Policies and procedures
These Regulations form part of Research Policy 10 Higher Degrees by Research
Preamble
1. Higher Degree by Research (HDR) programs and
Admission Criteria
2. Research Degree Graduate Qualities
3. Application for admission
4. Enrolment and re-enrolment
5. Research proposal
6. Programs of research
7. Supervision requirements
8. Monitoring progress
9. Unsatisfactory progress
10. Suspension
11. Termination of candidature
12. Academic integrity in research
13. Grievance procedures
14. The thesis
15. Examination of the thesis
16. Examinations Panel
17. Final grades and transcript notations for non-enrolled HDR
students
18. Reinstatement/ re-admission
19. Eligibility for the degree
20. Intellectual property
21. Quality control
Appendix 1: Guidelines for the preparation for
research proposals
Appendix 2a: Guidelines for the presentation of
the thesis, or exegesis
Appendix 2b: Guidelines for the presentation of Artefact thesis
Appendix 2c: Guidelines for the presentation of
Thesis by Publication
Appendix 3: Statement of minimum resources for
higher degree by research
students
Appendix 4:
Research Degree Graduate Qualities
Appendix 5: Academic integrity in research
Research Degrees Committee is responsible to Academic Board for the conduct of all matters pertaining to Higher Degree by Research (HDR) programs. Research Degrees Committee is also responsible for the administration of these academic Regulations in accordance with University’s policies.
The relevant Head of School or Institute Director shall appoint Research Degree Coordinators to oversee the quality of all components of the HDR program and monitor the progress of Higher Degree by Research (HDR) students.
Note: The term Division or Institute also refers to the Centre for Regional Engagement.
Higher Degrees by Research programs at University of South Australia are:
All international applicants must meet the prescribed proficiency standards in English language established by Academic Board.
In addition to specific candidature prerequisites below, Clause 3 outlines admission criteria and procedures for all HDR applicants.
PhD programs provide training and education with the objective of producing graduates with the capacity to conduct research independently at a high level of originality and quality. By the end of the degree program, the PhD student ought to be capable of conceiving, designing and carrying to completion a research program without supervision.
The purpose of the PhD is to advance knowledge and/or the application of knowledge through the preparation of a substantial piece of work which represents a significant contribution to a particular field of study.
The PhD student submits for examination a written thesis (normally a maximum of 80,000 words) or, where indicated in the program documentation, a thesis which consists of written and artefact components. In this context, an artefact means a product of human creative skill or its application which cannot adequately be described in words, for example a painting, performance or multi-media presentation. An HDR student submitting a thesis with artefact components should refer to Appendix 2c - Guidelines for the Presentation of Artefact Thesis.
1.1.1 PhD admission criteria
An applicant for a place in a Doctor of Philosophy program must satisfy the Research Degrees Committee of competence to undertake a higher degree by research by:
Where UniSA has a signed and approved relationship agreement with an overseas institution and where a joint research project is established between the two institutions, an HDR student may undertake a Jointly Badged PhD. This applies both to UniSA enrolled students who undertake part of their research at an overseas institution and to students enrolled in an overseas institution who undertake a joint research project at UniSA.
The benefits of undertaking a jointly badged PhD include:
A supervisor is to be appointed from each institution, with the nominated supervisor at UniSA being the Principal Supervisor while the student is studying at UniSA.
Any ethics clearances obtained from an overseas institution must also meet Australian standards and have the approval of the appropriate UniSA Ethics and Safety Committee.
The agreement for a Jointly Badged PhD Program may necessitate negotiation with the overseas institution on a range of issues, including:
Students undertaking jointly badged PhD programs must nominate a home institution and the examination will be organised by the home institution. The relationship agreement will take into account the PhD thesis and examination requirements of UniSA, but may include provision for a viva if required by the overseas institution.
A copy of the final thesis will be submitted to each institution. If the language of submission is in a language other than in English, as a minimum, the summary of the thesis shall be provided in English.
The conferral of the award will be by the nominated home institution.
The single parchment issued should contain details of both participating institutions.
1.2.1 Jointly badged PhD admission criteria
An applicant for a place in a jointly badged PhD program must meet the PhD admission criteria of the home institution and pay the appropriate fees applicable to that institution.
PhD students from overseas institutions studying at UniSA must meet the prescribed proficiency standards in English language established by Academic Board.
The University of South Australia offers two types of Professional Doctorates based on the funding criteria of the Commonwealth Government's Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations:
The Professional Doctorate by Research is a rigorous program of advanced study and research, designed specifically to meet the needs of industry and professional groups. Professional Doctorate by Research programs foster excellence in professional practice by developing the capacity of individuals to lead the development of knowledge in their professional contexts. The Professional Doctorate by Research encourages close cooperation between the University, industry and profession and provides a framework for the integration of professional expertise and scholarly inquiry.
The coursework component of the Professional Doctorate by Research is designed to build on the HDR student's professional expertise by exposing them to leading and challenging ideas in their fields. The research component of the Professional Doctorate by Research shall direct and inform change in order to benefit the workplace and/or professional context. Supported by expert supervisors, Professional Doctorate by Research students bring the highest level of systematic research knowledge and practice to professional projects.
The Professional Doctorate by Research student submits for examination a body of research work, hereafter known as a thesis. The thesis is as specified in the program approval documentation and may be a dissertation, portfolio of work, exegesis, artefact, published articles or written project, or any combination thereof, as specified for the particular program. Refer to Clause 15.3.2.
1.3.1 Professional Doctorate by Research admission criteria
An applicant for a place in a Professional Doctorate by Research program must satisfy the relevant Dean, Research (or equivalent) of competence to undertake a higher degree by research by:
Masters by Research programs have the objective of training HDR students in:
The Masters by Research student submits for examination a written thesis, or where indicated in the program documentation, a thesis which consists of written and artefact components. In this context, an artefact means a product of human creative skill or its application which cannot adequately be described in words, e.g. a painting, performance or multi-media presentation. An HDR student submitting a thesis with artefact components should refer to Appendix 2c - Guidelines for the Presentation of Artefact Thesis.
1.4.1 Masters by Research admission criteria
An applicant for a place in a Masters by research program must satisfy the Research Degrees Committee of competence to undertake a higher degree by research by:
- an Honours degree or a Bachelors degree with honours; or
- a Bachelors degree and a preliminary course of study of honours standard; or
- an appropriate Masters degree; or
2.1 The University has defined the full range of competencies embedded in the higher degree by research experience in its statement of Research Degree Graduate Qualities (see Appendix 4). These qualities or competencies are considered to be transferable from the research environment to the workplace, whether academic or professional.
2.2 As part of their research training, HDR students are required to participate in Research Support Activities, the bases for which are the processes that develop the seven generic Research Degree Graduate Qualities.
For PhD and Masters by Research students, participation in Research Support Activities is negotiated between the HDR student and supervisors in the Statement of Agreement, taking into account elaboration of the Research Degree Graduate Qualities in terms of the particular needs of the HDR student and the particular field of their research. Participation may be reviewed and modified in subsequent planning and reviews of progress meetings between the HDR student and supervisor.
2.3 For Professional Doctorate by Research commencing students, participation in Research Support Activities is negotiated between the HDR student and the Program Director, taking into account elaboration of the Research Degree Graduate Qualities in terms of the particular needs of the HDR student and the particular field of their research. Participation may be reviewed and modified in subsequent planning and reviews of progress meetings.
2.4 HDR students who commenced their research after 1 January 2004 are required to complete a Final Review of Progress, which provides evidence of achievement and experience in the seven areas of the Research Degree Graduate Qualities. Together, the thesis and the Final Review of Progress provide information about the totality of individual achievement in the HDR program.
3.1 An application for admission to a place in an HDR program shall be made on the prescribed application form and shall include a proposed program of study in the form of a research outline, which should be prepared after consultation with the proposed Principal Supervisor/ Professional Doctorate by Research Program Director. The research outline will include:
3.2 The relevant Dean, Research (or equivalent) shall recommend to the Research Degrees Committee on admission to a place in the HDR program taking into consideration the following factors:
3.3 The Research Degrees Committee shall approve or reject admission to a place in the HDR program and may set conditions on an offer of admission. An offer of admission comprises a letter from the University of South Australia’s Graduate Studies Office, together with an acceptance of offer form for completion by the applicant. Correspondence from other parties does not constitute an offer of admission.
3.4 The Research Degrees Committee reserves the right not to offer a place.
3.5 The Research Degrees Committee's decision is final and no correspondence will be entered into.
4.1.1 An applicant who accepts an offer of admission to a place in a Higher Degree by Research program shall commence within the time specified in the letter of offer unless a written request for a deferment of enrolment is upheld by the Dean Research (or equivalent)1 and approved by the Research Degrees Committee (refer Clause 4.9).
4.1.2 Failure to enrol within the specified time subject to 4.1.1 may result in the HDR applicant forfeiting their right to a place.
4.1.3 All HDR students who have gained admission to a place will be enrolled as provisional students and will be subject to the provisions contained in clause 4.3.
4.2.1 The degree commences from the date of initial enrolment, unless otherwise determined by the Research Degrees Committee.
4.2.2 HDR students must comply with the enrolment dates indicated by the University.
HDR students are enrolled provisionally until the requirements for confirmation of candidature are met.
4.3.1 Within the equivalent of a maximum of six months of commencement in a higher degree by research program:
4.3.2 The relevant Dean, Research (or equivalent) will recommend to the Dean of Graduate Studies whether the HDR student has met the requirements for confirmation of candidature and the Dean of Graduate Studies will inform the HDR student whether their candidature is confirmed or rejected.
4.3.3 An HDR student transferring from another higher degree by research must complete the Confirmation of Candidature requirements.
4.3.4 An HDR student who is not able to complete the Confirmation of Candidature requirements within the provisional enrolment timeframe must apply for an extension at least one month in advance to the Dean Research (or equivalent). Any application for extension must be justified and include a supporting statement from the Principal Supervisor and be agreed to by the Dean Research (or equivalent). Normally, an extension will be granted for a maximum of three months.
Subject to clause 4.3 (Provisional Enrolment and Confirmation of Candidature), an enrolled HDR student shall be re-enrolled in each calendar year following initial enrolment until all components of the degree program have been completed and the thesis is submitted for examination, or the maximum period of allocated candidature is reached, or until suspension or termination of the enrolment by the Research Degrees Committee, whichever comes first.
4.4.1 Re-enrolment is subject to approval by the Research Degrees Committee upon recommendation from the relevant Dean, Research (or equivalent) who shall review and report annually on the progress of each of its HDR students (see Clause 8 Monitoring progress).
4.4.2 Where progress is deemed to be unsatisfactory, the Research Degrees Committee may suspend or terminate (See Clauses 10 and 11) the enrolment of an HDR student on a recommendation to that effect by the Dean Research (or equivalent).
4.4.3 No HDR student is required to be enrolled in a study period during which leave of absence has been approved in advance for that whole study period (for this purpose, a study period is defined as either 1 January to 30 June, or 1 July to 31 December).
4.4.4 An HDR student required to undertake major revision of the thesis after examination may be required to be re-enrolled prior to re-examination.
4.5.1 The normal maximum length of the doctoral program will be 3.5 years full-time equivalent from the initial enrolment date. Research doctorate students are allocated a maximum of four years of full-time equivalent study to complete their degree to allow for examination results and possible resubmission.
4.5.2 From the initial enrolment date, Masters by Research students are allocated a maximum of two years (full-time equivalent) to complete their degree.
4.5.3 The periods of maximum candidature, as outlined in 4.5.1 and 4.5.2, include provisional enrolment, any periods of candidature for any previous higher degree by research prior to transfer, and exclude periods of deferment and leave of absence granted by the Research Degrees Committee.
4.5.4 If the thesis has not been examined within the period of maximum candidature, the HDR student shall be required to show cause to Research Degrees Committee why enrolment should not be deemed to have lapsed and supervision discontinued.
4.5.5 In exceptional circumstances, in order to complete the degree requirements, Research Degrees Committee may approve extra time in addition to the maximum allocated time outlined above, subject to the payment of any applicable tuition fees, availability of supervision and subject to progress being monitored on a prescribed basis by the Dean Research (or equivalent).
4.5.6 Requests to go over the allocated time of candidature must be applied for on the appropriate form. HDR students shall not assume that their request has been approved unless they have been notified by the Graduate Studies Office.
4.5.7 The minimum period which may be approved by the Research Degrees Committee for a Doctoral degree shall normally be not less than eighteen months full-time equivalent for a Doctoral student, or not less than twelve months full-time equivalent for a Masters by Research student. In exceptional circumstances, the period of minimum enrolment may be reduced by the Research Degrees Committee, on a recommendation from the Dean Research (or equivalent).
The following clauses may not apply to international HDR students on an Australian government visa, who may only take limited leave on medical, exceptional or compassionate grounds.
4.6.1 An HDR student may change load from full-time to part-time candidature, or vice versa, provided that the Research Degrees Committee approves a recommendation from the Dean Research (or equivalent) to that effect.
4.6.2 Requests for change of load should be made on the appropriate form. HDR students shall not assume that their request has been approved unless they have been notified by the Graduate Studies Office.
The following clauses may not apply to international HDR students on an Australian government visa, who may only take limited leave on medical, exceptional or compassionate grounds.
4.7.1 An HDR student may change mode from internal to external candidature, or vice versa, provided that the Research Degrees Committee approves a recommendation from the Dean Research (or equivalent) to that effect.
4.7.2 Requests for change of mode should be applied for on the appropriate form. HDR students shall not assume that their request has been approved unless they have been notified by the Graduate Studies Office.
4.8.1 An HDR student may not enrol in a program leading to the award of another degree at this or another institution while enrolled in an higher degree by research program at this University.
4.8.2 Under exceptional circumstances, an HDR student may be permitted to enrol in a second program that complements the higher degree by research.
4.8.3 The HDR student must make a case to the Dean of Graduate Studies for permission to enrol in a second program, including evidence of academic achievement that indicates that the studies to be undertaken will not impact adversely on the progress of the research degree. The request must have the strong support of the supervisors and the Dean, Research (or equivalent).
4.8.4 Any hours devoted to such concurrent study are to be included within the time allowance for paid employment (see clause 6.7).
4.8.5 In each major review of progress, the supervisors will be required to advise if the concurrent enrolment has impacted adversely on the HDR student's progress in the program. If progress is not satisfactory, approval for concurrent enrolment will be rescinded.
4.8.6 An HDR student may be required to enrol in such complementary courses at this University as may be prescribed by the Research Degrees Committee.
The Research Degrees Committee, acting on the recommendation of the relevant Dean, Research (or equivalent), may permit the deferral of initial enrolment (refer clause 4.1) for a period not exceeding twelve months.
All students are entitled to twenty days recreation leave in each full-time equivalent year of enrolment. This is not deemed to be leave of absence for the purpose of calculating consumed candidacy load.
The following clauses may not apply to international HDR students on an Australian government visa, who may only take limited leave on medical, exceptional or compassionate grounds.
4.10.1 The Research Degrees Committee, acting on the advice of the relevant Dean, Research (or equivalent), may permit an HDR student to take leave of absence after enrolling but not within the period of provisional enrolment unless there are exceptional circumstances.
4.10.2 Any type of leave of absence taken during candidature will count towards the total amount of leave. This applies to both full-time and part-time HDR students.
4.10.3 Prior to commencing the leave, a request for leave of absence should be made on the appropriate form. Normally, retrospective leave will not be approved. The HDR student will be notified by the Graduate Studies Office of the outcome of their application.
4.10.4 Normally, leave of absence for reasons other than in 4.10.12 may only be taken for a maximum of six calendar months at any one time.
4.10.5 Normally, leave of absence will not be approved for an HDR student who has exceeded the allocated period of candidature (see clause 4.5).
4.10.6 The total period of the leave of absence accumulated in a given candidature will not normally exceed twelve calendar months. However, if the Research Degrees Committee deems the circumstances to be exceptional, leave in excess of twelve calendar months may be granted.
4.10.7 An HDR student requiring leave in excess of twenty four calendar months must apply to the Dean of Graduate Studies. Any application for this leave must be justified by the HDR student and shall include a supporting statement from the Principal Supervisor and be supported by the Dean Research (or equivalent).
4.10.8 Reasons for leave of absence include medical, adoption, maternity, carer's leave, family leave, personal and financial.
4.10.9 An HDR student is entitled to three months maternity leave during the candidacy. An HDR student holding a University-funded scholarship who has completed twelve months of their award will be entitled to three months paid maternity leave.
4.10.10 An HDR student is entitled to ten days carer's leave in each calendar year. An HDR student holding a University-funded scholarship who has completed twelve months of their award will be entitled to ten days paid carer's leave in each calendar year.
4.10.11 An HDR student whose partner gives birth or adopts is entitled to ten days parental leave. An HDR student holding University-funded scholarships and who has completed twelve months of their award will be entitled to ten days paid parental leave.
4.10.12 In exceptional circumstances, leave of absence of up to twelve calendar months may be granted to an HDR student wishing to enrol for a program leading to the award of another degree or diploma, provided that:
Leave undertaken for this purpose will count towards the total amount of leave to be taken.
(Also see clause 4.8 Concurrent Enrolment)
4.10.13 At the discretion of the Dean of Graduate Studies, an HDR student may be placed on administrative leave for up to six months where progress is being impeded for reasons such as change of supervision or approval of change to the program of research.
An HDR student who wishes to withdraw should immediately complete the appropriate form and submit it to the Principal Supervisor in the first instance.
4.12.1 An HDR student may be permitted to transfer or upgrade to a different HDR program provided that the criteria for admission have been met and the Research Degrees Committee approves a recommendation from the Dean Research (or equivalent). The recommendation must:
If approved, the period of enrolment (excluding periods of deferral and leaves of absence) will be counted towards the new degree.
4.12.2 An HDR student who wishes to transfer or upgrade should apply on the appropriate form. HDR students shall not assume that their request has been approved unless they have been notified by the Graduate Studies Office.
This section does not apply to HDR transnational, offshore or Jointly Badged PhD students.
4.13.1 In all cases where an HDR student is studying away from the University to pursue research overseas or interstate for more than six weeks at any one time, the student must obtain written permission from the Dean of Graduate Studies.
4.13.2 International HDR students are required to ensure their proposed arrangements to study away from the University do not conflict with their visa requirements.
4.13.3 Requests to study away from the University, either overseas or interstate, must have a supporting statement from both the supervisor and the Dean Research (or equivalent). This statement will include arrangements for supervision.
4.13.4 Normally, a request to study away from the University within the first six months of full-time equivalent enrolment will not be supported.
4.13.5 Normally, the maximum period of study away from the University will be six months.
4.13.6 An HDR student may include recreational travel during their time of study away but approval must be obtained prior to travel.
4.13.7 An HDR student cannot use the length of time spent overseas as a reason for either an extension of candidacy or scholarship.
4.13.8 Any HDR student permitted to study away from the University must comply with the requirements of the overseas institution, undertake appropriate health and vaccination advice, consult regularly the Australian Government’s travel advisory and ensure appropriate insurance cover is held.
A research proposal must be approved by the Dean Research (or equivalent) before an PhD or Masters by Research student can proceed with the research program and move from provisional to confirmed candidature.
5.1 The structure and terminology of the research proposal may vary between different HDR programs. The form and content of the research proposal will be as specified by the Division/Institute/School for the relevant program.
5.2 Within the research proposal, the HDR student should explain how the Research Degree Graduate Qualities will be developed during the program. (See Appendix 1 for Guidelines for the preparation of research proposals and Appendix 4, Research Degree Graduate Qualities)
5.3 The research proposal must be submitted with a statement of project-specific resources required for completion of the research program, as identified by the HDR student and supervisors and endorsed by the Head of School (or equivalent).
5.4 Unless an extension has been granted:
5.5 An HDR student who transfers between higher degrees by research programs must have their research proposal reviewed by the Dean Research (or equivalent).
5.6 The Dean Research (or equivalent) will establish a panel to review each HDR student's research proposal and will establish guidelines for the composition of the panel. A panel meeting may occur face-to-face, by teleconference or by email.
5.7 Each HDR student must present their Research Proposal to the review panel and include the statement of approved resources.
5.8 The Panel will advise the Dean Research (or equivalent) that:
5.9 On the advice of the panel, the Dean Research (or equivalent) will formally advise the HDR student of acceptance or otherwise of the research proposal. Where necessary, the panel chair will provide written feedback from the panel to the HDR student and the Dean Research (or equivalent).
5.10 Based on the acceptance or rejection of the research proposal, the Dean Research (or equivalent) will recommend to the Dean of Graduate Studies:
5.11 In accordance with clause 4.3.2, the Dean of Graduate Studies will inform the HDR student of the Dean Research's (or equivalent) recommendation regarding confirmation of candidature.
6.1 An HDR student shall undertake a program of research under supervision in order to complete a thesis for examination.
6.2 The primary role of each full-time PhD and Masters by Research student is to work on their thesis and for all HDR students, to complete the degree within the maximum allocated time of enrolment.
6.3 An HDR student commencing after 1 January 2004 will enter into a formal Statement of Agreement with the supervisors regarding the completion of the research. This Agreement will:
6.4 An HDR student studying on campus is required to attend the Orientation Session and is also expected to participate in the on campus Research Support Activities. An HDR student studying off campus is required to watch the Orientation DVD and participate in online Research Support Activities.
6.5 The research and study shall be carried out either within the University or within an industrial, commercial, government, educational, research or other organisation approved by the Dean Research (or equivalent). The University will not require an HDR student to undertake employment at the institution.
6.6 If a Professional Doctorate by Research student is to complete a prescribed practical component in their program, normally the student shall be monitored by University staff who are recognised by the relevant Division/Institute as providing leadership in the relevant professional field. In the event that a student is supervised by professional leaders external to the University and approved by the Division, the Professional Doctorate by Research Program Director shall be responsible for monitoring the student’s progress.
6.7 The Research Degrees Committee recommends that full-time HDR students do not undertake paid employment for more than eight hours per week or for a total of the equivalent of eight hours per week over a twelve month period.
The requirements, authorities and procedures for the appointment of postgraduate research supervisors are outlined in Policy RES 8 Register of Postgraduate Research Supervisors.
7.1.1 Supervisors are appointed on the basis that their research expertise is appropriate to the research outline indicated in the application.
7.1.2 At the time of application, the relevant Dean Research (or equivalent) is responsible for ensuring that each PhD and Masters by Research student has a Principal Supervisor appointed.
7.1.3 For Professional Doctorate by Research students, supervisors will be appointed at either the commencement of the degree or prior to the commencement of the research component. The requirements will be as specified in the appropriate professional doctorate program information.
7.1.4 Unless co- or panel supervision is required, each HDR student shall have at least two supervisors appointed, one of whom shall be nominated as a Principal Supervisor and one as an Associate Supervisor.
7.1.5 A person external to the University appointed as Principal Supervisor to an HDR student must be accepted as an Adjunct to the University and must be a member of the Register of Postgraduate Research Supervisors.
7.1.6 When a research proposal is approved, the Division/ Institute shall ensure that resources, including supervision, are available for the research project in line with the University's Statement of minimum resources for HDR students.
7.2.1 Where appropriate, co-supervision may be established for an HDR student in lieu of a principal and associate supervisor. Co-supervision occurs where two academic staff members share responsibility for the principal supervision of an HDR student. Co-supervision may be preferred in instances where expertise is desired in more than one research area and where the research is cross-disciplinary.
7.2.2 Co-Supervisors must be members of the University's Register of Postgraduate Research Degree Supervisors.
7.2.3 For administrative purposes, the co-supervisor employed by the School or Institute in which the HDR student is enrolled is recorded as the Principal Supervisor and is preferred as the signatory for forms. Other co-supervisors will be recorded as 'co- supervisor'.
Supervisors shall carry out the duties and responsibilities as set out in the Code of Good Practice: Research degree management and supervision and in Research Policy 8, Register of Postgraduate Research Supervisors.
7.4.1 In the event that the designated Principal Supervisor is unable to supervise the HDR student effectively for a period of six weeks or more, the Dean Research (or equivalent) in consultation with the Research Degree Coordinator, Head of School/Institute Director and HDR student shall nominate a replacement supervisor for approval by the Research Degrees Committee, using the appropriate form.
7.4.2 In the event that the research proposal requires a change in supervision for its approval to occur, the Dean, Research, in conjunction with the HDR student, Research Degree Coordinator and Head of School/Institute Director, shall nominate a replacement supervisor for approval by the Research Degrees Committee.
7.4.3 Where an HDR student wishes to change the focus of the research after the research proposal is accepted and which requires a change in supervision, the student shall make application to the Dean Research (or equivalent) to vary the research. In these circumstances, the University reserves the right to decline the proposed change of focus.
8.1.1 An HDR student must make satisfactory progress in the research to obtain approval for re-enrolment in the program.
8.1.2 Professional Doctorate by Research students must also make satisfactory progress during the coursework component to obtain approval for re-enrolment in the program.
8.1.3 An HDR student shall have the right to discuss any matter pertaining to the progress of the candidature with the Principal Supervisor, the Research Degree Coordinator or the relevant Dean, Research (or equivalent), as appropriate, to resolve any impediment to that progress.
8.1.4 Each HDR student, Principal Supervisor and Research Degree Coordinator must undertake at least two documented planning and review sessions each year (for Professional Doctorate by Research students, this occurs in the research component of the program only). These will be known as the minor review and major review respectively. These reviews are the basis on which re-enrolment or otherwise is recommended.
8.1.5 For HDR students commencing after 1 January 2004, the Statement of Agreement shall inform the review of progress. For continuing HDR students, the previous planning and review documents will be the basis of the review.
8.1.6 Failure by an HDR student to undertake the minor and major reviews may result in suspension or termination of the candidature (see clauses 10 and 11).
The planning, review and report of progress shall be conducted in accordance with the following procedures:
8.2.1 It is the HDR student's responsibility to arrange separate times to discuss progress with supervisors and, if required, the Research Degree Coordinator. These meetings may occur face-to-face, by telephone or by email. It is recommended that the HDR student and supervisor retain copies of the completed review forms.
8.2.2 The purpose of such discussions is to review the HDR student's progress over the previous six months and to discuss a plan of work for the coming six months. Supervisors other than the Principal Supervisor should also be involved in this process.
8.2.3 As a requirement of the major review, or more often if deemed necessary, the HDR student and Principal Supervisor shall submit to the Research Degree Coordinator a completed major review form, including a written report of the progress made towards the stated objectives of the program of study and research.
8.2.4 The Research Degree Coordinator may require an interview with the HDR student and Principal Supervisor in order to discuss progress or resolve any issues of concern raised in a review.
8.2.5 The Research Degree Coordinator shall add any appropriate comments to the report and then forward it to the Dean Research (or equivalent).
8.2.6 After considering such reports, the Dean Research (or equivalent) shall review each HDR student's progress and shall report to the Research Degrees Committee at least annually, on whether:
8.2.7 Where there are concerns about the progress of an HDR student the Dean Research (or equivalent) shall provide a copy of the complete report of progress to the HDR student and inform them in writing of the requirements necessary to make satisfactory progress. The HDR student may be required to undertake additional reviews and report of progress.
8.2.8 An HDR student shall have the right to discuss a review report and the comments by the Principal Supervisor with the Dean Research (or equivalent).
8.2.9 In the event that a problem which is impeding progress is not resolved through the review procedure, the HDR student has the right to submit a case to the Dean of Graduate Studies for investigation.
9.1 Unsatisfactory progress is defined to be where, in the opinion of the Dean Research, (or equivalent), the HDR student:
9.2 The Dean Research (or equivalent), upon receipt of a review of progress, or at any other time, can review an HDR student's progress, taking into account the recommendations of the supervisors and the Research Degree Coordinator.
9.3 If the Dean Research (or equivalent) deems that progress is unsatisfactory (refer clause 9.1), they may allow an HDR student to continue subject to such conditions as they wish to impose. The Dean Research (or equivalent) is to inform the HDR student in writing of the conditions and the timelines.
9.4 If conditions established in clause 9.3 are not met in the required time and progress continues to be deemed unsatisfactory, the Dean Research (or equivalent) may recommend to the Dean of Graduate Studies that the HDR student's enrolment be suspended or terminated (refer clauses 10 and 11).
10.1 If an HDR student's progress in the program is considered by the Dean Research (or equivalent) to be unsatisfactory, the HDR student's enrolment may be suspended pending approval from the Research Degrees Committee.
10.2 The Dean Research (or equivalent) will advise the HDR student of the reasons that the suspension has been recommended and appropriate action required to have their enrolment re-instated.
10.3 An HDR student who is suspended may appeal to the Dean of Graduate Studies to be reinstated.
10.4 An HDR student whose candidacy is suspended will have a notation marked on the transcript in accordance with clauses 17.3 and 17.4 of these Regulations.
11.1 If the Dean Research (or equivalent) considers an HDR student's academic progress to be unsatisfactory and not likely to result in the student being able to complete the thesis in a timely manner, the Dean Research (or equivalent) may recommend to the Divisional Research Management Committee (or equivalent) that the HDR student's enrolment be terminated (also see clause 17.2).
11.2.1 Upon the making of a recommendation under clause 11.1, the Dean Research (or equivalent), as Chair of the Division Research Management Degrees Committee (or equivalent), will establish a panel of at least three University's academic staff members from the discipline area and who are members of the University's Register of Research Degree Supervisors. The panel will consider the HDR student’s academic progress and whether there are any grounds for termination of enrolment.
11.2.2 The Dean Research (or equivalent) will write to the HDR student notifying him/her of the Division/Institute inquiry under clause 11.2.1. the letter from the Dean Research (or equivalent) must, at a minimum:
11.2.3 The HDR student will have ten working days from the date of despatch of the letter under clause 11.2.2 to advise their intention to attend the Division/Institute inquiry.
11.2.4 The HDR student is entitled to invite a UniSA Students Association nominee, or any staff member or student nominee of the University, to be present at the panel meeting.
11.2.5 The panel meeting will proceed on the scheduled date regardless of whether or not the HDR student has responded in accordance with clause 11.2.3 or fails to attend at the scheduled time.
11.2.6 Within ten working days of the panel meeting, the panel’s recommendation will be made available to the Division/Institute Research Management Committee (or equivalent).
11.2.7 Within ten working days of the meeting, the Dean Research (or equivalent) will notify the HDR student, in writing, of the Division/Institute Research Management Committee's decision. If the recommendation is to proceed with termination of enrolment, the letter under this clause will include a detailed description of why the student’s progress has been found to be unsatisfactory and outlining the process for termination of enrolment.
11.2.8 If the Division/Institute Research Management Committee (or equivalent) recommends that the HDR student's enrolment be terminated, the Dean Research (or equivalent), will make a recommendation to the Chair of the Research Degrees Committee and include detailed reasons as to why the HDR student's progress has been found to be unsatisfactory, together with a copy of the relevant correspondence with the student.
11.2.9 Upon receipt of a recommendation under clause 11.2.8, the Chair and Executive Officer of the Research Degrees Committee will consider all documentation relating to the recommendation and ensure that due process has been followed.
11.2.10 For the purposes of considering the documentation under clause 11.2.9, the Chair and Executive Officer of the Research Degrees Committee may appoint a sub-committee, comprising at least five academic members of RDC.
11.2.11 The Executive Officer of the Research Degrees Committee or the sub-committee as appropriate will give the HDR student ten working day's notice and invite the student to meet with the members in order to present a case as to why the enrolment should not be terminated. The HDR student may be assisted or represented at the Research Degree Committee’s inquiry by the UniSA Students Association or nominee or any staff member or student nominee of the University.
12.2.12 The RDC inquiry will proceed regardless of whether the HDR student responds to the RDC Executive Officer or attends at the scheduled time.
11.2.13 The Chair of any sub-committee appointed under clause 11.2.10 will make a recommendation on the outcome of the RDC inquiry with the HDR student to the full Research Degrees Committee.
11.2.14 Within ten working days of the RDC recommendation, the Chair of the Research Degrees Committee shall notify the HDR student of the outcome of the RDC inquiry. Where a recommendation that enrolment be terminated is accepted by the Research Degrees Committee, the HDR student shall be notified of the grounds for the recommendation.
11.2.15 An HDR student may appeal against the Research Degrees Committee's decision to terminate the enrolment (see Appeals process, clause 11.3).
11.2.16 An HDR student whose enrolment is terminated will have a notation marked on his/her transcript in accordance with clause 17.2 of these Regulations.
11.3.1 If an HDR student wishes to appeal against the final determination of the Research Degrees Committee, the appeal should be lodged with the Dean of Graduate Studies within ten working days of the date of despatch of the notification from the Chair, Research Degrees Committee.
11.3.2 The appeal will be heard by the Student Appeals Committee (see Assessment Policies and Procedures Manual, Section 11 - PDF file, 992kb).
11.3 .3 The decision of the Student Appeals Committee will be final.
The University aims to foster and preserve the scholarly values of curiosity, experimentation, critical appraisal and integrity and to foster these values in its HDR students. It is expected that students and supervisors will comply with the national code on ethical practice published by the AVCC/NH&MRC and will adhere to high standards of academic integrity and honesty at all times. Failure to do so may constitute academic misconduct.
HDR students will be made aware of the importance of academic integrity when they accept a place at UniSA. As part of the Statement of Agreement, Principal Supervisors will make HDR students aware of the University's policies on plagiarism and ethical standards of research.
Refer to Appendix 5 for Academic Misconduct procedures in higher degrees by research.
All grievances and complaints by HDR students not covered under these Regulations should be dealt with under University Policy C-17.3 Policy and Procedures for the Resolution of Student Grievances. The Dean, Research (or equivalent) shall report any grievance or complaint made by an HDR student on the major review form.
Each HDR student must submit a body of research work for examination. This is known as a thesis.
14.1.1 The thesis is the material form of a sustained program of research that has produced original findings. The thesis may comprise either:
14.1.2 The thesis may be presented for examination in either printed or electronic form. (See Appendices 2 for Guidelines for the presentation of written thesis or exegesis, Artefact and Publication). A thesis in electronic form can be submitted only where there is agreement of the examiner to review an electronic version.
14.1.3 The HDR student shall submit a thesis for examination to the Research Degrees Committee that shall:
14.1.4 The submission of a non-standard thesis will require the approval of the Dean Research (or equivalent) before being presented for examination.
Refer to Appendix 5 for Academic Misconduct procedures in higher degrees by research.
14.2.1 The work on which the thesis is based shall be the original work of the HDR student normally carried out during the period of the enrolment in the higher degree by research program and with the approval of the Research Degrees Committee.
14.2.2 Work which has been submitted for any other academic award may not be submitted as the main content of the thesis. Where the main content of the thesis consists of any significant extension or elaboration of the HDR student's earlier work, that portion referring to previous work must be clearly indicated. Work undertaken as part of any qualifying program approved by the Research Degrees Committee may be taken into account as part of the work for the degree for which that program qualified.
14.2.3 An HDR student shall normally make a formal presentation of the thesis to a Division/Institute/ School/ Research Centre seminar prior to the commencement of the examination process.
14.2.4 An HDR student must preface the thesis with a signed statement affirming that:
14.2.5 When the HDR student submits the thesis for examination, the Principal Supervisor and the Research Degree Coordinator shall provide a statement to the Research Degrees Committee, through the Dean Research (or equivalent) verifying:
14.2.6 If the Principal Supervisor is unable to advise that, in their opinion, the submission is prima facie worthy of examination, the Dean Research (or equivalent) will offer the student the opportunity to withdraw the submission before examination, or for the student to make a case to the Dean of Graduate Studies for the examination to proceed.
14.3.1 A Professional Doctorate by Research student shall undertake the assessment for the prescribed coursework and/or practice in accordance with the program approval and review processes as recommended by Research Degrees Committee and approved by Academic Board.
14.3.2 The coursework and practice components shall be graded in accordance with the University's Assessment Policies and Procedures.
An HDR student shall give the Dean Research (or equivalent) not less than one month's notice in writing of intention to submit a thesis for examination and, at the same time, an electronic summary of not more than 500 words regarding the content of the thesis. The notice should indicate if the HDR student is to present artefacts within the thesis. The summary will be forwarded to the examiners when they are invited to examine the thesis. (Also refer to clause 15.2 Appointment of examiners.)
Regulations relating to examination may be varied only where a Jointly Badged PhD agreement exists (see clause 1.2)
15.1.1 Subject to clause 15.1.3, anonymity must be maintained during the examination process, but normally all reports of examiners will be made available to the HDR student, unless indicated otherwise by the examiner.
15.1.2 An HDR student has the right to be consulted about the choice of examiners, but does not have the right to nominate or veto the selection of examiners.
15.1.3 Unless agreed by the Dean of Graduate Studies, during the examination process no dialogue about the examination is to be conducted by the supervisors and/or the HDR student with the examiners involved.
15.2.1 Upon receiving notice from an HDR student of intention to submit the thesis for examination and following consideration of recommendations from the Dean Research (or equivalent), the Research Degrees Committee shall appoint:
15.2.2 Any supervisor of the HDR student may not be appointed as an examiner of that HDR student's thesis.
15.2.3 Where artefacts are included with the thesis, the same two people shall examine both the written component and the artefact(s).
15.2.4 For HDR students who commenced prior to 26th April 2002 (the effective date for the change to two examiners), the Division Research Management Committee may make a recommendation to Research Degrees Committee for three examiners to be appointed. In these cases, the three examiners' reports will be treated of equal value.
15.2.5 Examiners shall:
15.2.6 Following Divisional approval of examiners, the Graduate Studies Office will confirm the examiners' availability and despatch the thesis to them for assessment.
15.2.7 Where an examiner fails to return an assessment within the required time of receiving a thesis for examination, the Research Degrees Committee may appoint another examiner.
15.2.8 Arrangement for the examination of artefacts will be made by the School in conjunction with the Graduate Studies Office.
15.3.1 Doctor of Philosophy degree:
Examiners shall examine the HDR student’s thesis according to the following criteria:
15.3.2 Professional Doctorate by Research degree:
Examiners shall examine the thesis according to the HDR student’s capacity to:
15.3.3 Masters by Research degree:
Examiners shall examine the thesis to determine:
15.4.1 The examiners shall independently assess the thesis and recommend to the Research Degrees Committee one of the following assessments:
15.4.2 On receipt of all examiners' reports,the Graduate Studies Office will despatch the reports to the Principal Supervisor and HDR student, copied to the Research Degree Coordinator and Dean Research (or equivalent).
15.5.1 Where a thesis has been assessed as passed forthwith, the final thesis shall be submitted to the Research Degrees Committee within four weeks of the notification of the examination outcome. The submission will be accompanied by a statement that is signed by the Principal Supervisor and the Dean Research (or equivalent), each confirming that the thesis is satisfactory for the award of the degree.
15.5.2 If a case is made by the HDR student and the Supervisor that amendments cannot be completed satisfactorily within the four weeks submission deadline, the Dean of Graduate Studies may grant an extension.
15.6.1 In the case that a thesis has been assessed as passed following minor corrections, the revised thesis shall be submitted to the Research Degrees Committee within six weeks of the notification to the student of the requirement for revision.
15.6.2 The submission will be accompanied by a statement that is signed by the Principal Supervisor and the Dean Research (or equivalent), each confirming that the revisions have been made, or addressed, and that the thesis is satisfactory for the award of the degree.
15.6.3 If a case is made by the HDR student and the Supervisor that amendments cannot be completed satisfactorily within the six weeks submission deadline, the Dean of Graduate Studies may grant an extension.
15.7.1 Where a thesis has been assessed as passed following major corrections, the revised thesis will be submitted to Research Degrees Committee within three months of the notification of the need for revision.
15.7.2 The submission will be accompanied by a statement that is signed by the Principal Supervisor, one other person nominated by the Dean Research (or equivalent) and the Dean Research (or equivalent), each confirming that the revisions have been made and that the thesis is satisfactory for the award of the degree.
15.7.3 In the case where an examiner has recommended assessment option 3(b), the amendments to the thesis will be reviewed by the examiner before the final submission is considered by Research Degrees Committee.
15.7.4 If a case is made by the HDR student and the Supervisor that amendments cannot be completed satisfactorily within the three months submission deadline, the Dean of Graduate Studies may grant an extension.
15.8.1 Where a thesis is to be re-submitted for examination after major revision:
15.8.2 The HDR student may be required to re-enrol.
15.8.3 If a case is made by the HDR student and the Supervisor that amendments cannot be completed satisfactorily within the six months submission deadline, the Dean of Graduate Studies may grant an extension.
15.8.4 A thesis which is not submitted within the prescribed time will, in the absence of evidence of extenuating circumstances, be deemed to have failed.
15.9.1 In the case of a thesis which has been assessed as not of PhD standard, but worthy of awarding a Masters by Research degree following any corrections indicated in the examiners' reports, the revised thesis will be submitted to Research Degrees Committee within three months of the notification of the need for revision.
15.9.2 The submission will be accompanied by a statement signed by the Principal Supervisor, one other person nominated by the Dean Research (or equivalent) and the Dean Research (or equivalent), each confirming that the revisions have been made and that the thesis is satisfactory for the award of a Masters by Research degree.
15.9.3 If a case is made by the HDR student and the Supervisor that amendments cannot be completed satisfactorily within the three months submission deadline, the Dean of Graduate Studies may grant an extension.
15.10.1 Where both examiners recommend that the thesis be failed, the Examinations Panel shall deem the thesis to have failed.
15.10.2 Where one examiner recommends that the thesis be failed and the other recommends that the thesis be passed (or passed with corrections or amendments or revised and re-submitted), normally the Examinations Panel will recommend the appointment of a third examiner or an adjudicator and a final result will then be determined by the Examinations Panel.
15.10.3 A thesis which has been failed may not be resubmitted for the award of the degree and the enrolment will be terminated, except as provided in clause 15.11.
15.11.1 An HDR student may submit an appeal to the Research Degrees Committee to have the thesis re-examined once only, provided that evidence is submitted to the satisfaction of Research Degrees Committee that any of the examiners:
15.11.2 Research Degrees Committee will determine whether the appeal should be upheld or rejected and, if upheld, shall appoint new examiners. If the appeal is not upheld, the student may appeal to the Student Appeals Committee (see section 11 of the Assessment Policies and Procedures Manual - PDF file, 312kb).
15.11.3 The decision of the Student Appeals Committee will be final.
16.1 Research Degrees Committee will establish an Examinations Panel. Membership will comprise the Dean of Graduate Studies, the Academic Board representative of Research Degrees Committee and the Deans Research (or equivalent) from each Division/Institute.
16.2 The purpose of the Examinations Panel is to reconcile conflicting examiners' reports involving assessment option (4) or lower result, or any other matter referred by Research Degrees Committee.
16.3 Normally, combinations of assessment options 1, 2 and 3 will be decided by the Dean Research (or equivalent), however the Dean Research (or equivalent) may refer any matter relating to a higher degree by research examination to the Examinations Panel for advice.
16.4 Within six weeks of receipt of the examiners’ reports, the Principal Supervisor will provide to the Dean Research (or equivalent) documentation and a recommendation as to the proposed course of action. All examiners' reports are to be taken into account when preparing a recommendation.
16.5.1 The Examinations Panel may determine that:
16.5.2 The Examinations Panel will send a written report to the Dean Research (or equivalent) and Principal Supervisor for action.
16.6.1 Where an independent adjudicator is required, the Research Degrees Committee will appoint the adjudicator, normally who will be external to the University.
16.6.2 The adjudicator is not an additional examiner, but a judge requested to pronounce on the relative soundness, correctness and appropriateness of the initial two examiners’ recommendations.
16.6.3 The following material is sent to the adjudicator:
16.6.4 The adjudicator shall evaluate the above material and advise the Examinations Panel about whether the examiners have:
The following gradings and transcript notations will apply, depending on the circumstances of each individual non-enrolled HDR student and as determined by the Dean, Research (or equivalent) and the Dean of Graduate Studies.
17.1 F- Failed. This notation is to be used where an HDR student has:
An appeal may also have been heard. No reinstatement is permitted.
17.2 T - Terminated. This notation is to be used where an HDR student's progress has been deemed to be unsatisfactory in accordance with the Academic Regulations, that is milestones have been established (including revisions to thesis after examination) and have not been met. No reinstatement is permitted.
17.3 SE - Suspended - examined, but examination process not completed. May apply for reinstatement. This notation may be used where an HDR student's thesis has been examined and revisions (minor or major) are required, but the HDR student chooses not to complete. Within three years, the HDR student may seek reinstatement and be re-admitted if appropriate support is available.
17.4 SNE - Suspended - not examined. May apply for reinstatement. The HDR student has not completed the requirements for the award of the degree. This notation is to be used where the enrolment lapses prior to the examination process due to the student failing to withdraw, maintaining contact with the supervisors or does not make satisfactory progress. Within three years, the student may seek reinstatement and be re-admitted if appropriate support is available.
17.5 WD – Withdrawn. HDR student formally withdrew from the program. Within three years, the HDR student may seek reinstatement and be re-admitted if appropriate support is available.
18.1 An HDR student whose enrolment was suspended may apply to the Dean of Graduate Studies for reinstatement, provided they have had less than three years absence and will continue their previous research project.
18.2 An application is required to be supported by the Principal Supervisor; Research Degree Coordinator, Dean Research (or equivalent) and Head of School/Institute Director.
18.3 The Principal Supervisor of a reinstated HDR student will be required to establish milestones with the HDR student to ensure completion within the required timeframe and the Dean Research (or equivalent) will be required to agree to these milestones and to monitor progress against milestones.
18.4 Reinstatement will be allowed only once.
19.1 If the Research Degrees Committee is of the opinion that an HDR student has satisfied the requirements for the award of the degree, it shall certify to Council that the HDR student is eligible to be admitted to the degree.
19.2 For HDR students commencing after 1 January 2004, in their final year, the HDR student shall document evidence of achievement and experience in the seven areas of the Research Degree Graduate Qualities in their final review of progress.
The University provisions relating to intellectual property, contained in the University activities policy, shall apply unless an Intellectual Property Assignment Agreement (PDF file, staff access only) has been entered into. Copyright in all theses shall remain the property of the HDR student.
20.2.1 Three copies of the final version of the thesis, amended if necessary must be sent to Dean of Graduate Studies for lodgement with the University Library (2 copies) and in the Division or such other place(s) as the Research Degrees Committee considers appropriate (1 copy).
20.2.2 The final version should include an appropriate record of artefacts, eg photographs, video recording.
20.2.3 Wherever possible, the final version should be in print format
20.2.4 The University is a member of the Australasian Digital Thesis Program (ADT) and Australian Research Repositories Online to the World (ARROW). HDR students are required to submit a digital copy of their thesis into ADT via arrow@UniSA
20.2.5 In order to protect intellectual property rights, an HDR student may restrict access to the thesis (refer to clause 20.3).
20.3.1 The HDR student, as author, will be asked to consent in writing to the thesis being made available for loan or copying. Such notice of consent will be inserted by the Dean of Graduate Studies into the copies deposited in the Library which will become available for loan or copying, except where a restriction is imposed by Research Degrees Committee as provided for in clause 20.3.2.
20.3.2 Where written consent to the thesis being made available for loan or copying is not given by the author, the Research Degrees Committee may restrict the circulation and copying of the thesis.
20.3.3 If the Research Degrees Committee approves a restriction on circulation or copying, the thesis will, in any case, become available for loan two years after the thesis has been deposited with the University, or such longer period as may be approved by the Research Degrees Committee.
From time to time the Research Degrees Committee will audit these Regulations and their implementation.
Note: Research Degree Coordinator also refers to Professional Doctorate by Research Program Director.
Before the expiration of six months full-time study, the candidate must develop, and subsequently maintain, a comprehensive Research Proposal. A Research Proposal is designed to provide a structure and time frame for a candidate's research program and can be used to assess the candidate's progress at times of review. The proposal should contain the following sections, and should normally be between 10 to 20 pages in total length. The Research Proposal should indicate how the candidate intends, in performing the research project, to elaborate the Research Degree Graduate Qualities. Obtain information on the qualities
This section should typically include the following details:
a) Introduction in which the candidate states the nature of the topic, why it is considered important and how the research will contribute to its solution. This section should also include a proposed thesis title, and the ratio of written to artefact components, where relevant. The proposed artefact(s) should be of a nature agreed with the Supervisor and Research Degrees Coordinator.
b) Review of relevant research and theory, an integrated statement that affords some explanation of why the literature and artefacts cited are important to the research the candidate proposes to undertake;
c) The Research Topic (or Hypothesis). (The research topic should be clearly stated and provide clear indication of the focus of the research project);
d) Subsidiary Issues, which like the research topic may be stated in hypothesis form (where relevant).
This section should typically include the following details:
a) A description of the theoretical or conceptual framework to be employed;
b) Details of analytical techniques and research design to be used to undertake the research project;
c) Timetable or Project Plan for undertaking the research and completing the thesis, including gaining ethics approval and timelines for writing up the thesis.
This section should normally comprise 1 or 2 pages and has the advantages of indicating to the reader the dimensions of the topic, and providing the candidate with a provisional organisational framework.
The chief advantages are that it enables the Supervisor to form an opinion of the quality of the sources available and to suggest any useful references which may have been overlooked. Work on a preliminary bibliography, which may include an artefact review, provides the foundation for the more comprehensive listing which will be incorporated in the final thesis.
Note: Professional Doctorate students submit a body of research work for examination. Research work is as specified in the program approval documentation and means any combination of a thesis, dissertation, portfolio of work, exegesis, artefact, published articles or written project, as specified for the particular program information. The research work submitted for examination may be known as a thesis, portfolio or folio. HDR students submitting for examination should check with their Supervisor and/or Program Director as to the requirements in that particular program. Any work presented for examination must follow these guidelines.
For detailed information on the content and form of the thesis and requirements for submission, refer to Section 14 of the Academic Regulations.
Before the research work is submitted for examination, the HDR student, with the advice of their supervisor, should ensure that a very high standard of scholarly presentation has been achieved. This includes ensuring that:
Normally, a doctoral thesis is around 80,000 words. The exegesis accompanying an artefact thesis is normally a maximum of 20,000 for a doctoral thesis and 10,000 words for a Masters degree.
If length limits have been exceeded, notification of the length and number of volumes is to be advised, so that examiners can be informed of the length of the thesis before they accept nomination. (National College of Deans and Directors of Graduate Studies Guidelines April 2004)
Theses may be presented in either electronic or printed form, depending on the agreement of the examiner as to their preferred medium in which to assess the thesis. The electronic format normally should be in the software compatible for the examiner's computer.
HDR students presenting non-standard theses will need to obtain the prior approval of the Supervisor and the Division/Institute Research Management Committee (or equivalent) before being lodged for examination. Advice supporting the submission of non-standard theses is to be provided to the Graduate Studies Office at the time of lodgement.
Four copies of the thesis in either form or a mixture of forms must be presented for examination. One copy is to be retained in the school and the other three copies are to be forwarded to Dean of Graduate Studies for despatch to examiners.
The thesis should incorporate in the following order:
Notes:
Figures of high quality should be drawn, photographed or securely mounted on A4 size paper and inserted in the appropriate place in the text.
Diagrams and figures are to be labelled using a computer based graphics drawing program in a font that matches the main text. The legend should be placed beneath the figure.
Tables should be inserted in the appropriate place in the text, except that lengthy or bulky tables should appear as an appendix. The legend should be placed above the table.
Where the figure or table fills the whole A4 page, the legend should be placed on the left-hand (verso) page. Verso pages are to be prepared with a right-hand side margin not less than 3.5cm to allow for binding and 1.5cm on the other three sides.
Diagrams, maps, tables, etc exceeding A4 size, should be folded so as to read as a right-hand page when open.
The final three copies of the thesis must be sewn and bound with dark cloth on stiff covers. The examination copy may be presented in soft cover and heat bound, but must be secure, ie sheets cannot be removed or added without evidence of tampering.
On the spine of the final copies of the thesis should be given, in gold lettering of suitable size, normally reading from top to the bottom, the HDR student's family name and title of the thesis, abbreviated if necessary. Where the width of the spine allows, the lettering may be placed horizontally, with the title of the thesis near the top of the spine and the HDR student's family name near the middle.
When published papers are submitted as evidence, they should normally be bound near the back of the thesis as an appendix. In the case of published papers of unusual size, it may be desirable to bind them in a separate volume. If they have been bound by the publisher it is desirable to keep them in a special case made and lettered to simulate a bound volume of the thesis.
Supplementary material such as computer disks, folded maps and other large folded sheets may be placed in a pocket inside the back cover of the bound thesis. Any material which cannot readily be kept in a pocket should be placed in a special case made and lettered to simulate a bound volume of the thesis.
A supplementary case or additional volume of a thesis should be distinguished by a volume number but should otherwise be uniform with the first part of the thesis in respect to colour, lettering and, as far as possible, size.
Three copies of the final version of the thesis, amended if necessary must be sent to Dean of Graduate Studies for lodgement with the University Library (2 copies) and in the Division (1 copy) or such other place(s) as the Research Degrees Committee considers appropriate. The copies should include an appropriate record of artefacts, eg photographs, video recording.
The University is a member of the Australian Digital Thesis Project (ADT). HDR students are required to submit a digital copy of their thesis into the ADT database. The deposit form is on the Library's webpage
In order to protect intellectual property rights, an HDR student may restrict access to the thesis.
These guidelines for the examination of artefact-based theses are based on the understanding that you will have thoroughly discussed the issue of appropriate examination with your Principal and Associate Supervisors and the School’s Research Degrees Coordinator before submitting your thesis for examination.
A 'thesis' is a directed argument supported by evidence derived from the candidate’s research, ranging from academic library or 'field' sources and data to reflective practice in the studio. It is vital therefore that the thesis establish a clear relationship between all its constitutive components - written and artefact.
'Artefact' is used here to mean physical objects forming part of your thesis. Submission of theses by artefact requires a first-hand viewing of the artefact in all cases. Artefacts will vary widely according to the field but may include: works of art and design; video and film; management policies and plans; curriculum documents and other resource documents.
For visual art and design HDR students, the written component of an artefact-based thesis is termed the 'exegesis', defined in the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary as being an: 'explanation, exposition, or interpretation' (see below).
Exactly the same conventions mentioned for conventional written theses apply to the exegesis.
For visual art and design candidates, where the exegesis is submitted in conventional printed form, it must include a durable visual record of the artefacts submitted for examination - either as images included within the body of text, or as a separate insert bound within the exegesis as a CDrom of digital images and/or series of 35mm photographic transparencies. Where the exegesis is submitted in electronic form it must include digital images of the artefacts submitted.
Artefact theses require a 500-word 'abstract' (summarising the argument outlined in the thesis) in electronic form. The abstract should also be included in the exegesis submitted for examination.
For further information on written thesis presentation see the Guidelines for presentation of written thesis or exegesis - Appendix 2a of the Academic Regulations for HDR Programs.
The main school at UniSA in which students undertake artefact-based theses is the South Australian School of Art, and 'artefact' generally means 'art' or 'design' work for the purposes of Master of Visual Art, Master of Design (Art), and PhD by Major Studio Project degrees in that school. The following guidelines for presenting and examining artefact theses have been prepared by Mr John Barbour, Portfolio Leader for Research and Postgraduate, South Australian School of Art. Other schools may develop guidelines for artefact theses in their own academic context.
Regulations for the research degrees of Master of Visual Arts, Master of Design (Art), and Doctor of Philosophy by Major Studio Project provide for submission of a thesis in the form of art or design works ('artefacts'), supported by written exegesis. This reflects the understanding that artefacts are as important as writing in advancing the ‘argument’ of the thesis, with each component forming a part, or proposition of the whole.
1. General expectations
Submission expectations for Master of Visual Arts and Master of Design (Art) artefact theses:
The normal written Masters thesis is around 40,000 words. A body of artefacts, in conjunction with the 10,000 word exegesis, needs to be seen as equivalent (with commensurate expectations as to quality of argument)2.
Expectations for PhD by Major Studio Project theses:
The normal written Masters thesis is around 80,000 words. A body of artefacts, in conjunction with the 20,000 word exegesis, needs to be seen as equivalent (with commensurate expectations as to quality of argument)2.
2. The body of artefacts
Artefacts should form a substantial, coherent, highly resolved body of works, judged in terms of scope, scale and originality. These three terms can usefully be defined as follows:
Substantial: a body of works equivalent to a significant solo exhibition - for example only, at Masters level this might perhaps mean eight to ten major paintings or sculptures (though this would obviously depend on the nature of the idea informing the work, as well as upon considerations such as scale, materials and processes employed). Other media, such as performance, installation or video, will require a different yardstick.
Coherent: articulating a common thread or theme or proposition as outlined in both the proposal (not available to examiners) and exegesis (available to examiners).
Highly resolved: consistent and considered, technically, aesthetically, formally, conceptually.
Original: making a significant contribution to knowledge in the particular area of research nominated for investigation in the proposal and as developed in the exegesis.
HDR students must understand that in assessing the artefacts, examiners look for attributes such as:
3. The exegesis
It is important to note that while the minimum length of the written document is set at 10,000 words and 20,000 words for Masters and PhD respectively, HDR students may elect to develop a more substantial document. However this will be an exception and will require approval by the HDR student’s supervisors and the School’s research proposal approval panel at the outset of study - on the basis of a strong argument established in the research degree proposal. In any case, the length of the exegesis is less important than the strength of the argument it advances and the quality of the research which underpins it.
Given that a 10,000 word or 20,000 word exegesis will be the norm, the emphasis within the thesis is upon development of a substantial, coherent and highly resolved body of art works (the 'artefacts') – the proposition underpinning which will be supported by the exegesis. The writing should not be allowed to overwhelm studio work.
The relationship between written and artefact components should be complementary, clearly articulated, and specific in relating the art works produced to the sorts of theoretical, social, cultural and historical considerations appropriate to providing a critical and informed account of the research itself.
The exegesis should demonstrate:
The exegesis should not include:
Note: while examiners have relatively clear expectations as to the role and significance of the exegesis in outlining the terms of the research investigation, the form of the writing itself is not fixed. With the approval of their supervisors, candidates are encouraged to consider creative approaches to developing a form for the writing which might complement the artefacts themselves. If this approach is adopted, candidates must still ensure the expectations outlined above are met.
4. Preparing the artefacts for submission for examination
It would be inadvisable to generalise about the process to be followed in preparing artefacts for examination because of the potentially enormous variety of forms and media available. A few things however need to be stressed.
The first is to ensure that the links made between the research and the artefacts are indeed evident in the artefacts themselves. To achieve this it may help you (and your supervisors) to write up abstracts of each artefact, emphasising the aim of the artefact and its distinguishing features.
The second is to ensure that each artefact goes through a process of design, preparation, drafting, editing and consultation, and received substantial feedback from your supervisors before the final artefact is made ready for submission.
On the whole HDR students should present the outcomes of the research for examination, rather than the artefacts produced along the way (unless a strong argument can be made for inclusion of such work).
Note: UniSA also has a Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (by Portfolio of Publications) where a person is admitted to that degree on the basis of a prior significant publications record. The content of the PhD by Portfolio of Publications is outlined in an appendix attached to those Academic Regulations.
These guidelines relate only to Higher Degree by Research students who present a thesis, which includes publications written as part of the requirements for the Higher Degree by Research.
In 2006, UniSA introduced an alternative for the presentation of a doctoral thesis, called Thesis by Publication. This alternative presentation method was developed to encourage the HDR student to enhance the skills necessary for publication in peer-reviewed journals and to communicate the results internationally.
As acceptance for publication can take some months between submission for the paper and having it accepted, together with the complexity of some large-scale research studies and data collection, this may mean that this method of presentation may not be an option.
The decision regarding format of the thesis is to be made in consultation with the Supervisor(s) and should occur early in the candidacy, as there are a number of issues which will influence that decision.
The minimum requirements to lodge a thesis by publication for examination are:
Work published or submitted for publication prior to commencing in the degree, either at UniSA or at another university must not be included in the thesis.
Any publications included in the thesis by publication must have been peer reviewed and therefore have been accepted for publication, preferably in significant journals relevant to the discipline.
The Dean of Research (or equivalent) will have a list of the relevant journals which meet the University’s requirement for approved and high impact journals.
Where copyright has been assigned to the publisher, permission may need to be sought to reproduce the work in the thesis. This is the HDR student's responsibility to obtain permission.
HDR students should follow the general presentation guidelines indicated in Appendix 2 of the Academic Regulations.
In addition to the contents stipulated in Appendix 2, the thesis by publication is to comprise:
If desirable, an HDR student may reformat the publications to a word document in order to simplify production and enhance presentation and ease of assessment. Any reformatted papers should contain reference to the full citation of the published paper.
In addition, the Principal Supervisor must provide a certificate, to accompany the final thesis, that original correspondence from the editors has been sighted and that the HDR student has followed the editorial advice.
Revised statement approved by Academic Board 24
February 2005.
Endorsed by Senior Management Group on 15 October 2003; approved
by Academic Board on 28 November 2003
The University of South Australia (UniSA) has higher degree by research (HDR) students studying full-time or part-time, on-campus or externally in a range of locations in Australia and offshore, and 'transnationally' through industry partners in a number of locations.
HDR students at UniSA are expected to produce work of a very high standard and require facilities of an equivalent standard with which to do this. All HDR students should be able to undertake educational activities with the University in an environment promoting the principles of equity and social justice and free of unlawful discrimination, harassment, bullying and victimisation.
Divisions and Institutes receive annual funding from the University's budget and other sources to provide resources and facilities for HDR students. The university funds come from revenue from international student fees and from funds allocated by the Department of Education, Science and Training's Research Training Scheme (RTS).
Approval of resources will occur in two stages: in signing the Recommendation Form, the University agrees to fund basic facilities and resources for that HDR student, access to which is agreed upon in the Welcome meeting; in signing the Confirmation of Candidature form, the University agrees to fund the negotiated project specific resources for that HDR student.
The most important resource that UniSA provides to HDR students is the expertise and time of the supervisor. Supervisors are required to be familiar with the Code of good practice: Research degrees management and supervision and to adhere to its principles. Under RES Policy 8.4, Register of Postgraduate Research Degree supervisors, supervisors must remain aware of current supervisory practices and policy environment by participating in supervisor development programs provided by the University.
The University will provide the following resources to all HDR students:
In signing the Recommendation Form to accept an HDR student, the Head of School/Institute Director and Divisional Dean: Research /Chair of Research Management Committee commit the area to provide the following basic facilities and resources that HDR students can access while completing their degree3 . Access will be negotiated in the Welcome meeting and reviewed as needed. Research degree coordinators can provide further explanation of this statement.
On-campus students
On-campus HDR students with be provided with the following facilities, available 24 hours a day, subject to safety requirements. Access will be negotiated with each student taking into account their needs, including any disability-related services, and preferred mode of study. Part-time HDR students shall have pro rata access to the same facilities as full-time HDR students negotiated on a case-by-case basis. For full-time on campus students, resources shall include:
The University will provide on-campus HDR students with the following resources:
External students
Where HDR students study off-campus such that they relinquish direct access to study facilities, the University will provide them with resources outlined below. Part-time external HDR students shall have pro rata access to the same facilities as full-time external HDR students, negotiated on a case-by-case basis. For full-time external students, resources shall include:
Transnational students
Where students study offshore through a partner institution, the provision of the following resources is dependent on the agreement signed between the offshore partner and the University in relation to resources, establishment of program fees and fee split. Part-time transnational HDR students shall have pro rata access to the same facilities as full-time transnational HDR students, negotiated on a case-by-case basis. Having considered the terms of the agreement and the agreed upon fees for each transnational research degree program, full-time students shall have access to:
The Local Program Management Partner (LPMP) is expected to provide a team of professional managers to work closely with UniSA for the local promotion and management of UniSA programs. Its responsibilities include providing the following local administrative and management support:
The University recognises that HDR students may require specific equipment, e-research infrastructure, laboratory or studio space and funds adequate for the completion of the research program. Expenses may include travel arising from field work, experiments and data collection and the cost of consumables.
These project specific costs are to be identified by the HDR student and supervisor during the preparation of the research proposal. Where the student’s project is a subset of the supervisor’s funded research project, such costs could be allocated from the project’s budget. Costs must be presented and negotiated with the Head of School/ Institute Director prior to confirmation of candidacy.
Should a change of proposal prove necessary, resources may be renegotiated between the HDR student, the Supervisor and the Head of School/ Institute Director.
Review: Research Degrees Committee, in conjunction with the appropriate areas of the University, will review this statement annually. Research Degrees Committee reviewed the amounts in November 2005.
Please note: The resources listed above are only available to currently enrolled higher degree by research students and does not include those on leave/suspension from the program.
1.1 Academic misconduct, whether inadvertent or deliberate, includes the following:
1.2 Plagiarism is a specific form and serious act of academic misconduct. Whether inadvertent or deliberate, plagiarism includes:
1.3 Use of text comparison software
2.1 In line with clause 7 of these Academic Regulations, each HDR student will have a minimum of two supervisors appointed.
2.2 The Code of Good Practice: Research degree management and supervision details the responsibilities of Supervisors. Supervisors are expected to supervise their HDR students in accordance with the responsibilities outlined in the Code, including fostering academic integrity by commenting critically and constructively on any written work submitted by the student. Part of these responsibilities involve the monitoring of each student's writing style to help avoid plagiarism, ensure the appropriate presentation of research, written material and referring the HDR student to appropriate resources regarding conducting ethical research.
2.3 In addition, the Supervisor is required to certify that the thesis is of a standard appropriate to the discipline, is properly presented and adequately expressed in English, conforms to University Regulations and policies and is, therefore, prima facie, worthy of examination (see clause 14.2.5 of the Academic Regulations).
2.4 As the discipline expert appointed to assist the HDR student, supervisors will become familiar with the student's written work. Therefore, supervisors have a direct role in scrutinizing the work and initially dealing with any issues involving academic integrity or research misconduct.
Note: Any possible breach of examination procedures will be dealt with initially by the Research Degrees Committee’s Examinations Panel.
3.1 Where a supervisor has concerns that the action of an HDR student may involve academic misconduct, they will first discuss the issue with the appropriate Research Degree Coordinator.
3.2 If the Research Degree Coordinator believes the issue warrants further explanation, the Supervisor will notify the student within 5 working days, detailing their concerns and requesting that the HDR student attend a meeting with the Supervisor and Research Degree Coordinator to discuss the matter. The meeting should occur within 20 days of the initial notification. Where the HDR student is unable to attend the meeting, the discussion may occur via email or teleconference.
3.3 The student and supervisor may each elect to invite a Students Association nominee, or any staff member or student nominee of the University, to be present at this meeting, or to participate in the email or teleconference discussion.
3.4 If the student chooses not to participate in the discussion, the Research Degree Coordinator will advise the Dean Research (or equivalent), to initiate a formal inquiry, and provide their record of the initial inquiry.
3.5 Possible outcomes of the initial inquiry:
- rewriting the appropriate section, or
- having a formal inquiry.
3.6 If, as a result of this discussion with the student and supervisor(s), the Research Degree Coordinator determines a more formal inquiry is appropriate, or if the student does not agree with the course of action proposed by the Research Degree Coordinator, then the Research Degree Coordinator will advise the appropriate Dean Research (or equivalent) to initiate a formal inquiry, and provide their record of the initial inquiry.
3.7 Upon advice from the Research Degree Coordinator that the case is to go to a formal inquiry, the Dean Research (or equivalent) will record the case in a central database and on the student’s record (see clause 12.10) and will, within 10 working days, provide a report to the HDR student, the supervisor(s) and the Dean of Graduate Studies.
4.1 Upon receipt of advice from the Research Degree Coordinator following an initial inquiry, the Dean Research (or equivalent) will review the case and the evidence provided to determine whether the case should proceed to formal inquiry. The Dean Research (or equivalent) will ensure that all processes have been complied with.
4.2 Where the Dean Research (or equivalent) concludes that the evidence in the case is insufficient to proceed, the Dean will advise the Research Degree Coordinator, the supervisor(s) and the student accordingly. No further action will be taken, and any record of the investigation will be removed from the database and the student’s record.
4.3 Where the Dean Research (or equivalent) concludes that the action of the student lacked intent, but constituted academic misconduct, then the student may be permitted to undertake further research, if necessary, and re-submit the work and the Dean will advise the student, the supervisor(s), the Research Degree Coordinator and the Dean of Graduate Studies accordingly.
4.4 Where the Dean Research (or equivalent) concludes that there is sufficient evidence to proceed to formal inquiry, the Dean will establish a formal inquiry committee, consisting of:
4.5 The supervisor who has alleged that the case involves deliberate academic misconduct may present their case to the inquiry but shall not serve as a member of the formal inquiry committee.
4.6 The Chair will write to the student providing details of the alleged misconduct and inviting the HDR student to attend or, if unable to attend (in person or via teleconferencing) to provide evidence to the formal inquiry committee regarding the allegation. The letter to the student must include a copy of this regulation. The student may be assisted or represented at the inquiry by the Students Association or nominee or any staff member or student nominee of the University.
4.7 The formal inquiry may proceed whether or not the HDR student responds or attends.
4.8 Options available to the formal inquiry committee:
4.9 Options available to the formal inquiry committee:
4.10 Outcomes may include:
5.1 The HDR student has the right of appeal against the decision of the formal inquiry committee.
5.2 The HDR student may appeal in writing to the Dean of Graduate Studies within ten working days of the date of dispatch of the notification of the outcome. The Dean will collect relevant documentation, including the records of prior inquiries and forward this, together with the appeal to the Student Appeals Committee of the Council for final resolution (see Section 11 of the Assessment Policies and Procedures Manual, PDF file, 312kb, for details of the Committee’s membership and procedures).
5.3 The HDR student may continue in the program of study pending the outcome of an appeal, or be granted leave of absence from the program. Should their appeal be denied, their enrolment may be amended or terminated, depending on the outcome determined.
5.4 The decision of the Student Appeals Committee shall be final.
6.1 The University will store data about academic misconduct and breaches of examination procedures in a central database. The data will be stored for a minimum period of 7 years from the date of the last incident recorded.
6.2 No data will be recorded where following an informal inquiry involving the HDR student, it is determined that no academic misconduct occurred.
6.3 All Deans Research (or equivalent) and the Dean of Graduate Studies will have access to any data stored in the database about a student, for consideration when determining whether the action of that student was academic misconduct, and if so in determining the appropriate outcome.
6.4 Where an HDR student has breached an examination procedure that does not constitute academic misconduct, the following information will be recorded in the University’s central database:
6.5 Where Dean Research (or equivalent) determines academic misconduct occurred, they will record the case in a central database, setting out:
6.6 Where a case is referred to a Dean Research (or equivalent) or the Dean of Graduate Studies, they will have access to the data stored regarding the initial inquiry relating to that case, and to any other cases recorded against that student, in order to assist in the determination.
6.7 Where, as a result of an informal inquiry, the panel concludes that the action of the student does not constitute academic misconduct, any record of that investigation will be removed from the database.
6.8 Where, as a result of a informal inquiry, the panel concludes that the evidence in the case is sufficient to proceed they will add a record to the database to indicate whether the case was referred to a formal inquiry committee, or the student allowed to re-submit work, and the factors taken into consideration in making that decision.
6.9 Where a formal inquiry committee is constituted, the committee, through the Chair, will have access to the data stored regarding the initial inquiry relating to that case, and to any other cases recorded against that student, in order to assist in their determination. The committee will add a record of their determination to the database, including:
6.10 Where a student appeals the outcome of a formal inquiry, the Student Appeals Committee (PDF file, 312kb), through the Chair, will have access to the data stored regarding the initial inquiry and formal inquiry relating to that case, and to any other cases recorded against that student, in order to assist in their determination.
6.11 The student’s transcript will record Suspension (only during the course of suspension) or Expulsion.
1 "Or equivalent" means Divisional Dean Research Education or Chair of Institute Research Management Committee where the Institute sits outside the Divisional structure.
2 Notwithstanding length, it is imperative HDR students understand the significance of the exegesis in examiners' minds in providing a sophisticated, well written, thoroughly researched and rigorously argued case in support of the overall 'thesis'. For their part, examiners are entitled to question or take issue with any and all aspects of the thesis presented for examination - whether artefacts or written.
3 School, Centre or Institute should inform the Library of the HDR student’s proposed research area if it lies outside the University's designated research priorities, so arrangements can be made to support access to relevant information resources.
