the Faculty of Rural
Management, The University of Sydney, Orange this project is designed in the first
15
instance to satisfy the requirements for an MPhil. Additional research questions are
then posed and methods outlined that are designed to enable this project to satisfy the
requirements for a PhD. A review would be held around one year (full-time equivalent)
after this proposal has been approved for the candidate to convert from a MPhil to a
PhD subject to the agreement of candidate, supervisors and University.
16
PROGRESS: PROBATION4
Key People
Chair, RMRI Management Committee
Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)
Primary Supervisor
Student
Administrative Assistant (Research)
Procedure
All postgraduate research students are admitted on probation. At FRM probation is completed
when the following have occurred:
Acceptance by the RMRI Management Committee of the student‟s Research Proposal.
Statement by the Primary Supervisor on the student‟s competence in written English
expression provided to the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) for noting and
attachment to student file. This statement will recognise English language ability
appropriate to the field of study, and identify any problems and consequent remedial
actions for those who are likely to have difficulty with English expression in the writing
of a thesis.5
4 Approved by Board of Postgraduate Studies March 1998.
5 University policy statement formally operationalised in this way from 1999 at FRM.
17
PROGRESS: TRANSFER FROM MPHIL TO PHD CANDIDATURE6
Key People
Primary Supervisor
Associate Supervisor/s
Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)
Student
Chair (RMRI Management Committee)
Members of the RMRI Management Committee
Administrative Assistant (Research)
Responsibility
The Committee ultimately confirms or denies a request by an MPhil student to transfer to PhD
candidature.
Procedure
All stages of the transfer process should normally be completed within 8-10 weeks. The steps
leading to the Committee‟s decision should include:
1. The MPhil student initiates the process by submitting to the PS
a written request to transfer to PhD candidature that should include a cover letter and a
revised Research Proposal. The request for transfer to PhD candidature cannot be made
before completing twelve (12) months from commencement of candidature for full time
students (24 months for part-time students). The student prepares a research proposal based
on the guidelines for preparing a Proposal for Transfer from MPhil to PhD candidature (see
Appendix 4). This comprehensive written proposal is developed in consultation with the
student‟s PS.
2. The PS nominates three reviewers to the Chair. The three reviewers shall among them
include one discipline expert, one FRM experienced researcher, one experienced supervisor
of research students at the candidature level. The associate supervisor of the student is
normally one of the three reviewers. The PS will be responsible for selecting reviewers who
can provide feedback in a timely manner and for ensuring that feedback is obtained.
3. Agreement of the Committee to the nominated reviewers is sought by the Administrative
Assistant (Research) via email within a set time limit of two (2) weeks following receipt of
advice of reviewers‟ names and details from the PS.
The proposal will be available at this time for review by any member of the Committee on
request from the Administrative Assistant (Research).
6 Approved by Board of Postgraduate Studies March 1998.
18
4. The reviewers provide written feedback to the PS on the proposal (Appendix 1, Form
Downloads, Research Proposal Review Report) within a period not normally exceeding four
(4) weeks.
5. The student presents his/her proposal at an in-house seminar or elsewhere by negotiation
with the PS. (Sequence of events 2, 3 and 4 are agreed to by PS and student.)
6. On receipt of the written feedback from the reviewers, completing the seminar and after
appropriate consultation with the student, the PS will submit in writing to the Chair of the
RMRI Management Committee at least ten days before a scheduled Committee meeting:
the PS‟s recommendation to the Committee on the proposal as per the proforma
given in Appendix 1 (Form Downloads, Primary Supervisor‟s Research Proposal
Review Report). The recommendation should include actions or explanations in
relation to the issues/concerns raised by the reviewers
If the student and the PS disagree over the readiness of the candidature transfer research
proposal to be presented to the Committee, the student may request that it goes ahead and
provides a written comment of his/her own in addition to the statements above.
1. The recommendation will be considered at the next meeting of the Committee and the
distributed papers will include the abstract of the student‟s proposal, and a short statement
from the Primary Supervisor outlining issues raised by the reviewers and how these have
been addressed.
2. The Committee‟s decision will be based on circulated and available documents, and any
discussion at the next Committee meeting held in person or electronically, and will be one of
the following four decisions:
a) Approve the proposal and confirm the transfer OR
b) Approve the transfer subject to the satisfaction of the PS that the student has
addressed the Committee‟s specified recommendations. In this case the PS will
advise the Chair in writing when this has been achieved and the Chair will then
ensure that the student is advised that transfer is approved OR
c) Refer back to the PS for further action and resubmission of the proposal as specified
by the Committee. This decision will only be made if there are fundamental
problems with the proposal that may inhibit the successful completion of the PhD
research project OR
d) Reject the request for transfer to PhD and direct that the student complete the MPhil
program.
19
PROGRESS: MONITORING AND SUPPORTING THE CANDIDATURE
Key People
Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)
Student
Primary Supervisor
Associate Supervisor/s
Administrative Assistant (Research)
Annual Progress Report7
„For research students the annual progress report form and the annual review process are
mechanisms whereby the faculty can be assured that satisfactory progress is being made‟
(University of Sydney Postgraduate Studies Handbook ).
The Annual Progress Report process consists of completion of a proforma (see Appendix 1 –
Form Downloads, Annual Progress Report Orange Template) by the student, PS and Sub Dean
(Sydney Research Students). This will be completed by the 11th-12th month of the candidature,
and then each twelve months thereafter until the thesis is submitted.
Completion of the Annual Progress Report is initiated by the Administrative Assistant
(Research).
Annual Review Process8
The Annual Review Process („Departmental Review‟) is part of a University-wide review of
progress system. Departments are required to maintain a formal review process whereby the
candidature of each postgraduate research student is reviewed at the anniversary of their
enrolment throughout their candidature. The review‟s purpose is to assist the candidate and
relies on full and open communication…. “The review shall include an assessment of the
research project, including the resources being made available, the candidate's progress and the
supervisory arrangements. It shall include participation by a staff member who is not the
supervisor or the head of department or school and should normally be expected to include the
postgraduate coordinator. There will normally be a segment where the student has the
opportunity to discuss in confidence his or her progress in the absence of the supervisor”
(University of Sydney Postgraduate Studies Handbook ). The focus of this review is the
academic welfare of the student. Annual review is considered best practice by the University‟s
Graduate Studies Committee.
7 Approved by Board of Postgraduate Studies March 1998.
8 Approved by Board of Postgraduate Studies March 1998.
20
The review process will include the following steps:
1. After reviewing the Annual Progress Report, the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)
consults with the PS and the student to appoint a Review Panel that can deal with all issues
or concerns identified in the Progress Report or raised verbally by the supervisor or student.
The Review Panel should consist of Chair, two experienced academics (one of whom may
be the associate supervisor) and the PS.
2. The Panel meets with the student in person or using audio- or video-conferencing facilities
to discuss any of the written or verbal concerns identified by the supervisor and student. This
meeting is normally first held in the 12th-13th month of the candidature. The supervisor/s
leave the meeting for a period of time so that the remaining panel members may discuss the
supervision with the student.
3. The Chair of the Review Panel prepares a written report on the outcome of the meeting (see
Appendix I of the Orange Report template). This report is subsequently included in Board
papers for noting and then copied to the student‟s file in Client Services.
4. If action is required, the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) works with the PS and
student on the necessary action, consulting the Committee for approval at the Committee‟s
meeting or through email, as appropriate.
The normal expectation is an annual meeting throughout the candidature. More frequent review
meetings may be held where it is deemed to be of benefit to the student.
Preparation for Review Panels. Committee members find it beneficial to receive a document
which represents the project‟s state of play (e.g. project proposal, progress report, and/or thesis
plan) and copies of any publications to date. The PS is responsible for ensuring that the students
prepares and distributes these documents a reasonable time prior to the meeting.
Facilities for Review Panels. In some Review Committee meetings it is found necessary to take
the student through his/her work and thinking in an exhaustive manner. Where this is foreseen,
the panel meeting should be held where facilities such as a white board are available.
POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH SUPPORT SCHEME (PRSS)
The PRSS was introduced by the University in 2001 to provide direct support for currently
enrolled postgraduate research students. Under the scheme, funds are allocated to Schools or
Departments (in some cases Faculties) based on their higher degree research enrolment figures
in the previous year.
Who is eligible for funds?
21
Currently enrolled PhD students, full-time or part-time, are eligible to apply for funds under
the PRSS provided their candidature does not exceed eight full-time semesters (or part-time
equivalent at the closing date for applications.
Enrolled Masters by research students, full-time or part-time, are eligible to apply for funds
provided their candidature does not exceed four full-time semester (or part-time equivalent)
at the closing date for applications.
Other eligibility criteria
Applications will not be considered if the students have not demonstrated satisfactory
progress towards timely completion of the degree and/or the period of candidature has
been exceeded.
Justification for the use of funds. A brief statement outlining the benefits to the
application‟s candidature.
Support by the applicant’s supervisor/s.
Any achievement related to the research
CSU operating funds
Operating funds to defray costs directly associated with the student‟s research project are
provided by CSU at the rate of $2,750 per semester for full-time students and $1,375 per
semester for part-time students.
Guidelines for the use of this finding may be accessed from the „Maintenance Allocation
Guidelines” link at http://www.csu.edu.au/research/higher_degrees/funds/
A budget outlining expected expenses should be included in the Research Proposal.
Insurance Matters
Postgraduate research students need to be clear about how they are covered by insurance.
Completion of Authorities to Travel for travel within Australia and overseas are FRM‟s way of
determining official travel.
22
EARLY SUBMISSION OF PHD
Candidates undertaking a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) at the University of Sydney are required
to submit the thesis for examination after a minimum length of candidature.
Queries relating to the early submission of a PhD thesis should be directed to the Sub-Dean,
Sydney Research students.
Refer to Appendix 1, Form Downloads, to access the form (Application for early submission of
Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) thesis. This form is to be used for applications to be considered in
accordance with Part 10, Division 4, section 78(4) of the University of Sydney (Amendment Act)
rule 1999 as amended. This clause states that in exceptional circumstances, the Chair of the
Academic Board may accept for examination a PhD thesis submitted by a candidate enrolled for
less than the minimum length of candidature.
Applications submitted in accordance with this provision are considered on a case-by-case basis.
All PhD requirements must be met, including that the work submitted was undertaken during
candidature, and evidence must be produced that the candidate has made exceptional progress
during candidature.
Applications for consideration by the Chair of the Academic Board should be completed by the
candidate, supervisor and head of department and submitted to the Administrative Assistant,
Research for a recommendation from the Dean to the Chair of the Academic Board.
To complete the application:
clearly state the length of time by which candidature is requested to be reduced (and thesis
to be submitted early) and the reason; and
attach any supporting documentation.
23
THESIS: SUBMISSION
Key People
Chair (RMRI Management Committee)
Student
Primary Supervisor
Administrative Assistant (Research)
Thesis Format
Theses are normally expected to be presented in traditional printed format (and currently must
be so lodged with the University and FRM libraries, with inclusions where appropriate).
Guidelines are provided at http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/research/usyd More
detailed guidelines are provided in the Resolutions of Academic Board regarding form and
binding of theses at
http://www.usyd.edu.au/ab/policies/Higher_Degree_Theses.pdf
Also refer to the SUPRA publication “The Thesis Guide” at
http://www.supra.usyd.edu.au/Pub/Thesis_Guide/TG-04.pdf
Readiness for Examination
The Primary Supervisor must sign the Certificate of Suitability for Examination (Appendix 1,
Research Forms: PhD or MPhil Submission Statement of Supervisor) prior to the student‟s
submission of the thesis. The Administrative Assistant (Research) acknowledges receipt of the
thesis for examination (Appendix 1, Lodgement of Higher Degree Thesis).
24
THESIS: EXAMINATION – MPHIL(RURMGMT)
Key People Chair (RMRI Management Committee)
Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)
Administrative Assistant (Research)
Primary Supervisor
Procedures are fully detailed in the diagrams on the following pages.
Responsibility
Examination of research master‟s theses is under FRM‟s control while examination of doctoral
theses is carried out under the direction of the University‟s PhD subcommittee of the Graduate
Studies Committee.
Degree of MPhil(RurMgmt): Appointment of Examiners9
Appointment of examiners is discussed generally in Chapter 4 in the University of Sydney
Postgraduate Studies Handbook.
Number of Examiners. Two (2) (at least one of whom is external to the university).
Appointment of Examiners. Appointed by RMRI Management Committee on advice by the
Chair. Although University guidelines allow for appointment of the student's supervisor or
associate supervisor, FRM guidelines are that all examiners will be appointed from outside
FRM.
1. The Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) and the student's supervisor consult on
appropriate examiners and informally determine whether the selected persons would be
willing to undertake the task.
2. A list of nominated examiners is formally presented (see Appendix 1, MPhil Appointment of
Examiners Form) to the Chair of the RMRI Management Committee
3. Once the examiners have been agreed by the RMRI Management Committee, the
Administrative (Research) sends a letter of invitation to the examiners together with FRM
guidelines on the expectations of the degree and the thesis, and the Examiner's Comment
form (Appendix 1, Form downloads, MPhil Examiners report).
9 Approved by Board of Postgraduate Studies June 1994.
25
Master's Thesis Examination:
Two months before planned submission
Student writes to Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)
advising of intention to
submit within three months
Sub Dean (Sydney
Research Students): 1. acknowledges student's
advice in writing
2. reminds Primary
Supervisor that it is time
to nominate thesis
examiners
Primary Supervisor
1. completes any discussion of possible examiners with student
2. informally discusses proposed examiners with Sube Dean
(Sydney Research Students)
3. informally sounds out proposed examiners on their willingness
to examine
4. formally presents list of proposed examiners (2 plus reserve on
pro forma) to Chair, RMRI Management Committee
5. if not previously done as part of an Annual Review Report,
confirms in writing that the student has completed the
graduation requirement of seminar presentation or advises when
and how this requirement will be met.
Administrative Assistant (Research) advises Committee members of proposed examiners and requests
comment/confirmation. This will be carried our by email consultation if a Committee meeting is not imminent.
Administrative Assistant (Research) formally invites proposed examiners to
undertake the task with advice on
expectations, amount of honorarium and
timeline.
If one of the initial examiners is unable to
undertake the task, the reserve examiner is
then invited.
Primary Supervisor or Student advises the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) in
writing if the proposed submission date slips
behind by more than a month, proposing a new
submission date.
Chair (RMRI Management Committee) writes to examiners to advise delay in submission and ask each examiner whether he/she is still available to complete the task in the requested timeframe.
If either of the agreed examiners is now unable to undertake the task, the reserve examiner is invited to examine.
When a reserve examiner is asked to examine, a second reserve examiner is then nominated.
26
Master's Thesis Examination:
submission and examination
Student submits to Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) required number of theses, 300 word summary,
MPhil Submission Supervisor Statement, Lodgement of Higher Degree Thesis, Originality of work pro forma.
Administrative Assistant (Research) dispatches thesis, examination guidelines, and examination
report form to examiners.
Administrative
Assistant (Research) sends reminder letter after eight weeks if report not
received
Administrative Assistant (Research) receives reports. When all
reports are received, recommendations are considered by Chair (RMRI
Management Committee) and action taken as follows.
Outcome A:
If both examiners agree to award, or to award with corrections to typographic errors only, the
Chair accepts the recommendations on behalf
of the Board and writes to the student and
Supervisor/s appropriately.
Outcome B:
In the case of any other recommendations from the examiners, the Chair asks the Primary
Supervisor to consider the examiner's reports
confidentially and, in consultation with the Board
Chair, to prepare a recommendation to the Board.
The student is not included in these
considerations
Outcome A: The results are reported by the Chair to the RMRI Management Committee at its next
meeting.
Outcome B: The RMRI Management Committee considers the recommendation and decides on an
appropriate course of action with regard to awarding the subject to correction of typographic errors,
emendation, revision for re-non-award, or in exceptional cases appointment of a third examiner assessor.
The Chair then writes to the student and supervisor/s appropriately.
27
Master's Thesis Examination
Thesis finalisation
The Chair's letter to the candidate on the results of examination will specify the remaining conditions to be met
by the student before the degree is awarded. These will usually be:
Option A:
1. Correction of any
typographic errors
2. Formal binding as
required
3. Submission of
required number of copies to the Sub
Dean (Sydney
Research Students).
Option B (I)
1. Revision of parts (emendation) of
the thesis document
2. Review of the changes by an
appointed person (usually the
Principal Supervisor)
3. Submission of a report by the
appointed person to the Board that
the required work has been
satisfactorily completed according
to the conditions stated.
Option B (ii)
1. Revision of the
whole thesis document.
2. Re-submission
for re-
examination.
The RMRI Management Committee accepts the revised thesis and
agrees to awarding of the degree or if not satisfied determines further
action.
On acceptance, the Chair writes to the student so advising and
providing instructions on remaining steps.
On receipt of the required number of formally bound theses the Sub Dean (Sydney Research
Students) will advise the Client Services Manager to:
1. add the student's name to the next graduation list
2. write to the student advising that all graduation requirements have been met and that the
degree will be awarded at the next graduation ceremony.
28
THESIS: EXAMINATION - PHD
Key People
Chair (RMRI Management Committee)
Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students)
Administrative Assistant (Research)
Primary Supervisor
Chair (University of Sydney Graduate Studies Committee PhD Subcommittee)
Procedures are fully detailed in the diagrams on the following pages.
Responsibilities
Examination of doctoral theses is carried out under the direction of the PhD subcommittee of
the University‟s Graduate Studies Committee. Operationally, the PhD subcommittee is
primarily involved when examination is completed and a recommendation regarding awarding
of the degree is being made.
Degree of PhD: Appointment of Examiners
The Resolutions of Senate relating to the degree of Doctor of Philosophy provide for faculties to
appoint three examiners of a thesis submitted for the degree, two of whom shall be external to
the University, and for the appointment to be reported to the Academic Board. The Academic
Board has delegated its powers and responsibilities with respect to graduate studies matters to
the Research and Research Training Committee, who in turn has established the PhD Award
Sub-Committee to act on its behalf in the consideration of examiners appointed by faculties.
Examiners are recommended to the Chair (RMRI Management Committee) on the form in
Appendix 1, Research Forms, PhD Appointment of Examiners, following informal consultation
between the PS and Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students). Steps to ensure that examiners are
free from bias, for or against either the student or supervisor must be taken. This should include
a general discussion of a wide range of possible examiners with the student by the supervisor
and/or other academic head; the student, the supervisor, or the academic head may initiate such
discussion. Students may in addition advise the names of persons they do not wish to see
appointed as examiners giving their reasons in writing; this information will then inform
identification of appropriate supervisors. The consultative process, however, should not result in
the student being given the names of his/her examiners and care must be taken not to jeopardise
the integrity and independence of the examination process.
In order to reduce delays it is necessary to contact examiners in advance of their appointment to
see if they are willing and able to act within the time frame expected. Provision is also made on
the form for the nomination of a fourth person as an alternative examiner should one of the
recommended examiners decline to act, later withdraw or not complete the examination within
the time frame specified.
.
29
1. Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) and the student's supervisor consult on appropriate
examination and informally determine whether the selected persons would be willing to
undertake the task.
2. A list of nominated examiners is formally presented (see Appendix 1, PhD Appointment of
Examiners) to the Chair of the Committee by the Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students).
3. The Chair of the RMRI Management Committee presents the names of the examiners to the
RMRI Management Committee for approval as a confidential item.
4. Recommendations approved by the Management Committee are forwarded to the
University‟s PhD Award Sub-Committee by the Administrative Assistant (Research) at
least four weeks prior to the candidate’s expected submission date.
5. Once the Administrative Assistant is notified of formal approval of the examiners by the
PhD Award Sub-Committee , a formal letter of invitation to the examiners is then sent,
together with Academic Board guidelines on the expectations of the degree and the thesis,
and the Examiner's Comment form (Appendix 1, PhD Examiners Report form).
The following specific points should be noted:
The examiners should be known to be familiar with that the examiner should be known to be
familiar with the supervision and/or examination of research theses for the University and/or
other educational institutions (including overseas) and hence this detail is required on the
form. Full details of the examiners must also include title, position held, home institution
(and address of the institution) of each examiner. Recommendations for examiners who are
not persons of obvious academic standing must be supported with justifying statements.
Examiners should normally be still active in research/scholarship thus ensuring that their
knowledge of the field is current and hence this detail is requested on the form,
Recommendations for the appointment as examiner of someone who has retired should be
supported with a justifying statement including how long it has been since the person retired.
The Academic Board allows a supervisor to be appointed as examiner although individual
faculties may hold different policies on this matter. Normally a person should not be
recommended for appointment as an examiner if he or she has been a supervisor of the
student and is also the head of the department or academic unit concerned. If this is
considered academically necessary a justifying statement should be provided.
The University is concerned to minimise delay in the examining process. In cases where
examiners are not appointed in a timely manner, justification will be required by the Sub-
Committee, and as from November 2008 it will seek justification for examiners nominated
after the submission date.
When a PhD thesis is being presented for re-examination normally the original examiners
should be re-appointed provided they are available unless, in the opinion of the Faculty
concerned, the examiners have required modifications of the thesis that the Faculty deems to
30
be unnecessary or undesirable or there appear to be academic reasons for not appointing any
or all of the original examiners.
Reporting PhD Awards Made at FRM
PhD awards made at faculty level (see diagrams for guidelines) are reported at quarterly
intervals each year to the PhD Award Sub-Committee. The completed form should be
forwarded to the Secretary to the PhD Award Subcommittee as an email attachment, followed
by posting of the Certificate of Confirmation.
Both date of submission of the thesis and date the student is informed in writing of the
examination result must be included. The period between the two dates is the official
examination period. Any time taken for corrections or emendations leading to graduation is not
considered part of the examination period. Where the initial examination leads to a revision
requirement, both sets of dates must be included.
31
PhD Thesis Examination:
Three months before intended submission
Student writes to Sub Dean
(Sydney Research Students)
advising of intention to submit
within three months.
Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) 1. acknowledges student's advice in writing
2. reminds Principal Supervisor that it is time to nominate
thesis examiners
Primary Supervisor
1. completes any discussion of possible examiners with student
2. informally discusses proposed examiners with Chair (RMRI Management Committee)
3. informally sounds out proposed examiners on their willingness to examine
4. formally presents list of proposed examiners including reserve (3 plus 1 reserve on pro forma) to Chair
(RMRI Management Committee)
5. if not previously done as part of an Annual Review Report, confirms in writing to Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) that the student has completed the graduation requirement of seminar presentation
or advises when and how this requirement will be met.
Chair (RMRI Management Committee) advises Committee members of proposed examiners and requests
comment/confirmation. This will be carried out by email consultation if a Committee meeting is not imminent.
Chair (RMRI Management
Committee) advises the PhD Award
Subcommittee of the examiners to
be appointed.
Primary Supervisor or Student
advises Chair (RMRI Management
Committee) in writing if the proposed
submission date slips behind by more
than a month, proposing a new intended
submission date.
Chair (RMRI Management Committee) 1. Writes to examiners to advise delay in submission and ask each examiner whether he/she is still available
to complete the task in the requested timeframe.
2. If any of the agreed examiners is now unable to undertake the task, the reserve examiner is invited to
examine.
3. When a reserve examiner is asked to examine, the Primary Supervisor is asked to propose a second
reserve examiner who is considered via the normal procedure.
32
PhD Thesis Examination:
Submission and presentation to examiners
Student submits to Sub Dean (Sydney Research Students) required number of copies (4), 300
word summary, PhD Submission Supervisor Statement, Lodgement of Higher Degree Thesis
& Originality of work pro forma.
Administrative Assistant (Research) dispatches thesis, examination guidelines, and
examination report form to each of the examiners.
Administrative Assistant (Research)
sends reminder letter after eight weeks if
report not received.
Administrative Assistant (Research) receives reports. When all reports are received,
recommendations are considered by Chair (RMRI Management Committee) and
appropriate action taken.
33
PhD Thesis Examination:
Consideration of examiners' recommendations
Agreement or Minor
Disagreement of Examiners'
Recommendations:
If all examiners agree to award, or to
award with corrections to
typographic errors only, the Chair
accepts the recommendations on
behalf of the Committee and the
University and writes to the student
and supervisor/s appropriately.
Differences among Examiners'
Recommendations #1
If one or more examiners recommends
minor emendations and the others
recommend either „award‟ or „award
subject to correction of typographical
errors‟ AND the HOD (= Faculty Dean)
also recommends that the degree be
awarded subject to ALL emendations
recommended by the examiners, then the
Faculty should award the degree subject
to all those emendations without
referring to the PhD Award
Subcommittee. The Chair makes a
recommendation to the Committee
accordingly.
The Committee‟s recommendation to
award is advised in writing to the student
and supervisor by the Chair and is reported
to the PhD Awards Subcommittee in a
quarterly report.
Differences among Examiners'
Recommendations #2
When the examiners make any other
combination of recommendations other
than those outlined in Differences Among
Examiners‟ Recommendations # 1 (above
right) OR when the examiners make the
same combination of recommendations as
outlined above but the Head of Department
recommends award subject to some
emendations: The Chair makes a
recommendation to the Committee
accordingly, after consultation with the
Primary Supervisor.
This is advised to the Committee at
its next meeting, and to the PhD
Subcommittee of the Graduate
Studies Committee in a quarterly
report.
The Chair then sends all required
documentation (see “thesis documentation
checklist” in Appendix 1) to the PhD
Subcommittee Committee for
determination of the University's final
decision. This documentation will at a
minimum include the student file, the
Committee‟s recommendation, the
examiners‟ reports, the HOD‟s report and
evidence of consultation with the Primary
Supervisor.
The resulting decision of the PhD
Awards Subcommittee is communicated
to the Chair and advised in writing by
him to the student and Primary
Supervisor
34
PhD Thesis Examination:
Thesis finalisation
Option A:
1. Correction of any
typographic errors
2. Formal binding as
required
3. Submission of
required number of
copies to the Sub
Dean (Sydney
Research Students)
Option B(i)
1. Revision of parts
(emendation) of the
thesis document.
2. Review of the changes
by an appointed person
(usually the Principal
Supervisor, then HOD)
3. Submission of a report
by the appointed person
to the Committee that
the required work has
been satisfactorily
completed according to
the conditions stated.
Option B(ii)
1. Revision of
the whole
thesis
document.
2. Re-
submission
for re-
examination.
The Committee accepts the revised
thesis and agrees to awarding of the
degree or if not satisfied determines
further action.
On acceptance, the Chair writes to the
student so advising and providing
instructions on remaining steps.
On receipt of the required number of formally bound theses the Sub Dean (Sydney Research
Students) advises the Client Services Manager to:
1. add the student's name to the next graduation list
2. write to the student advising that all graduation requirements have been met and that
the degree will be awarded at the next graduation ceremony.
The Chair's letter to the student on the results of examination will specify the remaining
conditions to be met by the student before the degree is awarded. These will usually include:
35
APPENDIX 1 HIGHER DEGREE FORM DOWNLOADS
The following forms can be accessed at:
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/research/usyd/
Agreeing on Supervision Responsibilities
Application for early submission of PhD thesis
Annual Progress Report Orange Template
Appointment of Associate Supervisor
DSAg Appointment of Examiners
DSAg Examiners report
DSAg Submission Statement of Supervisor
Guidelines for Preparing Research Proposals
Lodgement of Higher Degree Thesis
MPhil Appointment of Examiners
MPhil Examiners report
MPhil Submission Statement of Supervisor
Originality of Work
PhD Appointment of Examiners
PhD Examiners Guidelines
PhD Examiners Report form
PhD Submission Statement of Supervisor
Primary Supervisors Research Proposal Review Report
Research Proposal Review Report
Revised Resubmitted DSAg examiners report
Revised Resubmitted MPhil Examiners Report
Revised Resubmitted PhD examiners report
Thesis Documentation Checklist
36
APPENDIX 2 SUPERVISION: APPOINTMENT OF ASSOCIATE
SUPERVISORS10
It is generally University policy, and so FRM policy, to appoint one or more associate
supervisors to look after postgraduate research students (see The University of Sydney
Postgraduate Studies Handbook).
1. The Associate Dean (Research) and the Primary Supervisor confer about associate
supervisor(s) for a student and come to an agreement which is in the best interest of the
student. The student should be consulted at an appropriate stage.
2. The proposed Associate Supervisor is approached by the Primary Supervisor to take on the
role in an honorary capacity if not an eligible member of FRM staff. (In the case of
individuals from elsewhere in the University a case-by-case review of resource implications
would normally occur, but the normal expectation would also be of an honorary capacity.)
3. On informal agreement by the proposed Associate Supervisor:
For FRM staff, the Pro Dean is advised and their workload negotiated and adjusted
appropriately
For individuals external to the University, a nomination is made to the FRM Dean using the
form which follows.
4. On satisfactory resolution of Step 3, the Associate Dean (Research) writes to the nominated
Associate Supervisor on behalf of the FRM, expressing thanks for agreement to undertake
the role, listing any expectations agreed in consultation with the Primary Supervisor and the
proposed Associate Supervisor and providing copies of the University's and FRM‟s
guidelines on postgraduate studies where appropriate.
5. When the student under supervision has achieved the award the FRM Dean, on initiation by
the Administrative Assistant, Research), will write to the Associate Supervisor thanking
him/her for the contribution to FRM‟s research and education programs.
10
From procedural policy document approved by College Principal June 1995.
37
APPENDIX 3 TRANSFER FROM MPHIL TO PHD CANDIDATURE
The expectations given in Guidelines for Preparing Proposals for Postgraduate Research
(refer: http://www.orange.usyd.edu.au/research/formslist.htm) must be addressed and the
following additional information must be provided:
Three-page progress report of phase 1 of the project summarising the main findings,
conclusions and any complications in terms of achieving the set objectives.
The relationship between the completed and proposed research must be clearly articulated.
In addition to the Transfer Project Proposal, a complementary document may be added as an
appendix to provide other evidence that support the student‟s ability and the potential of the
research project to produce a successful PhD Thesis. This evidence could include publications,
additional funds attracted, collaboration with other organisations.