phd uk regulation

• Professional Work Based Learning
• Contingency classification and progression regulations
• Coming soon
• Exceptional classification and progression regulations
• Exceptional regulations: Covid-19
• Academic regulations
• Personal tutoring, student support and development
• Assessment, awards and degree classification
• Programme and module design and approval
• Concerns, complaints and appeals
• Registration and attendance
• Research degree policies and guidance
• Progression
• Supervision
• Research programme regulations
• Regulations for programmes which are not currently running
• Student engagement and representation
• Studies away from the University
• Recent changes

Regulations for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) and Master of Philosophy (MPhil)

This page contains the regulations for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) and Master of Philosophy (MPhil). Its content is relevant to staff and students across all of the UK, China and Malaysia campuses.

Search the manual

All teaching and assessment must be in English when students are registered for a University of Nottingham qualification. The only exception is where the subject of study is a language or literature other than English.

These regulations state the minimum requirements for students undertaking a PhD or MPhil. Where any other body, such as a sponsor or collaborative partner, is involved in a student’s study, additional requirements may be agreed and must be satisfied in order for the student to be considered for an award.

Admission requirements

1.    Requirements for admission to a research degree are set out in the University of Nottingham’s Quality Manual in the section entitled Admissions, which can be found here:

Course of study

Includes:  frameworks; full-time students undertaking paid employment; counting same period of registration; staff submitting publications; submission by a staff candidate for a research degree document; part-time students

2.    Periods of registration for these degrees are as set out in the University of Nottingham Qualifications Framework (UNQF). For more information about the UNQF, please consult the following:

University of Nottingham Qualifications Framework

The student’s School may permit up to one year of registration at Nottingham (two years in the case of part-time students) to be replaced by prior study at another institution.

3.    Full-time students may only undertake paid employment with the permission of their School and in accordance with the requirements of any scholarship they hold. In approving a request to undertake such employment, a School must assure itself that such work will not interfere with the student’s programme of study.

4.    A student is not permitted to count the same period of registration for both the degree of MPhil and the degree of PhD. However, a student registered for an MPhil degree may, with the permission of their School, be allowed to transfer their registration to a PhD degree. The procedure for transferring registration is set out below in paragraphs 12 and 13 of the annual review and progression section. It is also possible to transfer from a Master’s degree by examination course to the degree of MPhil with the permission of the School.

5.    Members or former members of the University staff may submit publications for a research degree of the University but must do so in accordance with the published supplementary regulations for staff candidates.  The PhD by publication route is not available for candidates wishing to register at UNNC. 

6.    For part-time students registered on a standard research degree programme (i.e not a staff candidate route) and holding an appointment within the University, the minimum period of registration may be reduced to three years.

PGR Progression monitoring and formal Progression Review

Includes:  confirmation review; minimum elements of a progression review; final progression review; possible outcomes

7.    All postgraduate researchers (PGRs) registered on research degrees lasting more than one year full-time or two years part-time (e.g. MPhil or Professional Doctorates but not MRes etc) are subject to progression monitoring throughout the year and formal assessment at Progression Review, usually annually. The purpose of progression monitoring and review is to ensure that the PGR is making satisfactory progress towards successfully completing their research and thesis examination (including any viva voce examination) to the required standard in the appropriate time. 

For more information on the maximum period from initial registration for completion of studies, please consult the following: 

Maximum period from initial registration for completion of studies

The basic principles of the formal Progression Review are common to all research candidates  and all years of their programme. There are specific requirements relating to PGRs registered for a PhD dependent on the length and stage of the candidate’s  programme of study.

For more information on the process and structure of PGR progression monitoring and review, please consult the following: 

8.    PGR progression monitoring occurs through regular meetings with the supervisory team beginning on first registration and continuing throughout the programme of study. The supervision records form part of the formal assessment in Progression Review at each Stage of study. 

If /when the supervisors feel that the PGR's progress during the year is unsatisfactory this must be discussed with the PGR and recorded in the supervison record.

All doctoral PGR's should aim to complete the thesis examination within a maximum of four years of first registration irrespective of programme duration, unless the PGR holds an award with terms and conditions that vary this maximum period and the School approves the arrangement.

For more detailed information about the informal and formal aspects of the Progression Review process for research students, please consult the following: 

Progression review of research students

9.     Stages of PGR Study and Progression, and timing of formal Progression Reviews 

Formal assessment of progression through the Progression Review will take place at a time appropriate for the PGR and/or aligned with a School annual process, but should normally be completed by the end of each completed year of study. It is strongly recommended that preparations for the formal Progression Review assessment (e.g. submission of the written report) should begin before the PGR has completed nine months of each year of study and that reviews are held around the nine-month period. This is to allow for any remedial actions on progress and required re-assessment to be completed within the year of study.

For PGRs registered for non-doctoral degrees (e.g. MPhil), progression from Stage 1 usually occurs after the first year of full-time study (with equivalent pro rata timing for part-time PGRs). For these PGRs Stage 2 can be omitted, and Stage 3 represents confirmation of satisfactory progression towards thesis completion and submission. This is determined by assessment of the PGR’s progress towards the level 7 QAA and UNQF outcomes at Stage 3 Progression review. 

For more information about the UNQF, please consult the following:

For doctoral PGRs on 3 and 3.5 year programmes:

In Stage 1, the status of doctoral PGRs as doctoral candidates is probationary. Progression Review to Stage 2 includes confirmation that 1) the PGR is meeting the appropriate published criteria  and 2) their status as doctoral candidates. 

For more information about Assessment criteria for Progression Reviews, please consult the following:

Stage 2 Progression Review confirms the PGR has demonstrated sufficient progress to achieve the doctoral outcomes within the next 12-18 months with reference to the published criteria. Stage 3 Progression Review confirms the achievement of progress sufficient to meet the doctoral outcomes at thesis examination within 6 months. Progression to Stage 3 will therefore normally occur approximately 6 months before the end of the period of registered study.

For doctoral PGRs on 4 year programmes containing a large component of mandatory elements in the first year of registered study, such as substantial training and development requirements, taught modules, or laboratory / research project rotations, Stage 1 Progression Review should take place at the most appropriate time for the PGR depending on the programme, but prior to the end of the second year (and the review processes thereafter on an annual basis). Subsequent Progression Reviews are scheduled at the same intervals/times as for 36 and 42 month programmes as above.

The formal assessment at Stage 3 Progression Review is expected to be held at least 6 months before the end of the period of registered study with a view to thesis examination within this period. If progress is insufficient for thesis submission within the period of registered study, a further Stage 3 Progression Review may take place during the Thesis-pending period. 

For more information about the Thesis-pending period, please consult the following:

Thesis-pending period

The Stage 3 Progression Review can be conducted by the supervisory team but should not be conducted by a single supervisor. It is strongly recommended that where possible the Internal Assessor is also involved in the Stage 3 Progression Review for continuity and quality assurance purposes.

For more information on required timelines for Progression Review and timings, please consult the following:

10.   Minimum elements of the formal assessment at Progression Review

Progression Reviews at Stages 1 and 2 must involve an Internal Assessor. Continued involvement of the Internal Assessor is recommended at Stage 3 Progression Review. The appointment of the Internal Assessor should be confirmed to the PGR and School at least 3 months prior to the start of the Stage 1 formal Progression Review process. More than one Internal Assessor may be appointed if required for specific reasons.

For more information on role, responsibilities and appointment of the Internal Assessor, please consult the following:

Role and responsibilities of the Internal Assessor

Progression Reviews at Stages 1 and 2 should use the core Review elements below, and may include additional methods of assessment deemed necessary by Schools, to assess progress to date against the Stage appropriate published criteria. When including additional elements Schools must pay due regard to PGR and Assessor assessment load.  

The following elements should be included in the formal Progression Review process:

• A meeting between the PGR and Internal Assessor for assessment of the written report and plans for the research. 
• Formative verbal feedback on performance from the Internal Assessor at the end of the meeting, whether performance was good or poor; 
• Independent written assessments from the Internal Assessor and supervisory team on the PGR’s performance to date, and a response from the PGR. 
• Confirmation that the required minimum number of supervision sessions has taken place, that supervision records are available, and that these record the progress made to date highlighting any problems encountered.
• Where required for the programme, provision of evidence to the Internal Assessor that the PGR has attended any modules and passed any assessments that form a compulsory part of their research programme.
• Where the PGR is sponsored and reports have been submitted to the sponsor during the year, the content of those reports should form part of the consideration.

For more detail on the requirements on the different aspects of the Progression Review, please consult the following:

The Stage 3 Progression Review can be conducted by the supervisory team but should not be conducted by a single supervisor. It is however strongly recommended that where possible the Internal Assessor is involved in the Stage 3 Progression Review. 

Progression Review at Stage 3 (progression to thesis examination) must include all the elements above with the following additions and adjustments to assess progress towards achievement of doctoral outcomes:

• a detailed consideration of progress, including the progress already made on writing the thesis, and a detailed plan for thesis completion and submission within the period of registered study. 
• If submission within the registered period of study for the programme (for 36 or 42 month programmes) is not deemed possible based on progress to date, then plans should address how the PGR will ensure final thesis examination within a maximum of 4 years (for doctoral PGRs) from first registration. This should include discussion of any exceptional circumstances, unforeseen problems and mitigations that have been necessary to ensure progression and timely completion. 

If a PGR has extenuating circumstances which may affect their attendance at or performance in the Progression Review, they should refer to the policy and procedure for extenuating circumstances to request an extension to the date set for the Progression Review.

For more information on circumstances affecting the ability to complete the Progression Review assessment, please consult the following: 

Policy on circumstances affecting students' ability to study and complete assessments 

11.   Formal Progression Review recommendations 

For PGRs undergoing Progression Review at all Stages:

• In light of the review at Stages 1 and 2, the internal assessor and the supervisory team should first provide independent reports on the PGR's progress. The PGR should be invited to respond to these reports. The reports and response should be discussed and a joint recommendation on progress made to the PGR’s Head of School on the outcome.
• If the Internal Assessor and supervisory team cannot agree on the recommendation, the supervisory team and Internal Assessor should discuss the review with the Head of School in order to reach an agreement. The PGR should also be aware of such discussions, and where appropriate be included in them.  

For more information on resolution of Progression Review outcomes please consult the following:

For probationary doctoral PGRs at Stage 1 review:

• As above, including whether the joint recommendation includes confirmation of PhD registration to the PGR’s Head of School.

For doctoral PGRs at Stage 3 review: 

• As above, including an additional statement on whether plans for thesis completion are sufficiently robust to result in completion of a thesis of the required quality and examination within the period of registered study, OR if not, completion of a thesis of the required quality and examination within a maximum of 4 years from initial registration. 

All reports on the outcome of the Review, and all supervision records should be available to the assessing staff and the PGR. 

12.   The possible outcomes of formal Progression Review

Where the Supervisory team and Internal Assessor recommendations agree, the joint recommendation to the University can be either:

That the PGR progresses to the next stage:

• For Stage 1 PhD PGRs, this includes confirmation of PhD status. 
• For all Stages, this means re-registration in the following academic session on the same degree (unless the PGR has reached the end of the registered length of the programme).
• For PGRs in Stage 3 who have reached the end of their period of registered study and who have satisfied the minimum period of registration and completed their research, the recommendation will be entry to the thesis completion and submission period.  
• For PGRs at all Stages: With the agreement of the PGR, the recommendation in the joint report can be to transfer registration to another, usually higher, degree (e.g. from MPhil to PhD). 

For more information on the necessary process required before transfer, please consult the following:

That the PGR does not progress to the next stage and has an opportunity for reassessment:

• At all Stages, this recommendation includes a referral for reassessment. The PGR is registered/re-registered for PhD in the following academic session. Stage 1 PGR's remain on probationary status until successful re-assessment and confirmation of Stage 1 progression. 
• For Stage 3 PGRs who have made insufficient progress to allow them to meet the doctoral outcomes within the following 6 months, the assessors may recommend a reassessment of the PGR's ability to meet the doctoral outcomes after 3 months, with a plan of supportive or corrective action. 
• For Stage 3 PGR's who have made insufficient progress in the research to allow them  to meet the doctoral outcomes and submit the thesis for examination within the following 6 months, the assessors may recommend an exceptional extension to the PGR’s period of registration for up to one further year. Reassessment for progression to Stage 3 should be done after no more than 6 months. Thesis completion and examination are still expected within the 4 year maximum period.
• The maximum number of Progression Reviews at any stage is limited to two unless extenuating circumstances are accepted, in which case a further First Sit Progression Review may be conducted.

In these cases, supervisory records must be kept, and should be available for the re-assessment. 

That the PGR does not progress to the next stage, and:

• At all Stages, and with the agreement of the PGR, the PGR transfers to registration for another degree (e.g. from PhD to MPhil, or MPhil to MRes) without the need for re-assessment. In this case formal transfer of degree must be done. 

The reasons for a recommendation for reassessment or registration on another degree must be explained to the PGR as soon as possible. When reassessment is required, the specific requirements for improvement must be made clear. Where the Internal Assessor is likely to make this recommendation, this should be fed back verbally at the Progression Review meeting.

The supervisory team can be invited to attend the Progression Review for the informal feedback from the Internal Assessor.

If the independent recommendations from the Supervisory team and Internal Assessor disagree, this should be resolved by discussion, which may involve the Head of School or delegate. Once resolved, the processes for ‘Progression recommended’ or ‘Progression not recommended’ should be followed. 

For further details on the resolution process in the event of such a disagreement, please consult the following.

13.   Reassessment of progression

When reassessment is required before progression can be confirmed, PGRs must be given the requirements for improved performance with SMART objectives/goals, and agree with the assessors an appropriate and defined timeframe in which to meet these. The PGR must be aware of the possible outcomes of the reassessment process (Section 14) and must receive support in achieving the required improvements.

Reassessment of progression has the same format as the Progression Review. 

For further information on the requirements and processes for PGRs recommended for remedial support and reassessment, please consult the following:

14.    The possible outcomes of re-assessment Progression Reviews are:

If performance in the re-assessment meets the stated criteria, and the required improvement has been made as agreed by the assessors, the recommendation by the School to the University should be that:

• For Stage 1 PhD, PGRs receive confirmation of doctoral status. 
• At all Stages, the PGR is re-registered on the same degree.
• PGRs in Stage 3 who have reached the end of their period of registered study and who have satisfied the minimum period of registration and completed their research enter the thesis completion and submission period.  

If performance in the re-assessment does not meet the criteria and the required improvement has not been achieved as agreed by the supervisory team, Internal Assessor and PGR, the recommendation by the School to the University should be that, for all PGRs at all stages:

• the PGR is required to re-register on another, usually lower degree (e.g. PhD to MPhil, MPhil to MRes). 
• the PGR’s registration be terminated. 

Termination of registration can only be recommended when supported by evidence that the PGR has received written warnings on lack of progress during the period of study, and the period of supported improvement. In all such cases, all records of supervisory meetings and the Progression Review process must be submitted to QSC for scrutiny and approval before termination of registration.

Includes:  exceptional circumstances; Application for an Extension to the Thesis-pending Period document; examples that would/not warrant an extension

15.   Students whose programme of study lasts for less than 4 years (8 years in the case of part-time students) and who have completed their research and the period of registered study as required by regulations may enter the thesis-pending period. In all cases the thesis must be submitted within 4 years (full-time) or 8 years (part-time) of the start of study or within 12 months (full-time) or 24 months (part-time) of the end of registration, whichever is the lesser unless the terms and conditions of a studentship held by an individual vary this.

In the Thesis-pending period the student will be entitled to the use of library facilities and University computing facilities but not to facilities for research. The PGR and supervisors must continue to meet regularly, in line with minimum requirements . Supervisors must read and comment on one draft of the candidate’s thesis prior to each submission (as appropriate), when submitted within the required timeframes for feedback to be given.

More information on the Thesis-pending period can be found here:

Thesis-pending period (including Policy on extension)

16.    In exceptional circumstances an extension to the Thesis-pending period may be granted subject to the following conditions.  Requests for extensions will only be considered as a result of circumstances affecting the Thesis-pending period, and not for the period of registered study. If an extension request is granted, the fee listed in the University's Fees Schedule will be payable.

More information on tuition fees and the University's fees schedule can be found here:

Student fees and finance

(a)    Applications for an extension to the Thesis-pending period should be submitted to a Student Service Centre or equivalent for consideration on behalf of the University, using the application form available from here.

(b)    Other than in exceptional circumstances applications will only be considered if received by a Student Service Centre no less than 3 months in advance of the Thesis-pending period.

(c)    All applications require the support of the student's School.

All applications should include a plan detailing:

• which thesis chapters are complete
• what work remains to be done on incomplete chapters
• a time-line for the completion of outstanding work and a date for submission of the completed thesis.

17.     Acceptable and unacceptable circumstances:

The following circumstances may result in an extension being granted:

• Exceptional personal circumstances (e.g. illness, hospitalisation, accident) if significantly impacting on the writing-up process (or resubmission/minor corrections process relating to paragraph 37 below)
• Death of a close relative, or illness of a close relative where the student is the carer
• Illness or death of a partner
• Prolonged jury service
• Expeditions for sport of national significance (providing the extension is acceptable to the student’s funding body)
• Requirement for a student to undertake military service.

The following are examples of circumstances which would not normally warrant an extension:

• Taking up employment during the Thesis-pending period or resubmission/minor corrections process relating to paragraph 37 (of the Extension to a resubmission period or of time allowed for minor corrections section below)
• voluntary service overseas.

Submission of thesis

Includes:  after registered study and before conclusion of Thesis-pending period; notification of submission; soft bound copies and electronic versions of thesis; role of proof readers; alternative formats for thesis submission; key documents

18.    Students are required to submit a thesis for examination after their period of registered study and before the conclusion of the Thesis-pending period. A student must give formal notice to their School of their intention to submit their thesis. The School should ensure that a Student Service Centre or equivalent office is informed so that the procedure for appointing examiners can be initiated.

19.    An electronic version saved as a searchable PDF, should be submitted to a Student Services or equivalent in a form prescribed by the University, which will forward the thesis to the Examiners. Soft bound copies may be required. PGRs are encouraged to publish papers in advance of submission of their thesis and prior publication of papers arising from the research being undertaken should not prejudice the assessment of the thesis.

20.   The thesis must be written by the student and be the result of the student’s own work. It must be the result of work done mainly while the student is registered as a student of this University. This requirement does not preclude a student obtaining limited assistance with proof-reading and with the routine collection and/or processing of data under guidelines and instructions clearly devised by the student. When such help is obtained it should be with the prior approval of the supervisor who must be satisfied that the spirit of the 'own work' requirement is not breached.

The Role of Proofreaders

A proofreader may only ensure that the meaning of the author is not misrepresented due to the quality and standard of the English used. This can include correcting spelling and basic grammar errors. Inaccuracies in academic content should not be corrected nor should the structure of the piece of work be changed; doing so may result in a charge of plagiarism. 

21.   The thesis should not be more than 100,000 words in the case of PhD or 60,000 words in the case of MPhil (in both cases inclusive of appendices, footnotes, tables, and bibliography); the University may withhold from examination a thesis that exceeds these word limits.

22.    Alternative formats for submission may apply. For certain doctorates (Music, Creative Writing, Drama and Performance Practice as Research, Translation Studies) an appendix detailing submission requirements is available. For more information, please consult the following:

Alternative formats for thesis submission

Submission by Published Works may also be permitted.

23.    Students may offer performance work for assessment alongside the thesis as supplementary evidence for the ideas and arguments put forward in written form. Where such evidence is submitted, a permanent record of that evidence should be included with the version of the thesis that is lodged in the University Library.

24.   If a thesis includes work which is politically, commercially or industrially sensitive, the student’s School may apply to the University for access to the thesis in the University libraries to be restricted. The restriction may be for a period not exceeding two years in the first instance with the possibility of an extension of that period up to a maximum of five years.

More information on the assessment of research students can be found here:

25.    In circumstances where it is appropriate to the student’s discipline, students are required to submit all data collected during the period of study as a research student of this University to their School prior to arrangement of the viva voce examination. Failure to do so may mean that the thesis is withheld from examination.

Examination

Includes:  examiner submission of independent report; viva voce examination; alternative forms of examination; attendance

26.    The Examiners should submit independent reports on the thesis to a Student Service Centre or equivalent or the Head of School before the viva voce examination takes place. The reports should contain a full and frank assessment of the merits and weaknesses of the thesis. In the case of MPhil students, the reports should indicate whether a viva voce examination is necessary. If it is found not to be necessary, the Examiners should provide a recommendation as set out in Regulation 35 of the Outcomes of Examinations section on a Joint Report Form.

More information on Examiners can be found here:

Role and appointment of Examiners

27.    The School should seek to ensure that the viva voce examination takes place within 3 months of the submission of the thesis. The viva voce examination will normally take place at the University and in person. However, the Head of School or delegate may give permission in appropriate circumstances for the viva voce examination to be held in another location or through digital means, provided agreement of the Examiners and the student is obtained and the proposed location/format is one that is deemed by them all to be suitable for the purpose. The Head of School or delegate will confirm that the necessary conditions for a remote or online viva have been met when signing the Nomination of PGR Examiners form.

28.    If circumstances allow or demand it, a viva voce examination may be organised in another form (e.g. by video conference/other online platform). Before agreeing such an arrangement the School must check that appropriate facilities for an online viva voce examination are available to all participants, and shall ensure they have written confirmation that the student and the Examiners have agreed to the proposal. 

Hybrid viva conditions, with some participants together and some remotely situated, should be avoided where possible. If this format is required, if and where possible, the candidate should be co-located with either the Internal Examiner or Independent Chair. Vivas with only the candidate located remotely are not permitted. If an online format of the viva voce is agreed by all parties, this cannot subsequently be used as grounds for a appeal. No evidence based on recordings of the viva will be permissible in any appeal process.

29.    An Independent Chair is not a requirement for a viva voce examination unless specific circumstances apply, such as conducting the viva online. The candidate or Head of School may request the appointment of an Independent Chair. An independent, non-examining chair must be appointed to preside over proceedings when specific circumstances apply, including at the request of the PGR.

If the PGR requests an Independent Chair on grounds of equality and diversity, they may also request that the appointment takes the diversity of the examining team into consideration.  

When appointed, the Independent Chair will lead the viva, be present throughout and will provide a short report on the conduct of the viva. They will not take an active role in the examination or decision making other than supporting examiners to reach a decision with reference to the University of Nottingham Qualifications Framework/ QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications Award Descriptors.

Where the appointment of an Independent Chair is not required or requested, Schools should find alternative ways of assuring fairness and consistency which are acceptable to the student.

30.    The Head of School has a right to attend the viva voce examination of any research student in their School, as an observer, unless they are the student's supervisor when a deputy may be appointed to attend in their place. Before the viva voce examination takes place the Head of School should first inform the Examiners, the Independent Chair (if appointed) and the PGR that they wish to attend. The Examiners may request that the Head of School attend a viva voce examination. 

Supervisors may not attend the viva voce examination. If concerns about process or PGR support or performance are raised, an Independent Chair or the Head of School should attend.  

If the viva voce is held online, the candidate may request that they have a supporter/observer present with them either for the entire viva or for the communication of the decision. This individual must not contribute to or participate in the viva in any way and must be introduced to all participants on camera at the start.

31.   The viva will include questions and discussions that determine whether the candidate has achieved the required doctoral outcomes.

This will normally include questions and discussion designed to ascertain that the thesis embodies the candidate’s own research; clarify aspects of the research presented in the thesis to ensure understanding; test the candidate’s general comprehension of the field of study within which the subject of the thesis falls; test the candidate’s acquaintance with the general literature of the subject, and knowledge of the relation of the work to the wider field of which it is a part; and determine the respects in which the work advances, modifies, or otherwise affects the wider field of scholarship.

Outcomes of Examination

Includes:  completion of joint report form; frameworks; possible outcomes; resubmission; successful candidates

32.    Following the viva voce examination the Examiners should complete and sign the joint report form and come to agreement of the recommendation on the award (or not) of the degree. The student should be given immediate informal feedback on the recommended outcome of the examination and should be advised that more formal details will be transmitted later in writing. If the Examiners recommend that the degree should not be awarded and/or that the student should also be required to resubmit for the same or a different degree, the student should be provided with copies of the Examiners' reports. The Internal Examiner should also write to the student formally conveying the joint views of the Examiners on the submission, describing in detail the academic and presentational reasons for their recommendation, and (if appropriate) providing clear advice about what matters should be addressed in any resubmission. 

33.    Research degrees will be awarded at Masters or Doctoral level to students who have demonstrated that they satisfy the relevant qualification descriptors contained in the University of Nottingham Qualifications Framework (UNQF). For more information about the UNQF, please consult the following:

34. The Examiners may recommend to the University the following outcomes of examination:

• Award of degree for which the student is registered, or
• Award of the degree subject to correction of typographical errors within one month
• Award of the degree subject to minor amendments to be completed within 3 months*, or
• Require the candidate to attend a second viva voce examination and resubmit the same thesis (which may be subject to minor amendments to be completed within 3 months*), or
• Resubmit the thesis in a revised form within 12 months with/without attending a second viva voce examination, or
• That no degree be awarded and that the candidate is not allowed to present themself again for examination for the degree for which the thesis was submitted.

35.    Where a thesis has been resubmitted and/or a second viva voce examination has occurred, the Examiners may recommend to the University the following outcomes of examination:

• Award of the degree subject to correction of typographical errors within one month, or
• Award of the degree with minor amendments to be completed within 3 months to the satisfaction of the internal examiner*, or
• (in the case of PhD students) Award of degree of MPhil without further conditions, or
• (in the case of PhD students) Award of the degree of MPhil with minor amendments to be completed within 3 months*
• No degree awarded and no further examination opportunity.

* Exceptionally, where a student has been previously registered as a part-time student and it has been demonstrated that circumstances exist such that it would be in the best interests of that student, the examiners may recommend that the degree be awarded subject to minor amendments being completed within 6 months. 

36.    The joint report form is forwarded by the Examiners to the Head of School and they shall forward the independent and joint report forms to a Student Service Centre for approval by the University. The Student Service Centre or equivalent will inform the student of the University's decision.

37.   Successful candidates will be eligible to graduate once their thesis has been uploaded to the University’s etheses service and approved by the Internal Examiner or, in cases where there are two External Examiners, the lead External Examiner.

Extension to a resubmission period or of time allowed for minor corrections

Unuk students   , student services, unnc students .

UNM students 

Staff       , related content.

Portland Building, University of Nottingham University Park Nottingham, NG7 2RD

Legal information

• Terms and conditions
• Posting rules
• Accessibility
• Freedom of information
• Charity gateway
• Cookie policy

Connect with the University of Nottingham through social media and our blogs .

Browser does not support script.

• Regulations  / Ordinances and Regulations: Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Ordinances and Regulations: Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

This regulation refers to the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD).  The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) is awarded by the University in recognition of the successful completion of a period of supervised research and training, the results of which show convincing evidence of the capacity of the candidate to pursue research and scholarship and make an original contribution and substantial addition to knowledge. The results of this research shall then be embodied in a thesis or other appropriate form and must contain material of a standard appropriate for peer-reviewed publication.

Our expectations of you under this policy:

This regulation sets out the regulatory framework by which the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) is governed and includes specific content on admission, progression and examination of the thesis.  

Your expectations of us under this policy:

This regulation sets out the regulatory framework by which this programme of study is governed at the University. 

View the full guidance document

Who to contact.

Students should contact their Faculty/School Graduate Office for guidance in the first instance. 

• See a list of School contacts

(University Switchboard) +44 (0) 161 306 6000

Open contact directory

The University of Manchester Oxford Road Manchester M13 9PL

Open campus map

Connect with us

Open social media directory

• Graduate School and Doctoral Research
• PhD and MPhil Regulations

QMU PhD and MPhil Regulations

For further information on the Regulations, please contact staff in the Graduate School .

Please note that regulations are subject to change. Always refer to the most recent version of the regulations.  This can be found on the University’s Graduate School website by clicking on the doctoral regulations tab.

These regulations govern all PhDs and MPhils undertaken at Queen Margaret University. Professional Doctorate regulations are published separately.

PhD/MPhil candidates, and their supervisors are required to read these regulations, and also the PhD Candidate Handbook and Code of Practice, the most recent versions of which are available on the QMU Graduate School website.

Where questions of procedure arise, and especially in the case of any appeal, candidates and supervisors will be deemed to have read the regulations and all relevant institutional Codes of Practice and Handbooks. All candidates and supervisors are also expected to be aware of the Essential Information for Students publication. This is available on the current student A-Z (under the letter E).

General Regulations and Policies

Under these regulations, where a University officer is named by their title, they may act through their properly appointed nominee.

Committee structure and remits

The Research Strategy Committee is the standing committee of Senate with overall responsibility for the academic quality of research degrees at Queen Margaret University. The Research Strategy Committee makes recommendations to Senate on the regulatory framework for doctoral programmes and related matters. It also promotes best practice in admission, supervision and examination of doctoral candidates.

The Research Strategy Committee delegates some matters concerning individual candidates to the Graduate School Academic Board. The remit of the Graduate School Academic Board is attached as Appendix One.

Equal opportunities

Queen Margaret University is committed to equality of opportunity and believes in a culture of diversity and inclusion. Each application received by the University is considered carefully on its own merits. The University seeks to open access to a wide range of candidates, subject to the essential principle that there is a reasonable expectation of completion within the normal duration of registration.

Candidates who wish to offer feedback or report a concern or issue can do this by contacting a member of their Supervisory Team, the Head of the Graduate School, their Doctoral Research Co-ordinator or the Graduate School Officer.

Candidates with disabilities

Information for candidates with disabilities, including contact details for QMU Disability Advisors, is available from the Disability Service Website . It is recommended to make contact with the Disability Service at the earliest opportunity.

School-based facilities

The University will provide access to office space and use of office facilities, as well as support services. Further details can be obtained from the PhD Candidate Handbook.

Full details regarding the payment and amount of fees applicable for a particular session can be found on the QMU fees website .

The following fees apply depending on fee status: tuition fees; bench fees; continuation fee; examination fee. Candidates, or their sponsors, are also required to cover the cost of printing theses and the graduation fee.

• Bench fees pay for the cost of consumable materials and other expenses associated with the candidate’s research. Divisions or Research Centres may charge bench fees – please contact the relevant supervisor who can liaise with the Graduate School to set this up for you.
• All PhD/MPhil candidates exceeding their normal prescribed period of study, without submitting their thesis, are registered as continuing candidates, and pay the appropriate continuation fee.
• All PhD/MPhil candidates must pay the examination fee, which is charged following submission of the thesis for examination. A second fee is charged for any re-examination.

It should be noted that QMU fee levels are reviewed on an annual basis and may be subject to increase during the period of study. It is therefore possible that, by the time a candidate reaches the continuation or examination stage, the continuation or examination fee will have increased from the fee in place on initial matriculation.

Fees will be adjusted in accordance with any change to a candidate’s registration status, e.g., suspension of studies or change in mode of study from full-time to part-time. Changes which affect fees will be notified to the relevant department only once approved by the Graduate School Academic Board.

There are four categories of PhD or MPhil candidate in relation to fees: fee-paying; fee-paying with support from an independent sponsor; QMU bursary; and staff.

Fee-paying and fee-paying with support

Fee-paying candidates pay tuition fees and bench fees, where applicable, annually for the prescribed period of study, plus any continuation fee, and the examination fee. If an independent sponsor has agreed to support study (e.g., an employer, embassy, or other funding body), arrangements can be made to invoice the sponsor directly. It is a condition of registration that candidates accept liability for their fees. Even if the fees are to be paid by a sponsor, such as an employer or embassy, it is the candidate’s personal responsibility to ensure that they are paid and to provide evidence of funding at matriculation.

Where a candidate has failed to provide written confirmation of funding within 28 days of the start of their programme of study, they will be deemed to be personally liable for the payment of the fees, and an invoice will be issued to the candidate accordingly. QMU bursary

Candidates on a Queen Margaret University bursary have their tuition and bench fees waived, but are liable for any continuation fee and for the examination fee.

Fees may be waived for current members of staff registered for a part-time PhD or MPhil. This requires to be agreed by the Dean of School. Members of staff are required to cover the costs of examination and graduation themselves.

Collaborating establishments

The University encourages co-operation with relevant establishments and organisations (collaborating establishments) for the purposes of research.

Less formal collaboration normally involves access by the candidate to the facilities and other resources of the collaborating establishment. Supervision and other facilities will be provided by Queen Margaret University, but the collaborating establishment may provide a nominated Advisor, or even a second supervisor, as part of the Supervisory Team. Examples would be where a candidate is conducting fieldwork outside the UK or is registered on a non-resident basis. In such cases, a letter from the collaborating establishment should be provided, outlining the facilities that will be made available to the candidate.

More formal collaborations may involve joint supervision, intellectual property considerations or joint funding. Examples might include situations where a studentship is attached to a joint funding application, or collaboration with an NHS or European research programme. In such cases, a collaborative agreement must be drawn up in which the performance obligations and responsibilities of each party are explicitly stated. The Agreement shall set out the terms and conditions of collaboration, covering areas such as financial provisions, reporting, intellectual property, publication of results, and liability/indemnity. Guidance regarding agreements of this kind is available from the Research Grants and Contracts Unit.

The contribution of the collaborating establishment must be duly acknowledged in the candidate’s thesis.

Academic staff considering setting up a joint or shared collaboration are advised to contact the Graduate School in advance, as part of the discussion, application or tendering process.

For the most recent version of the guidelines and the forms required for an ethics submission, please see the QMU Ethics website . Advice and guidance is also available from the Secretary to the University Research Ethics Committee via [email protected] .

No research may proceed without formal ethical approval received in writing. Applications for ethical approval are reviewed initially by the Divisional Research Ethics Committees (DivRec) with four possible outcomes: (a) referral back to applicant for amendments b) approval by the DivRec; c) referral to the University Research Ethics Committee (UREC) for further review; d) referral to an external ethics committee such as NHS (IRAS). All research must receive QMU ethical approval irrespective of external ethical approval requirements.

Data Protection and Research Data Management

QMU is committed to protecting the rights and freedoms of individuals with respect to the processing of their personal data. Such processing is undertaken in compliance with:

• The UK General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) and Data Protection Act 2018 (the Act), which together are referred to as the "Data Protection Legislation" within this section
• associated legislation
• the University's notification with the UK Information Commissioner, which sets out the purposes for which the University holds and processes personal data about employees, students, graduates and others.

It is essential that all candidates are familiar with the University’s Data Protection Policy and Guidelines. These are to be read and followed by all candidates and are available on the QMU website. In addition, the University’s Research Data Management Policy requires that researchers take steps to ensure strict confidentiality of data relating to study participants, and that research data is managed to the highest standards as part of the University’s commitment to research excellence. Further information is available on Research Data Management site .

Intellectual Property Rights

Full details are available in the University’s Intellectual Property Policy .

All IP generated by candidates during the course of their studies at the University and/or using University resources (“Student IP”) will be owned by the inventor (the candidate who created the IP), except:

• Where, as a condition of support an external funder providing funding or other support requires that Student IP is assigned to them (for example projects involving 3rd parties and work requiring use of pre-existing University-owned IP); or
• Where the Student IP has been developed in the production of an MSc, MPhil or PhD thesis or in the production of course or teaching materials, in which cases the Student IP will be owned by the University.

In the event where any of the exceptions above are considered by the University to apply, the candidate shall execute and deliver such documents and perform such acts as may reasonably be required in order to ensure that ownership of Student IP is vested in the correct party, as set out above, and the University may require the candidate to do so at any time.

Candidates may wish to publish the results of their research during or after their PhD/MPhil. There is no restriction on publication, unless commercial/third party interests are involved. Candidates should always consult their Supervisory Team first, to agree attribution of authorship.

Academic dishonesty, plagiarism and fraud

The University’s regulations on Academic Dishonesty and Plagiarism are available in full from the Assessment Regulations for taught programmes . Further information can be found on the Plagiarism Policy website . QMU is also committed to complying with sector Concordats and contemporary standards of good practice that promote quality and integrity in research and Knowledge Exchange. It is highly recommended that candidates and supervisors familiarise themselves with Research Concordats and Research Good Practice

Plagiarism, collusion, falsification of data and other forms of academic dishonesty are considered fraudulent and an offence against University discipline. Whilst the principles described in the general Assessment Regulations apply to all students, the procedures for reporting and evaluation for a suspected offence differ slightly in the case of PhD/MPhil candidates.

A consistently high standard of referencing is expected from all PhD/MPhil candidates, and Supervisory Teams should seek to offer feedback and feedforward from a very early stage to correct any examples of poor academic practice found in candidates’ written work.

Where a member of the Supervisory Team has concerns about possible plagiarism in early versions or drafts of written work, they will need to respond to this in a constructive way to enable the candidate to eliminate potential or actual plagiarism. Once work is submitted for any form of assessment, and plagiarism is a concern, formal processes will be used to respond to the concern.

Where academic misconduct is suspected in formal assessed work, the assessors should first discuss the concerns with the Supervisory Team. Staff in the Graduate School should be contacted for advice. All cases will be referred to the Dean of School, in accordance with the QMU Code of Discipline. The Supervisory Team shall decide whether there is a prima facie case established for plagiarism or research malpractice and, on that basis, the appropriate route for handling the case. If it is judged that there is academic misbehaviour or academic misconduct, then the case will be referred to the Dean of School under the QMU Disciplinary Regulations. The Supervisory Team will be responsible for the submission of evidential material to the Dean of School and for informing the candidate(s) involved and any referring staff member of the decision to move to the Disciplinary process. Please refer to The Regulations on Student Discipline .

Such offences on the part of academic staff would be dealt with by disciplinary procedures described in staff guidance available from Human Resources.

The University has established procedures for the making and hearing of complaints and grievances . Candidates are encouraged to seek resolution of such matters informally first, if at all possible. Staff in the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement can offer advice.

UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) Regulations

The University is bound by the regulations of UKVI, including visa requirements for international candidates. The University will comply in all cases with UKVI requirements, such as may be amended from time to time.

Relevant advice will be provided to international applicants and candidates as appropriate and within the remit of University officers. Advice on visas and immigration should be sought from the University’s International Office.

Candidates studying on a Student Visa may only study on a full-time basis and must be resident within reasonable commuting distance of the University. Please refer to the information on candidates studying on a Student Visa .

Health and safety

Health and Safety information , including fire regulations, is available from the QMU website. It is extremely important that candidates observe the University’s Health and Safety Policy and any health and safety precautions which may be prescribed. This includes the University Smoking Policy . It is also important that candidates are sensitive to issues of risk in the Health and Safety context.

DCA (Doctoral Candidates’ Association) and Students’ Union

All PhD/MPhil candidates are members of the Doctoral Candidates’ Association and Students’ Union. For further information, refer to the PhD Candidate Handbook.

1. Academic Regulations and PhD Criteria

1. PhD criteria

1.1 To be eligible for a PhD, a candidate must undertake a research programme leading to the submission and successful defence of a significant piece of work that embodies the results of their research and shows evidence that the candidate has met the criteria below. Either of two possible forms of submission is acceptable. The form of submission is decided at application stage by the candidate and their supervisors and approved as part of the probationary assessment. Exceptionally, any subsequent proposed changes to that agreed form of submission must be submitted to the Graduate School Academic Board for approval. The two acceptable forms of submission are:

This form of submission will consist of a substantial written thesis (of between 70,000 and 100,000 words) representing or embodying within the text new knowledge deriving from original research. The thesis must be presented in accordance with the University’s requirements.

(PhD by Creative Practice): Creative Work and accompanying Thesis

This form of submission will consist of a combination of original creative work and an associated written thesis (of between 30,000 and 40,000 words), which taken together form a coherent whole and represent or embody new knowledge and derive from original research. The original creative work may take a form appropriate to the field of study (for example, artefacts, film, performance, or photography) and must be documented fully in a form suitable for public dissemination (for example, photographs, DVD, or other audio visual material). In all cases, the creative practice must have been undertaken as part of the registered research programme.

1.2 The respective criteria for the awards of Master of Philosophy (MPhil) and Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) are set out below. The MPhil is offered as an exit award when a candidate has been moved to the MPhil track at a progression point (see paragraphs 6.4 and 6.5), or in lieu of PhD only, as set out further under paragraph 8.8.2 and 8.8.3. Applications to undertake an MPhil will not be accepted and PhD candidates cannot, normally, request to transfer to the MPhil. The form of submission will consist of a written thesis (of between 30,000 and 40,000 words). Applications to undertake an MPhil only will not be accepted. While it is recognised that candidates will require guidance and supervision during the course of their studies, by the end of the degree candidates must demonstrate:

In all cases, the submission must have a coherent structure understandable by a scholar in the same general field with regard to aims, background, methodology, methods and conclusions; must be satisfactory in its literary presentation and must conform to the regulations in respect of format (see Section 9 of these regulations). In the case of a PhD by Creative Practice, the written and practical elements together should address the research question, the conceptual/theoretical framework and methodology adopted, the critical and theoretical framework for the research, and demonstrate original research analytical skill and rigour.

2. Application and Acceptance

2.1 Topics of research

Programmes of research may be proposed in fields of study which are within the strategic areas of research specified by the University via The Research Centres and Institutes. Acceptance of any proposed programme is subject to the requirement that it is capable of leading to scholarly research impact and to its presentation for assessment by appropriate Examiners. All proposed research programmes shall be considered for PhD registration on their academic merits. The concerns and interests of any associated funding body may be taken into account as secondary factors.

2.2 Entry requirements

All applications will be considered by The Graduate School on an individual basis and in collaboration with supervisors and Research Centre Directors as required. No offer will be issued to an applicant who fails to meet the minimum QMU entrance requirements.

An applicant for registration for a PhD shall usually hold, or anticipate gaining, a Masters degree. An applicant with a good Honours degree (2:1 or better) from a United Kingdom Higher Education Institution, or a degree from an overseas institution accepted as equivalent by Head of the Graduate School, taking advice from the School Doctoral Research Coordinator and Head of Admissions may also be considered for admission to the PhD programme.

Applicants without an Honours degree may be considered if they can demonstrate equivalent professional experience in a relevant field to their proposed research topic. In considering such applications, additional evidence may be requested, (such as a portfolio or essay) demonstrating that the professional experience is at the requisite level.

See also the general University regulations on Recognition of Prior Learning .

2.3 English language requirements

All overseas applicants must provide evidence of their English language ability. A minimum score of IELTS 6.5 or equivalent, with no element of performance lower than IELTS 6.0, is the current QMU entrance requirement . Completion of a previous degree delivered in English within the last five years may count as evidence of English language ability. 2.4 Making an application

Applications are processed through the University’s online application form. A short overview of the proposed research idea justifying why the research is needed is required as part of the application. Two academic references are also required. Applicants are encouraged to have made contact with potential supervisors in advance of submitting their application. Potential supervisors may work with the applicant to develop the proposal overview for application. 2.5 Decision making on applications

2.5.1 The Admissions Team forwards applications and supporting documents to the relevant School Doctoral Research Coordinator. The Doctoral Research Coordinator considers applications and liaises directly with supervisors where they are named or, where no supervisors are named, with Research Centre/Institute Directors and potential supervisors. Occasionally, it may be necessary to involve Heads of Division or Deans.

2.5.2 Wherever possible, each suitable applicant is invited for interview as determined by the Doctoral Research Coordinator, including at least one member with relevant subject expertise and one Research Centre/Institute representative. In some situations, a potential supervisor may know the applicant through related research or other QMU activity and an interview may not be necessary. Where it is not possible to interview the applicant in person, an alternative interview format (e.g., video link) should be arranged. It is the responsibility of the Doctoral Research Coordinator to ensure that the applicant has appropriate entry requirements and is suited to pursuing a research degree, and that an appropriate Supervisory Team is available.

2.5.3 A recommendation for acceptance of the applicant and for appointment of the Supervisory Team is then submitted to the Admissions Team, and a letter offering a place is sent to the applicant.

2.5.4 No applicant may be accepted without confirmation that a suitably qualified Supervisory Team can be put in place (see Section 7).

2.5.5 No applicant may be accepted on a non-resident basis without confirmation from the Head of the Graduate School, acting on advice from the Doctoral Research Coordinator (see Section 3).

2.5.6 Within the offer letter, applicants will be informed of all relevant information, including fees, for which they may be liable and the expected time commitment involved in the degree programme. Part-time candidates should plan to devote half the amount of time a full-time candidate would need to complete their studies. Prior to starting the programme, information on joining the University will be e-mailed to successful applicants, including notification of the date on which they will report to the University to begin their programme of study.

It is the responsibility of the Admissions Team to ensure that all references have been supplied, to obtain copies of degree certificates and evidence of English language scores, and to notify applicants of any requirement for criminal record checks.

2.5.7 The Admissions Team is also responsible for advice to international candidates on visa requirements and for checking that candidates are in possession of an appropriate visa at the point of admission.

2.6 Start dates

New PhD candidates normally begin their programme of study at the beginning of the academic year in September, when the Doctoral Candidate Induction week takes place. An alternative start date is the second week of semester two in January. Candidates may start at a time other than the beginning of the academic year, in exceptional circumstances only, if suitable arrangements for induction can be put in place.

Members of staff of the University wishing to register for a part-time PhD must first discuss this with their line manager through Performance Enhancement Review. If it is agreed that appropriate study time can be set aside within the staff member’s workload, they may submit a formal application through the usual channels. It is expected that members of staff who are accepted for a part-time PhD will have some study time protected, although much of the study will need to be done outwith normal working hours.

All applicants must be interviewed in line with the usual admissions process. The decision-making process above must also be followed. Members of staff are encouraged to begin their studies as set out above in 2.6. and must complete induction.

2.8 Bursaries

Applications for QMU bursaries will be managed by the Admissions Team and the Graduate School and approved by The Research Strategy Committee.

2.9 General precepts

Where not otherwise stated, the general precepts of the QMU Admission Regulations apply. 2.10 Disability

All applications will be assessed on the basis of academic suitability. Discussions about the support requirements of applicants will be separate from that consideration. Applicants are encouraged to indicate any disabilities on the application form. Where an applicant with a disability meets the academic entry requirements, the relevant Academic Disabled Student Coordinator must be consulted. The standard process for determining special support needs must be followed before making an offer.

3. Residence, Leave of Absence and Holidays

3.1 Residence

3.1.1 Full-time candidates should normally be resident within reach of Edinburgh, except during holiday time. This is to allow adequate contact with the Supervisory Team and participation in the wider research environment of the School and Research Centres/Institute.

3.1.2 Where candidates are not resident within reach of Edinburgh, and do not intend to re-locate, the Head of the Graduate School, taking advice from the School Doctoral Research Coordinator, must consider the following factors before making an offer:

a) Whether suitable arrangements can be made for frequent supervisory contact by email, video conferencing, telephone or a combination of these. b) The ability to participate in Doctoral Study Weeks and ideally the Annual DCA Conference. c) The availability of any necessary facilities for the support of research locally. d) The availability of appropriate academic support locally. e) The availability of distance learning support from QMU, given the applicant’s location and subject area.

3.1.3 Distance learning applications will be considered on a case-by-case basis. All applications for admission as a non-resident candidate must be approved by the Head of the Graduate School, on taking advice from the School Doctoral Research Coordinator. Changes from campus based to non-resident status that arise once a candidate has been admitted, will be referred to the Graduate School Academic Board for decision. Applicants should obtain advice from Admissions on the visa requirements relevant to distance learning mode of study.

3.1.4 Distance learning candidates must attend at least two one-week long research development weeks organised by the Graduate School in the first year of study; and at least one, one-week visit to QMU in years 2 and 3 to allow face-to-face supervisory meetings and participation in various research study and development opportunities; and engage with the wider research culture at the University as part of the Researcher Skills Development.

3.2 Leave of absence

3.2.1 Applications for leave of absence for purposes such as fieldwork and extended visits to archives must be approved by the PhD candidate’s Supervisory Team.

3.2.2 Candidates and their Supervisory Team are required to notify the Graduate School of any such absence in advance of the absence occurring. International candidates on Student Visas are additionally bound by the University’s regulations for sponsorship, which are communicated separately.

3.3 Candidate holidays

Bursary candidates are entitled to a maximum of six weeks’ holiday per year, in addition to the public holidays. Dates for holidays should be agreed with the Supervisory Team. Other candidates may take holidays at their own discretion, subject to meeting the usual requirements of study and any visa restrictions.

4. Admission, Matriculation and Payment of Fees

4.1 All PhD candidates, whether full-time or part-time, must be matriculated students of the University. It is the candidate’s responsibility to matriculate each year, including the continuation period and while completing thesis amendments, usually in September, following the University’s standard matriculation procedures.

4.2 At initial matriculation a candidate will register on the PhD. Continued registration is conditional on the candidate meeting the progression requirements outlined in Section 6.

PhD candidates may not be concurrently registered for any other research degree at QMU or at another Higher Education Institution.

PhD candidates who have previously been registered on a postgraduate or undergraduate programme at QMU must exit that programme before registering on a PhD at QMU.

4.3 Following matriculation, PhD candidates will be invoiced for fees due, where applicable. Fee liability is determined by the Registry Office, and invoices will be raised and sent by the Finance Office.

4.4 PhD candidates must pay tuition fees and other charges as required in order to continue study. Full details can be found on our Fees and Funding website . Candidates will be liable for tuition fees for each year of study within the prescribed period (see Section 5). If a candidate does not submit by the end of the prescribed period, they will be classed as a continuing candidate. Continuing candidates are liable only for the continuation fee. Usual tuition fees do not apply during this period. The University reserves the right to review fees on an annual basis. Continuing candidates in certain subject areas may be liable for bench fees.

4.5 Candidates will be charged the examination fee following receipt of their thesis submission for examination. A second examination fee will be charged should the candidate require a second oral examination.

4.6 PhD candidates must be matriculated and must not be in debt to the University in order to be eligible to graduate.

5. Registration

5.1 A PhD candidate may register on a full-time or a part-time basis. Full-time status reflects a commitment to study for approximately 35 hours per week. Part-time status is considered to be the equivalent of half full-time and therefore reflects a commitment to study for approximately 18 hours per week. Such an amount of work is considered to be a pre-requisite for reaching the standard of the degree. Candidates who devote less time to their study may find that progress is inadequate, which can lead to de-registration.

A full-time candidate should normally reach the standard for PhD within a prescribed period of study of three years and a part-time candidate within a prescribed period of six years. Full-time candidates should normally make their final submission at the end of the third year for examination, or at the latest after one continuation year. A continuation fee must be paid for this fourth year of study. Part-time candidates will normally make their final submission at the end of the sixth year for examination, or at the latest after two continuation years. Part-time candidates pay a single continuation fee, irrespective of duration of the continuation period.

5.2 Candidates are usually expected to complete within the prescribed period. Progress will be subject to regular review at supervisory meetings and through annual reports and formal progression assessment points allowing candidates to identify barriers to completion and Supervisory Teams to put in place appropriate support mechanisms.

5.3 Credit for study at other institutions or relevant research experience

5.3.1 Credit for previous study may be given by the Graduate School Academic Board for candidates wishing to transfer their PhD registration from another Higher Education Institution. Similar credit may also be given to prospective candidates with relevant research experience in industrial laboratories or other organisations, including those supporting creative practice. Maximum credit in both cases will normally be as follows: full-time PhD 12 months; part-time PhD 24 months (see regulations 5.4 and 5.5 below). However, the Graduate School Academic Board will consider each case on its own merits.

5.3.2 The Graduate School Academic Board may give extended credit for previous research to applicants who wish to transfer their PhD registration to Queen Margaret University in cases where a member of their Supervisory Team is joining the University as a member of academic staff.

5.3.3 To apply for credit, candidates must submit an outline PhD proposal, indicating the full plan of work and how much has been achieved already. Where the previous research was undertaken in collaboration with others, candidates must demonstrate that there are no objections or concerns in relation to ownership of intellectual property.

5.3.4 At the point of submitting the proposal, the candidate must clearly indicate the amount of credit that is sought (length in months) and this must be supported with a statement from the prospective QMU Supervisory Team prior to consideration by the Graduate School Academic Board.

5.3.5 Credit will not be given for research for which the candidate has already been granted an award (e.g., research undertaken as part of a Master of Philosophy or Master of Research).

5.4 Abbreviation of the prescribed period of study

Where there is evidence that the research is proceeding exceptionally well, the Graduate School Academic Board may approve an abbreviation of the prescribed period of study. Early submission of the PhD thesis may be permitted up to the following maxima: full-time 6 months; part-time 12 months. 5.5 Periods of study

The tables below summarise the standard periods of study for the PhD/ MPhil degrees. The length of time an individual candidate is registered for may be amended following applications for suspension or extension (see Section 6).

6. Progression

6.1 Candidates register initially for a PhD. Continued registration is conditional upon satisfactory completion of the progress requirements below. A candidate whose progress is unsatisfactory may be de-registered.

6.2 Outline Proposal

6.2.1 Approximately one month after matriculation and no later than two months after matriculation (for full-time candidates), an Outline Proposal must be submitted to the Graduate School Academic Board for approval. Part-time candidates must submit the Outline Proposal within approximately two months after matriculation and no later than four months after matriculation. Candidates may apply to the Graduate School Academic Board for permission to delay the Proposal and Researcher Skills Development plan (see 6.2 below) only where exceptional circumstances apply. The Graduate School will confirm that the necessary facilities and resources can be put in place to support the project and ensure the full Supervisory Team is in place. Supervisory Teams must meet the criteria laid down in Section 7. Supervisory Teams must be confirmed by the Graduate School Academic Board. 6.2.2 Failure to submit an outline proposal within the maximum timescale will result in de-registration on grounds of failure to progress, except where extenuating circumstances apply.

6.3 Researcher Skills Development

Approximately one month after matriculation or the beginning of an academic year, and no later than two months after matriculation or the beginning of a new academic year, the candidate, with support from the Supervisory Team, is expected to submit a Researcher Skills Development plan using the Vitae framework for guidance. Part-time candidates must submit the Researcher Skills Development plan within approximately two months after matriculation and no later than four months after matriculation. Candidates may apply to the Graduate School Academic Board for permission to delay the Researcher Skills Development plan only where exceptional circumstances apply. A report reflecting on the achievement of the goals set out in the plan must be submitted as part of the documentation for Progression Points 1 and 2 (see 6.4 and 6.5). The report is not part of the word limit set for submission Progression Points and is expected to be approximately two-pages long. Specific guidance is offered in the Student Handbook.

6.4 Progression Point 1: Probationary Assessment

The probationary assessment proposal should be submitted six, and no later than eight months after initial matriculation for full-time candidates, or twelve and no later than sixteen months for part-time candidates. The probationary assessment should normally take place no later than four to six weeks after submission of the proposal. Where a candidate is unable to meet this deadline due to extenuating circumstances, the candidate should apply, in advance of the deadline, to the Graduate School Academic Board for an extension to the submission deadline. It is expected that evidence to support the request is submitted.

6.4.1 The probationary assessment takes the form of a face-to-face academic discussion with the Assessment Panel lasting up to one hour. The discussion is based on their research project plan for their studies, Researcher Skills Development report/plan and the research proposal, describing and justifying the research project, submitted in advance of the panel discussion. This proposal must include background to the topic, the the specific aim(s) and main research question(s), , a review of relevant literature or sources of evidence, and an outline of the research paradigm including potential and relevant methodology. Material on methods (including analysis) may be included, depending on the study undertaken by the candidate to date and their priorities. The assessment will focus on evaluating the overall scientific rationale, robustness, and feasibility of the proposed research within the available timelines and the candidate’s readiness, knowledge and skills for the next step in the research process. guided by the research questions rather than on additional or alternative ideas that could be explored and questions that could be asked. Ethical challenges and concerns can also be raised at this point and must be taken into consideration moving forward. In the case of a PhD by Creative Practice the proposal should also normally be accompanied by indicative or draft examples of the proposed creative outputs. The proposal will be reviewed by the Assessment Panel in advance of the candidate meeting with the panel.

6.4.2 Where the probationary assessment proposal is for a PhD by thesis only, the word limit for the probationary assessment is 6000. The 6000-word limit may be exceeded by up to 10% without penalty. The word limit excludes appendices, tables and references. Submissions over the word limit will not be accepted.

Where the proposal is for a PhD by Creative Practice, the probationary assignment should include indicative or draft examples of the proposed creative outputs and an associated 2500 word text. The 2500 word limit may be exceeded by up to 10% without penalty. The word limit excludes appendices, tables and references. Submissions over the word limit will not be accepted.

In both cases, probationary research proposals and the resources required to undertake the proposed study shall be subject to careful review by the Assessment Panel.

6.4.3 Failure to undertake a probationary assessment within the maximum timescale will result in de-registration on grounds of serious failure to progress, except where extenuating circumstances apply.

6.4.4 The Assessment Panel will write a joint report and submit it to the Graduate School within seven working days of the date of the candidate’s probationary assessment. Should one panel member be absent after the assessment (such as for holiday), the report should be completed and submitted by the second panel member. The Joint Report will be submitted to the Graduate School Academic Board for consideration and decision on progression. This report should comment on whether:

• the candidate is suitable and reasonably equipped to undertake research leading to the successful award of the relevant degree.
• the Researcher Skills Development has been appropriate and relevant.
• the candidate is making satisfactory progress.
• additional research training is appropriate.
• the necessary research facilities/resources are available.
• the candidate is likely to complete the proposed research work within the prescribed study period.

This report will also be provided in such a way that it enables the candidate to plan their development and the Supervisory Team to guide the candidate. At the end of the report a clear and numbered list of requirements must be set out. Any optional advisory statements are not to be included in this list and can be offered separately – and must be relevant to the candidate’s priorities and direction of study. Reports found to be offering poor quality feedback or feedforward and lacking in a clear list of requirements (where needed) will be returned to the panel for revision.

The report may make one of four recommendations:

(a) That the candidate be confirmed as a PhD candidate (b) That the candidate be required to resubmit with amendments (c) That the candidate be required to resubmit with amendments and another viva (d) That the candidate be transferred to the MPhil Programme (e) That the candidate be de-registered.

Concerns regarding supervision or facilities/resources should be highlighted to the Graduate School through the Assessment Panel’s report.

6.4.5 In the event of (e) above (de-registration), the report must be passed to the Head of Graduate School for further consideration in discussion with the Panel and others as required. In the event of the recommendation going ahead, The Graduate School Academic Board will consider and make a recommendation to the Research Strategy Committee. The Secretary to the Graduate School will inform the candidate in writing of the decision of the Committee. The candidate may appeal (see regulation 6.7.10 below).

6.4.6 In the event of (b) or (c) above, the candidate will normally be invited to meet with the Chair of the Assessment Panel to discuss their performance and how any concerns could be addressed.

In the event of (b) or (c) above, the form of resubmission will be indicated in the Assessment Panel’s report. For a PhD by thesis only, this would normally consist of a revised probationary proposal. For PhD by Creative Practice this may require amendments or revisions to the proposal and/or draft practical element of the submission. In cases where the Panel requires amendments to the draft practical element of the submission, they should be fully satisfied that their concerns cannot be addressed solely through amendments to the proposal. Where this is not possible, the Panel should consider whether an additional practical arrangement could be used to address any concerns rather than revise the original practical component.

The deadline for resubmission will be detailed in the Assessment Panel’s report. Typically, this will be between six to eight weeks from when the report is sent to the candidate. Where a candidate is unable to meet this deadline due to extenuating circumstances, an extension to the submission deadline should be applied for before the deadline. Failure to resubmit a proposal within the maximum timescale defined by the assessors may result in de-registration on grounds of failure to progress.

6.4.7 In the event of (d), the candidate will normally be invited to meet with the Chair of the Assessment Panel to discuss their performance and explain why transfer to an MPhil was recommended in their report . The Supervisory Team will continue to support the candidate towards successful completion of MPhil.

6.4.8 Only in rare circumstances and where there are significant amendments required, a second assessment may be requested by the Assessment Panel, in which case, this will be considered by The Graduate School Academic Board and, should it be approved, will be detailed in the Assessment Panel’s report.

6.4.9 Following consideration of the resubmission and second discussion, if appropriate, the assessors will write a second report, making one of the following recommendations:

(a) That the candidate be confirmed as a PhD candidate (b) That the candidate be transferred to the MPhil Programme (c) That the candidate be de-registered

6.4.10 In the event of (c) above (de-registration), the report must be passed to the Head of Graduate School for further consideration in discussion with the Panel and others as required. In the event of the recommendation going ahead, the Graduate School Academic Board will consider and make a recommendation to the Research Strategy Committee. The Graduate School will inform the candidate in writing of the decision of the Panel. The candidate may appeal.

6.4.11 A candidate who fails to pass the probationary assessment within 12 months of initial matriculation (full-time) or 24 months (part-time) will be de-registered.

6.4.12 Candidates have the right of appeal against any of the above decisions. For more information on appeals see regulation 6.7.10.

6.5 Progression Point 2: Assessed Seminar

6.5.1 Having passed successfully through the Progression Point 1, the candidate will undertake a formal assessed progression seminar presentation before the end of academic year two (year four for part-time candidates).

6.5.2 The Assessment Panel formed for the probationary assessment will normally assess the candidate at Progression Point 2. If the research topic or research paradigm has changed significantly, a new Panel may be constituted.

6.5.3 Examples of acceptable submissions for Progression Point 2 assessed seminar, include (minimum word count of 3000 words):

• A completed chapter of the candidate’s thesis (e.g. research methodology or methods);
• An introduction or overview to the specific study that is contributing to the overall PhD;
• A conference/seminar paper;
• A completed draft of a paper planned for academic publication/journal article;
• Submission of PowerPoint presentation slides (or other similar alternative) with detailed explanatory notes.
• Exhibition, performance or other creative event (for PhD by Creative Practice)

Further, candidates must submit the following documents (in an Appendix if appropriate):

• An abstract of 300 words;
• Their thesis completion plan for their third (full-time) or fifth and sixth (part-time) year(s) of study. The plan must clearly indicate tasks and progress and should be no more than 1-2 pages long.
• Research Skills Development report (specific guidance is offered in the PhD Candidate Handbook)

Candidates are encouraged to present to an audience who will be invited to ask questions in the presentation. The Graduate School will typically organise the seminar. The candidate should present work that provides a clear indication to the Assessment Panel that they have made satisfactory progress with their research. It would normally be appropriate within the chosen format to present a complete research paradigm including methodology and methods, research ethics and field work may also be included. Some candidates may also have preliminary data and analysis to share. There is no requirement to use a standard PowerPoint format and other formats are encouraged. Where the research involves creative practice, candidates may include draft works, performances, events or other such outputs.

Subject to approval from the Graduate School Academic Board, candidates may present a seminar paper accepted at an external conference or seminar session. In such cases, the candidate will be required to submit a portfolio of work that includes:

• The seminar paper submitted and accepted by the external conference/seminar provider;
• A specific chapter of the thesis (e.g. research methodology) that has relevance to the context of the external presentation (no fewer than 3000 words length)
• Research Skills Development Report (specific guidance is offered in the PhD Candidate Handbook)

Where the research involves creative practice, presenting this work along with an associated critically reflective analysis is also appropriate.

The candidate will be required to meet with the Assessment Panel approximately six weeks after submission of material in order to present their seminar. The Assessment Panel will have the opportunity to ask the candidate questions about their submission. The presentation usually lasts 20 minutes with 20 minutes for questions and/or discussion.

6.5.4 The Assessment Panel will submit a joint report to the Graduate School within seven working days of the date of the candidate’s assessed seminar. The joint report will be submitted to the Graduate School Academic Board for consideration and approval. This report should comment on whether the candidate is continuing to make satisfactory progress and feedback will be provided to the candidate to assist their development.

6.5.5 This report will be provided in a way that it enables the candidate to plan their development and the Supervisory Team to guide the candidate. At the end of the report a clear and numbered list of requirements must be set out. Any optional advisory statements are not to be included in this list and can be offered separately – and must be relevant to the candidate’s priorities and direction of study. Reports found to be offering poor quality feedback or feedforward and lacking in a clear list of requirements (where needed) will be returned to the Panel for revision.

The report will make one of five recommendations:

a) the candidate continues to progress with their studies. b) the candidate continues to progress with their studies with minor issues to be resolved by the candidate and supervisory team. c) the candidate continues to progress with their studies with major issues to be resolved by the candidate and supervisory team. d) the candidate be transferred to the MPhil Programme e) the candidate has not made satisfactory progress with their studies and be de-registered.

6.5.6 In the event of (b) above, the candidate and Supervisory Team would be expected to develop a study action plan to help resolve the minor issues raised by the Panel. Where only minor issues have been identified, normally no further meeting with the Panel will be required. 6.5.7 In the event of (c) above, the candidate and a member of the Supervisory Team will be invited to meet with the Chair of the Assessment Panel to discuss the candidate’s performance and how any concerns could be addressed. The candidate and Supervisory Team will be required to develop a study action plan to address the major issues raised by the Panel. The candidate and Supervisory Team would be required to develop a study action plan to address the issues raised by the Assessment Panel. The Graduate School, in consultation with the Supervisory Team, should agree a maximum timescale for the candidate to address the issues to their satisfaction. Failure to address the issues may result in de-registration on grounds of failure to make satisfactory progress, except where extenuating circumstances apply.

6.5.8 In the event of (d), the candidate will normally be invited to meet with the Chair of the Assessment Panel to discuss their performance and explain why transfer to an MPhil was recommended in their report . The Supervisory Team will continue to support the candidate towards successful completion of MPhil.

6.5.9 In the event of (e) above (de-registration), the report must be passed to the Head of Graduate School for further consideration in discussion with the Panel and others as required. In the event of the recommendation going ahead, the Graduate School Academic Board will consider and make a recommendation to the Research Strategy Committee. The Graduate School will inform the candidate in writing of the decision of the Panel. The candidate may appeal. 6.6 Annual Reports

6.6.1 Annual progress reports (APRs) on the progress of all PhD candidates must be submitted separately by the candidate and a member of the Supervisory Team, after discussion with the whole team, to the Graduate School. This is a requirement even for candidates and Supervisory Teams with no issues to report. Submission of an annual progress report is a requirement for all candidates.

6.6.2 The Graduate School Officer will provide a full set of reports to the Head of Graduate School and Doctoral Research Coordinators. It is the responsibility of the Graduate School to follow up any issues raised by the reports and ensure that candidates and Supervisory Teams are briefed on the outcome. A summary report will be presented to the Graduate School Academic Board each year. This report will detail key themes emerging. Issues raised by individual candidates or supervisors will come to the Board only where it is within the Board’s remit to take decisions. This approach maintains confidentiality and anonymity. 6.7 De-registration and withdrawal

6.7.1 All PhD/MPhil candidates are required to pursue their programme of study with due diligence. If a candidate wilfully and/or persistently neglects their academic work, or in the case of failure to progress being highlighted in the probationary period, through assessments or in the supervision logs and/or annual reports, the candidate’s registration may be terminated.

6 .7.2 De-registration may be pursued by the University under any of the following circumstances:

(a) the candidate is not in reasonable contact with their Supervisory Team; (b) the candidate has not matriculated; (c) the candidate has not paid tuition fees as required; (d) the candidate is failing to progress, as determined by the Supervisory Team and/or the terms of the PhD Regulations; (e) the candidate fails to make their final submission within the maximum period of study; (f) the candidate fails to comply with any conditions set by the Research Strategy Committee, Graduate School Academic Board, Head of Graduate School, Dean of School or Supervisory Team.

6.7.3 Lack of contact. When a candidate has not been in contact with the Supervisory Team for six weeks (full-time) or twelve weeks (part-time), or if a candidate does not contact their Supervisory Team when required to do so and at the frequency required as agreed, the Chair of the Supervisory Team will write formally to the candidate requesting an explanation. If no adequate explanation or reply is provided by the candidate within ten working days of the date of the written request, the Chair will refer the case to the Head of Graduate School. The Head of Graduate School will ask the Graduate School Officer to write to the candidate, giving them one month from the date of the written request to reply in writing. If, in the Head of Graduate School’s opinion, no reasonable explanation is provided, the Head of Graduate School may recommend to the Graduate School Academic Board that the candidate’s registration be terminated.

6.7.4 Failure to matriculate. Candidates must matriculate every year in accordance with Queen Margaret University’s regulations. When a candidate has not matriculated, and has not provided an explanation for not so doing, the Graduate School Officer will write to the candidate, copied to the Chair of the Supervisory Team, giving them one month from the date of the written request to reply in writing. Any response received will be referred to the Head of Graduate School for consideration. If, in the Head of Graduate School’s opinion, no reasonable explanation is provided, the Head of Graduate School may recommend to the Graduate School Academic Board that the candidate’s registration be terminated.

6.7.5 Non-payment of tuition fees. All candidates must pay tuition fees and other charges as required. Where a candidate has failed to engage with the University to find a solution to any outstanding tuition fee debt, or who has failed to honour an agreement to pay any tuition fee debt, the candidate’s registration may be terminated.

6.7.6 Failure to progress. A candidate who does not submit progression documentation within the specified time frame and consequently fails to present themselves for progression assessment (regulation 6) will have their registration terminated. Where a candidate has failed to make the required submission, the Chair of the Supervisory Team will write formally to the candidate requesting an explanation. If no reasonable explanation or reply is made by the candidate within 10 working days of the date of the written request, the Chair of the Supervisory Team will refer the case to the Head of Graduate School. The Head of Graduate School will ask the Graduate School Officer to write to the candidate, giving them one month from the date of the written correspondence to reply in writing. If, in the Head of Graduate School’s opinion, no reasonable explanation is provided, the Head of Graduate School may recommend to the Graduate School Academic Board that the candidate’s registration be terminated.

6.7.7 If the concerns referred to under 6.7.6 are extremely serious and urgent, are of a health and safety nature, or if the candidate has failed to meet agreed targets for progress (as set under 6.7.6 above), the Head of Graduate School will meet with the candidate to discuss whether the project can continue. Where candidates are based overseas, alternative arrangements for this meeting will be applied.

This meeting may result in one of three outcomes:

(a) the candidate continues in registration; (b) the candidate continues in registration conditionally on the attainment of certain agreed targets which will be monitored by the Head of Graduate School; or (c) a recommendation is made to the Graduate School Academic Board that the candidate’s registration be terminated.

De-registration under this regulation may be recommended providing (a) the full Supervisory Team has been consulted and (b) the candidate has had an opportunity to respond to the concerns raised. Should de-registration be recommended, the procedure set out in regulation 6.7.2 shall be followed.

6.7.8 Failure to submit the final submission. If a final submission is not made within four years (full-time) or eight years (part-time), and no application for extension or suspension has been received and approved, the candidate’s registration will be terminated automatically.

6.7.9 In all cases, candidates will have the right of appeal. Appeals must be lodged in writing to the University Secretary within 21 days of the de-registration decision being communicated to the candidate by written correspondence and should be on the basis of the following grounds i.e., that:

• Additional information is available that was not, and could not, reasonably have been made available to the Graduate School Academic Board at the time it made its original recommendation to the Research Strategy Committee, and which had it been available could have led the Board to make a different decision. • There was a material irregularity in the procedures of the Graduate School Academic Board.

Appeals will be heard by the Deputy Principal within 30 days of the receipt of the appeal in accordance with Section 10 of these Regulations. If a candidate is dissatisfied with the outcome of the appeal, the candidate may refer to the Scottish Public Service Ombudsman, as set out in Section 10 of these Regulations.

6.7.10 Where a candidate wishes voluntarily to withdraw from their programme of study, this must be indicated on the appropriate withdrawal form and submitted to the Graduate School via email. The candidate must inform their supervisors of the decision to withdraw. Whenever possible, the candidate should meet with the Head of Graduate School before making any firm decision.

6.8 Change of mode of study

6.8.1 Applications for a change of mode of study from full-time to part-time status or vice versa may only be made for good cause and normally within the prescribed period of study. The application must be made by the candidate to the Graduate School Academic Board on the appropriate form, counter-signed by the Chair of Supervisory Team. It is not normally possible to change mode of study retrospectively.

6.8.2 Following a change of mode of study from full-time to part-time status or vice versa, the minimum and maximum periods of study will be re-calculated.

6.9 Suspension

6.9.1 Where a PhD/MPhil candidate is prevented from making due progress by ill-health or other significant cause, the candidate may, with the support of the Chair of the Supervisory Team, ask the Graduate School Academic Board to suspend their registration for a period between one and twelve months in the first instance. If applicable, the payment of a PhD bursary is temporarily halted during any suspension. A request for suspension on medical grounds must be supported by a letter from the candidate’s doctor that supports the length of the full suspension period. The maximum total period of suspension is normally two years (24 months). No fees are payable for the period of the suspension. Requests for suspension of studies from the MPhil will be considered on a case-by-case basis by the Graduate School Academic Board.

6.9.2 In the case of members of staff registered for a PhD who are planning to be absent for a sabbatical period, research supervision will be reviewed. If the sabbatical is for the research, then supervision will continue, if it is for another reason then research supervision will be paused until the staff member returns.

6.9.3 Four weeks prior to the end of a suspension period, the Graduate School Officer will contact the Supervisory Team to request that a Return to Studies meeting is arranged with the Candidate. The Return to Studies meeting will, normally, be arranged before the return date and will be used to discuss plans for restarting studies and to agree an action plan. Following the Return to Studies meeting, the Supervisors will confirm to the Graduate School Officer if this meeting was successful and if the candidate is returning to studies. Once this confirmation is agreed, the Graduate School Officer will update the candidate’s record and inform the relevant departments (e.g., Finance or Registry).

6.9.4 If the candidate does not return within one month of the agreed return date, without extenuating circumstances accepted by the Graduate School Academic Board, procedures for de-registration due to lack of contact will be followed as in 6.7.3 above.

6.10 Extension

Only in exceptional circumstances will the Graduate School Academic Board consider an application for extension of the period of study of a candidate beyond the maximum period. As the regulations already make provision for suspension of registration and for regular progress reviews to support candidates and project management over a number of years, the Graduate School Academic Board will use very strict criteria for determining the exceptionality of the circumstances presented. The application must be made, on the appropriate form, by the candidate with the support of the Chair of Supervisory Team. Candidates who have had extensions approved above the normal maximum period of study will be liable for further continuation fees as determined by the Registry. Extension requests can only be applied for and considered by the Graduate School Academic Board, while the candidate is still in the "prescribed period of study". If approved, the prescribed and continuation time periods will be adjusted accordingly. Requests for extension, while candidates are already in the continuation period will not be considered.

6.11 Exclusion from studies

All candidates are required to observe the University’s Regulations and Codes of Conduct and Practice. The University reserves the right to take disciplinary action against any candidate on the grounds of a breach of rules and regulations or abuse of Codes of Conduct and Practice. Such cases are considered under the procedures described in the section on Discipline on the Quality website. Outcomes include the possibility of expulsion from the University.

7. Supervision

7.1 Each PhD/Mphil candidate has a supervisory Team consisting of at least two supervisors, and potentially one or more advisors. At least one of the supervisors should be a current member of academic staff. The other(s) should normally be a current member of academic staff.

7.2 An initial Supervisory Team will be formed comprising the two main Supervisors at the point at which an offer of study is made and included in the offer letter to the candidate. The initial team is normally suggested by the Supervisors in consultation with the Doctoral Research Coordinator and the relevant Research Centre(s) and communicated to the Graduate School. The full Supervisory Team will be considered and approved by the Graduate School Academic Board.

Composition of the Supervisory Team

7.2.1 Both main Supervisors are formally responsible to the Head of Graduate School for a candidate’s progress with their programme of study. Between them, the Supervisors should agree a Chair of the Supervisory Team. The Chair must always be a current member of academic staff at QMU. The Chair is the main point of contact for ensuring that all administrative aspects of the candidate’s progress are conducted appropriately and in particular for ensuring adherence to these regulations.

7.2.2 Both supervisors will normally hold a Doctorate and will normally be active researchers with membership to a Research Centre/Institute within QMU. Advisors may be external to the University, especially where they provide a link with a Collaborating Establishment or co-funder. Advisors may also be internal to the University. For PhDs by Creative Practice, at least one supervisor would normally have completed a creative practice PhD or similar.

7.2.3 At least one of the two supervisors must have been a member of a previous Supervisory Team for at least one successful PhD or Professional Doctorate candidate.

7.2.4 A member of staff must not normally be involved with the supervision of more than eight PhD and Professional Doctorate candidates at any one time. Exceptions may be made where a member of staff holds a primarily research focused contract. 7.2.5 All research supervisors must participate in QMU supervisor learning and development opportunities and keep up to date with best practice in research supervision. Research supervisors who cannot evidence their development may have their candidates reduced or reallocated until they are able to update their knowledge and skills.

Supervisory meetings

7.3 The frequency of supervisory meetings between the two main supervisors and a full-time candidate should normally be monthly throughout the prescribed period of study; and bi-monthly for part-time candidates. In the early months, the frequency of meetings should be greater. For continuing candidates (i.e., those who have not made their final submission within the prescribed period of study), it is expected that supervisory meetings will be required less frequently. Where candidates are based at a distance or conducting fieldwork abroad, equivalent discussions must be held by MS Teams, email or equivalent.

7.4 Records must be kept of all meetings. The candidate is responsible for preparing these. All members of the Supervisory Team must agree to the content of these records and especially any action points.

7.5 Supervisors must log all formal meetings (and informal where a formal meeting has not taken place) using the online form provided by the Graduate School. These records must be kept up to date to ensure the Graduate School has a record of progression for all candidates and can act quickly if any concerns are raised.

Changes to the Supervisory Team 7.6 Any proposal for a change in supervision arrangements shall be made, on the appropriate form, to the Graduate School Academic Board.

Alternative supervisory arrangements must be formalised in advance of any planned long-term leave (such as maternity or research leave) taken by either of the two main supervisors.

When a supervisor has been absent for longer than three months, an application for the appointment of a replacement must be made to the Graduate School Academic Board.

A supervisor who has been replaced due to their absence will not be automatically reinstated on their return. The case for return to the Supervisory Team has to be made to the Graduate School Academic Board.

If a candidate is experiencing difficulties with the supervisory relationship, they may contact their School’s Doctoral Research Coordinator for discussion or advice. The aim, in most situations, is to find a resolution between the candidate and the supervisor or Supervisory Team.

In the case of problems which cannot be resolved jointly by the candidate and the supervisor or the Supervisory Team, and especially where the Doctoral Research Coordinator is a member of the Supervisory Team, either the candidate or the Supervisor involved may contact the Head of Graduate School to discuss and where appropriate, ask for a change of Supervisor.

Where the Head of the Graduate School is the Supervisor concerned, the Dean of School should be approached to recommend the change.

Candidate Research Skills Training

7.7 The University, primarily through the Graduate School and the Research and Knowledge Exchange Development Unit, offers Researcher Training and Development opportunities. These take different forms, such as the Doctoral Induction and Development Weeks, which are held several times each year, as well as a range of seminars and workshops provided by QMU staff, candidates and visiting academics or externally through a range of partners and networks. Further training and learning opportunities are provided by the QMU Research Centres and Clusters. In some cases, candidates also organise peer facilitated learning and training opportunities. Attendance at learning development opportunities and training must be recorded by the candidate. Participation in a range of training opportunities is planned and monitored through the Researcher Skills Development process (see paragraphs 6.3, 6.4, and 6.5).

All new doctoral candidates must attend the Doctoral Induction and Development Weeks. Candidates may apply for exemption from this training by submitting evidence of previous certificated or experiential learning to the Graduate School Academic Board. A full record of exemptions will be held by staff of the Graduate School.

The Supervisory Team must discuss with each candidate their individual training needs using the Researcher Development (Vitae) Framework and agree how these can be met using the Researcher Skills Development plan. Bursary candidates have a research budget for this purpose and all candidates can apply to the various training and development funding calls that are on offer each academic year. Supervisors are expected to discuss any resource considerations within their Research Centre and to ensure that these are shared with the Dean of School.

The Head of the Graduate School must ensure that candidates are studying topics and using research methods and tools which can primarily be supervised and supported within the existing expertise and resource base of QMU

The Graduate School may offer candidates opportunities to apply for training and development funds. All such opportunities will be openly and fairly advertised and applications considered by a panel including The Head of Graduate School. Applicants must abide by the conditions of the funding and provide evidence of appropriate usage and learning outcomes.

8. Examination Regulations

8.1 The Graduate School Academic Board shall ensure that all examinations are conducted in accordance with the University’s regulations as set out below. In the event of significant deviation from these regulations, the Graduate School Academic Board may declare the examination null and void and appoint new Examiners.

8.2 Structure of assessment

The key function of the examination is to establish that both the candidate and their submission reach the standard required for the award of PhD or MPhil, with respect to the criteria listed in Section 1.2. Another function of the examination is to demonstrate the candidate’s authorship of the thesis, ownership of the conducted research (and creative work where applicable) and understanding of the field of study. The examination for a PhD normally has two principal stages: the preliminary assessment of the submission (in the case of PhDs by Creative Practice this would include both the creative work and the thesis) followed by its defence at an oral examination.

In the case of PhDs by Creative Practice, the creative work and accompanying thesis should be assessed as a whole and considered equal in their weighting to the contribution made by the research. Where the creative work takes the form of a live performance or similar activity, the Examiners should normally view the work at the time that this occurs, even if this is before the final submission of the accompanying thesis. Although all effort should be taken for live works to be seen by Examiners, in some circumstances it may be necessary for the Examiners to view a documentation of said activity. In such cases the mediating role of such documentation should be considered as part of the accompanying thesis.

8.3 All PhD candidates must pay an examination fee, which is charged following submission of the thesis. A second fee is charged for any second oral examination (see 8.7.10 (d)).

8.4 Preparation for submission

8.4.1 The decision to submit their work for examination is the candidate’s alone, but only exceptionally should a final submission be made without the agreement of the Supervisory Team.

8.4.2 No part of the final submission may have been included in a prior submission for any other degree or qualification without the permission of the Graduate School Academic Board.

8.4.3 It is the candidate’s responsibility to ensure that their final submission conforms to the regulations on format and presentation in Section 9 below (see also Regulation 8.6.2.).

8.5 Appointment of Examiners and arrangements

8.5.1 It is the responsibility of the Supervisory Team to nominate Examiners to the Graduate School Academic Board for approval on behalf of Senate, by completing the examination arrangements form. The completed form should be submitted to the Board at least three months before the expected date of submission to allow time for scrutiny and approval.

8.5.2 In nominating Examiners, the Supervisory Team Chair will consult the relevant School’s Doctoral Research Coordinator and the candidate and take into consideration any views they may express. The Supervisory Team Chair will liaise with Research Centre/Institute Directors, Heads of Divisions, the Dean and others, as appropriate, to establish whether there may be any conflict of interest with appointment of Examiners.

8.5.3 Normally the Supervisory Team Chair will informally approach Examiners to establish their willingness to act in this capacity, although this task may be delegated to another Supervisory Team member. The Examiners should confirm their willingness in principle before the examination arrangements form is submitted to the Graduate School. The examination arrangements will be approved by the Graduate School Academic Board once satisfied with the arrangements.

8.5.4 The Supervisory Team Chair must avoid all known conflicts of interest in nominating Examiners, including cases where an External Examiner has acted frequently for the School in the past (the Doctoral Research Coordinator for the relevant School can provide guidance on this point). No member of the candidate’s current or previous Supervisory Team (including any formal Advisors), research collaborators or anyone with a close personal, professional or commercial association with the candidate or candidate's research, may act as an External or Internal Examiner. Former QMU staff or candidates within the lifetime of a candidate’s research are not eligible. The Graduate School Academic Board, before approving their appointment, requires nominated Examiners to declare any other potential conflict(s) of interest. Proposed examiners must declare any past or planned future connections with the candidate and/or research work to be examined. Appendix 3 provides an indicative list of conflict of interest examples for information and guidance.

8.5.5 The candidate must have no contact with the External Examiner(s) between the nomination of Examiners and the oral examination. This rule is waived however, in the case of PhD by Creative Practice, should it be necessary for the Examiner(s) to view a live event as part of the assessment process. In this case, the Examiner(s) must attend the live event and independently write a detailed report afterwards. There must be no discussion with the candidate around their research or the examination and the relationship must remain formal.

8.5.6 There must be a minimum of two Examiners, including one External and one Internal, with normally no more than three Examiners. An independent, non-examining Chair will also be nominated by the Graduate School (see regulation 8.5.9).

8.5.7 Internal Examiners will normally be members of staff of the University but may on occasion be previous members of staff who have left no more than three years before, or members of Collaborating Establishments.

8.5.8 Examiners must hold a PhD or equivalent qualification or experience. External Examiners must be independent and must normally be experienced in examining at the relevant level. They must also be experienced in the specialist topic. Internal Examiners need not be specialists in the topic but must have experience of the general field of research. No candidate for a doctoral degree shall be appointed as an Examiner. In the case of PhD by Creative Practice at least one of the Examiners would normally be experienced in practice based research methodologies.

8.5.9 A neutral, non-examining Independent Chair will normally be appointed. The Independent Chair must have suitable prior experience of examining. Usually, this means they will have examined a minimum of two previous examinations, at least one of which must have been at QMU. They do not require subject or methodological expertise. Their role is to oversee the conduct of the examination to ensure a collegiate approach and consistency with QMU regulations.

8.5.10 The Independent Chair will be nominated by the Graduate School from a register of suitably experienced QMU examiners. The proposed Independent Chair, the candidate and their supervisory team will be required to declare any conflict of interest. In the event that a conflict of interest is identified, an alternative appointment will be made.

8.5.11 Candidates who undertake work on multidisciplinary topics may have two External Examiners, drawn from the contributing disciplines.

8.5.12 Candidates who are current members of staff of the University must have two External Examiners, and the internal examiner must not be the candidate’s Research Centre/Institute Director, Head of Division or Dean of School.

8.5.13 Where it is not possible to identify a suitable Internal Examiner, two External Examiners may be appointed. The Head of the Graduate School, or a delegated member of the Graduate School Academic Board, shall identify a suitably experienced Examiner to act as neutral non-voting Chair of the oral examination.

8.6 Submission for examination

8.6.1 The written thesis (see regulation 9.6.2) along with any additional material and/or documentation of creative practice (see regulation 9.2.3) must be electronically sent to the Graduate School before the expiry of the candidate’s registration period. This should be submitted, along with the candidate’s signed declaration form, to the Graduate School for distribution to the Examiners and Chair. The thesis should not normally be submitted before the Graduate School Academic Board has approved the examination arrangements.

8.6.2 The declaration form signed by the candidate must accompany the submission of the thesis. This form certifies that the work is the candidate’s own and that no part has been previously included in a degree submission. Full bibliographic details should also be given of any publication by the candidate, including joint publications, which has been derived from or included in the thesis. The form also contains a checklist to be completed, indicating word length, and compliance with the requirements for format listed in Section 9 below. If the written thesis exceeds the upper word limit, it will not be accepted for examination and will be returned to the candidate by staff of the Graduate School.

8.6.3 All members of the Supervisory Team should sign the declaration form to confirm that the work is the candidate’s own. On the form the Supervisors should indicate whether they:

(a) Believe the submission is worthy for consideration for the award of Doctorate or MPhil; (b) Believe the submission is not worthy of consideration, or (c) Hold reservations about its quality.

8.6.4 In the event of (b) or (c) the candidate will be given the option to delay submission and make further revisions (assuming there remains sufficient time in the candidate’s period of study). Should the candidate prefer to submit without revision, they must sign the declaration form to confirm this.

8.6.5 The candidate must also complete a candidate declaration form before submitting creative work for examination and the process above should be followed.

8.6.6 Acceptance of the submission for examination does not guarantee a successful outcome.

8.7 Examination

8.7.1 An oral examination is obligatory for all PhD/MPhil candidates, save in exceptional cases where the Graduate School Academic Board has previously agreed an alternative form of examination, for a valid cause such as disability. Inadequate knowledge of the language in which the thesis is presented shall not constitute a valid cause.

8.7.2 The Graduate School is responsible for arranging the date of the oral examination, which will normally be held between six and twelve weeks from receipt of the final submission by the Examiners. The oral examination will be held at Queen Margaret University. Exceptionally the Graduate School Academic Board may give permission for the oral examination to be held elsewhere. The examination may be held either face-to-face or online using university approved platforms.

8.7.3 After their final submission, candidates may request postponement of the oral examination for good reason likely to have an adverse effect on their performance. These reasons may include recent bereavement, personal or family illness, or serious domestic problems. Such requests require approval from the Graduate School Academic Board.

8.7.4 After considering the work which has been submitted, the Examiners are required to complete a preliminary report form, in which they are asked to comment on the intellectual, scholarly and literary quality of submission, and to identify areas on which they would wish to question the candidate in the oral examination.

8.7.5 The preliminary reports must be independent and confidential. The reports must be received by the Graduate School no later than three working days in advance of the date agreed for the oral examination. A copy of each Examiner’s report is made available to the other Examiner(s), to facilitate preliminary discussion, before the oral examination, but only after all reports have been received.

8.7.6 In the event that the Examiners judge the submission to be too poor academically to be worthy of examination, the oral examination will still be held, to allow the candidate the chance to discuss their submission with the Examiners.

8.7.7 One member of the Supervisory Team may attend the oral examination, with the prior agreement of the candidate and of the Examiners. In exceptional circumstances, Supervisory Teams may submit a request to the Graduate School Academic Board for two supervisors to attend the oral examination. The Supervisory Team member may only speak when addressed by the Examiners on matters of clarification, and must not intervene in the evaluative process. A further function of the attendance of the Supervisory Team member is to be present to hear any comments by the Examiners on necessary amendments.

8.7.8 Family members and friends may not attend the examination.

8.7.9 During the oral examination, the Examiners may explore the candidate’s understanding of the general field of study and research methodology as well as of the specific topic of doctoral research. The examination follows a standard format, and no deviation from this is permitted without prior agreement from the Graduate School Academic Board. Typically, the examination (discussion between the candidate and Examiners) will last between one and two hours.

8.7.10 The Examiners are required to complete and sign a joint final report at the end of the oral examination and submit it to the Graduate School within five working days of the date of the candidate’s oral examination. The report should indicate which of the options below they recommend to the Graduate School Academic Board: PhD examination outcomes

(a) the candidate to be awarded the degree. (b) the candidate to be awarded the degree subject to minor amendments, to be completed within two months of the Examiners’ report being sent to the candidate. (c) the candidate to be awarded the degree subject to major amendments, to be completed within six months of the Examiners’ report being sent to the candidate. (d) the candidate to be permitted to resubmit a substantially amended version of the work for re-examination, within twelve months of the Examiners’ report being sent to the candidate. A second oral examination is normally obligatory, except where the Examiners specify in their report that this will not be necessary. (e) the candidate to be awarded the alternative degree of MPhil in lieu of PhD. The Examiners may require suitable amendments to be made, within a maximum of six months of the Examiners’ report being sent to the candidate. This award may only be made if the Examiners are satisfied the candidate has met the criteria for the award of MPhil but is not able to meet the criteria for the award of PhD. (f) the candidate to be neither awarded the degree, nor permitted to resubmit, nor awarded an alternative degree.

For PhD by Creative Practice the examiners may require amendments or revisions to the thesis and/or practical element of the submission. In cases where the Examiners require amendments to the practical element of the submission, they should be fully satisfied that their concerns cannot be addressed solely through amendments to the thesis. Where this is not possible, the Examiners should consider whether an additional practical arrangement could be used to address any concerns rather than revise the original practical component.

MPhil examination outcomes

(a) the candidate to be awarded the degree. (b) the candidate to be awarded the degree subject to minor amendments, to be completed within two months of the Examiners’ report being sent to the candidate. (c) the candidate to be awarded the degree subject to major amendments, to be completed within three months of the Examiners’ report being sent to the candidate. (d) the candidate to be permitted to resubmit a substantially amended version of the work for re-examination, within six months of the Examiners’ report being sent to the candidate. A second oral examination is normally obligatory, except where the Examiners specify in their report that this will not be necessary. (e) the candidate to be neither awarded the degree, nor permitted to resubmit, nor awarded an alternative degree.

The comments in the final report by the Examiners should provide a sufficient basis to enable the Graduate School Academic Board to satisfy itself that the recommendation chosen from Regulation 8.7.10 is appropriate. All parts of the form must be completed.

8.7.11 The final report by the Examiners is confidential to the Graduate School Academic Board, Research Strategy Committee, Senate, the candidate, and the Supervisory Team.

8.7.12 Where appropriate, Examiners may also provide separate typed feedback for the candidate, including a formal statement of any necessary amendments, as an attachment to the final report. The full report and feedback should be supplied to the Graduate School Officer within seven days of the examination. It is essential that the amendments listed are complete and clear. Requirements must be appropriately specific, preferably identifying where or how the amendments should be addressed. The candidate is required to make only the amendments specified in the final report and Examiners may not introduce new issues later – see regulation 8.8.1 below.

8.7.13 The final report will indicate which Examiner(s) will be responsible for verifying that all, and only, the prescribed amendments have been satisfactorily completed. Major amendments are normally verified by the External(s) as well as by the Internal Examiner.

8.7.14 Where the Examiners are not able to be unanimous in their final recommendations, separate final reports will be completed and signed. In this circumstance, the Graduate School Academic Board may:

(a) accept a majority recommendation (provided that the majority includes at least one External Examiner) (b) accept the recommendation of the External Examiner (c) require the appointment of new Examiners to conduct an independent examination, including an oral examination.

8.7.15 The Graduate School Academic Board may very exceptionally approve an extension to the time period for amendments. Applications must be made well in advance of the deadline and must be supported by the Supervisory Team Chair and Head of the Graduate School.

8.8 Submitting revisions and amendments

8.8.1 Where a candidate has been required to make an amended submission under 8.7.10 (b) or (c) above, the amendments will be checked by the Examiner(s), normally within four weeks of receipt. The Examiner(s) may only check against the amendments specified following the oral examination and may not introduce new points of issue. If the amendments have been satisfactorily completed, the candidate will be awarded the degree.

8.8.2 If the Examiner(s) are not satisfied the amendments have been satisfactorily completed the candidate will be so informed and given the opportunity to make the required amendments within a period of two weeks. If after this, the submission does not incorporate the required amendments, both Examiners must view the amended submission and discuss it. Where the amendments have been partially completed, the Examiners will consider whether the submission as it stands, is worthy of a PhD. Should the Examiners be unable to reach agreement, regulation 8.7.14 applies. A candidate knowingly fails to make a required amendment at their own risk. The Examiners may make one of the following recommendations:

(a) the candidate be awarded the degree. (b) the candidate be awarded the alternative degree of MPhil in lieu of PhD. The Examiners may require suitable amendments to be made, within a maximum of two months. This award may only be made if the Examiners are satisfied the candidate has met the criteria for the award of MPhil but is not able to meet the criteria for the award of PhD. (c) the candidate be neither awarded the degree, nor awarded an alternative degree.

8.8.3 Normally, doctoral research can be resubmitted for formal examination (regulation 8.7.10d) only once, and no candidate may be examined more than twice for a given degree. The appointment of the original Examiners normally remains in force for any second examination. Should any of the original Examiners be unavailable, a revised examination team must be approved by the Graduate School Academic Board, as in regulation 8.5 above. The process of re-examination follows the pattern of a first examination, except that a restricted set of final recommendations is available, as follows:

(a) the candidate to be awarded the degree. (b) The candidate to be awarded the degree subject to minor amendments, to be completed within two months. (c) the candidate to be awarded the alternative degree of MPhil in lieu of PhD. The Examiners may require suitable amendments to be made, within a maximum of six months. This award may only be made if the Examiners are satisfied the candidate has met the criteria for the award of MPhil but is not able to meet the criteria for the award of PhD. (d) the candidate to be neither awarded the degree, nor awarded an alternative degree.

8.9 Award of the degree of PhD or MPhil

8.9.1 The authority to award the PhD or MPhil rests solely with Senate.

8.9.2 The Research Strategy Committee shall make a recommendation to Senate, based on the recommendation(s) and report(s) of the Graduate School Academic Board and Examiners, and following confirmation from the Examiner(s) that any necessary corrections have been satisfactorily completed, that the degree of PhD be awarded.

8.9.3 When Senate has agreed that the degree should be awarded, the Secretary to the Graduate School Academic Board communicates the decision to the candidate.

8.9.4 Following Senate agreement that the degree should be awarded, the Secretary to the Graduate School Academic Board also notifies the Registry Office that the candidate is entitled to graduate. Further correspondence about the process of graduation is then the responsibility of the Registry Office.

8.9.5 In the event of a recommendation from the Research Strategy Committee that no degree should be awarded, again the final decision rests with Senate. The Secretary to the Graduate School Academic Board will communicate Senate’s decision to the candidate.

8.9.6 Candidates may appeal against the outcome of their examination, on a limited number of grounds. These grounds and the process of appeal are described in Section 10 below.

8.10 Lodging the final version of the thesi s

8.10.1 One electronic copy of the thesis, or, in the case of PhD by Creative Practice, the thesis and a permanent record of the creative work, complying with the regulations in Section 9, should be submitted to the Secretary to the Graduate School Academic Board.

8.10.2 A deposit agreement form (supplied by the Graduate School) must be completed and submitted at the same time as lodging the final version of the doctoral research. This will confirm the agreement of the candidate that the submission may be made available to readers through the open access electronic repository and may be lent to the British Library.

8.10.3 The electronic copy of the doctoral research provided for lodging in the Library shall remain the property of the University, with the copyright of the thesis and any associated creative work being vested in the author.

8.11 Restriction of access

8.11.1 There is normally no restriction of access to the permanent record of the submission for which a higher degree has been awarded. The Graduate School Academic Board will only approve an application for confidentiality in order to enable a patent application to be lodged or to protect commercially or politically sensitive material, including creative works. A final submission shall not be restricted in this way in order to protect research leads. While the normal maximum period of confidentiality is two years, in exceptional circumstances the Graduate School Academic Board may approve a longer period.

8.11.2 Where the Graduate School Academic Board has agreed that the confidential nature of the candidate's work is such as to preclude the final submission being made freely available in relevant libraries, the final submission shall, during the period of restriction, only be made available to those who were directly involved in the project.

9. Recommended Format for Thesis Submission

All theses for higher degrees awarded by Queen Margaret University must conform to the same format. Regulations in this Section are designed to promote legibility, to meet the conventions of scholarly presentation, and to facilitate standard library cataloguing.

9.1 Except with the specific permission of the Graduate School Academic Board, the thesis shall be presented in English.

9.2.1 For PhDs by thesis only, the text of the thesis (excluding footnotes, references and appendices) normally falls within the following range: 70,000 to 100,000 words. For PhDs by Creative Practice and MPhil the text of the thesis (excluding footnotes, references and appendices) would normally be within the range 30,000 to 40,000 words. The higher figures in both cases represent maximum limits that must not be exceeded. The lower figures are provided for guidance only. Thesis length will vary with the conventions of different subject areas. However, it is unlikely that a thesis significantly shorter than the figures indicated above will be of sufficient depth to achieve all the outcomes of the award.

The following sections should be excluded from the word count:

• Acknowledgements
• Contents and list of tables and figures
• References and bibliography

Tables and figures within the text are included in the word count, as are quotations from interviews. It is recognised that certain types of qualitative research will therefore require a higher word count. Permission to exceed the word limit may be sought from the Graduate School Academic Board in advance of submission (see below).

Permission to exceed the maximum length of a thesis will only be granted by the Graduate School Academic Board for exceptional reasons. Permission must be sought at the time the examination arrangements are submitted for approval, well before submission of the thesis. A thesis that is over the word limit, without permission, will not be accepted for examination. Unless the thesis is submitted by the deadline in the required format, or permission for deviation from the required format has been granted (see above, the candidate will be de-registered on the grounds of lack of progress.

9.2.1 For PhDs by thesis only, examiners should be able to understand the thesis from the full argument presented in the main body of the text. Appendices should contain only supporting data and ancillary material. Overlong appendices should be avoided.

For PhDs by Creative Practice, the examiners should normally be able to understand the thesis from the full argument presented in the main body of the text, however, they may also be required to refer to a portfolio of additional evidence related to the associated original creative work, which should be submitted as an appendix. Additional appendices should contain only supporting data and ancillary material. Overlong appendices should be avoided.

9.3 Presentation

9.3.1 Theses must be in A4 format.

9.3.2 A font size of either 11 or 12 point must be used consistently throughout the thesis, except where otherwise specified below for footnotes and references. A slightly larger font size may be applied to headings. It is recommended that either Arial or Times New Roman font is used. Candidates are advised to avoid overuse of print enhancements such as bold, italic and underline.

9.3.3 Text must have at least 1.5 line-spacing, unless otherwise specified below.

9.3.4 The text should be justified, expect for tables, diagrams, graphs etc.

9.3.5 The following page-margins should be set: 4cm left-hand binding margin (1.5”) 2cm head margin (0.75”) 2.5cm right-hand fore-edge margin (1”) 4cm tail margin (1.5”)

9.3.6 Pages must be numbered consecutively (using Arabic numerals) throughout the text, references and appendices. Preliminary pages should be numbered in roman numerals.

9.3.7 Alternative formats to the above (larger print, coloured paper, etc.) may be requested by the Examiners. This should be discussed in advance of submission.

9.4 Structure

9.4.1 Title page

The title page must give the following information, all centred and in 20 point:

• the full title of the thesis (in capitals)
• the forename and surname of the author (in capitals)
• the degree for which the thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment (in Sentence case)
• QUEEN MARGARET UNIVERSITY (in capitals)
• the year of submission (for examination copy) or of award (for final version)

A model of the standard title page to be followed is given in Appendix Two of these regulations.

9.4.2 Abstract

A one-page, single-spaced abstract of no more 300 words. The abstract should provide a synopsis of the thesis, describing the nature and scope of the work undertaken and of the contribution made to the discipline. Candidates must provide a list of keywords for cataloguing purposes.

9.4.3 Acknowledgements

Any assistance received shall be acknowledged in a single-spaced acknowledgement section. It is customary for the candidate’s Supervisors and School to be mentioned. Also included here should be a statement of any internal or external collaboration or advisory links. Any Collaborating Establishment that has been involved in the research must be duly acknowledged.

Where the research was part of a collaborative group project, this must be recorded in the acknowledgements. The candidate’s individual contribution to the collaboration should be explicitly identified in the body of the thesis.

9.4.4 Contents

A contents list, and lists of any tables, diagrams, graphs and illustrations, should be provided, with page numbers identified and aligned right. The contents page(s) should be printed with 1.5 line spacing.

9.4.5 Diagrams, tables, illustrations et c.

These should be numbered, labelled with a legend, and placed as near to the relevant text as feasible.

9.4.6 Footnotes

Where footnotes are used, these should be single-spaced in 10 point, and preferably placed at the foot of the relevant page.

9.4.7 Quotation and referencing in the text

Short quotations in the running text should be enclosed in inverted commas. Longer quotations should be separated from the running text, and indented, with single line spacing. Any material consulted, especially including quotations, must be clearly and adequately referenced in the text.

9.4.8 References section

The thesis must include a full and adequate references section immediately after the main body of text, and before any appendices. Referencing must be done consistently, with adherence to a recognised style such as APA or Harvard. References should be printed with single line spacing.

9.4.9 Appendices (see also Regulation 9.2.3)

The text of any appendices may be single-spaced.

9.5 Copies of published materia l

The candidate shall be permitted to publish material in advance of the thesis in discussion with the Supervisory Team. Reference shall be made in the thesis to any such work. Where material is jointly authored the candidate must clarify the extent of his their role. Copies of published material should be provided with the thesis.

9.5.1 For examination

In the case of creative work, the format in which the work is presented for examination will vary, but it must be done in such a way as to be easily referenced and accessed by the Examiners. Each item should be individually labelled, with relevant details including the candidate’s name.

9.5.2 Version for record

One electronic copy of the thesis must be submitted for lodging in the Library’s open access electronic repository. This must be submitted as a single file and not split by chapter, section or similar. The electronic copy must be submitted before the candidate can graduate. Additional supporting material (such as maps or images) should be provided separately.

If any non-digital material accompanies the thesis, this should be discussed with LRC staff at the earliest possible opportunity, who will advise on the best format for submission. Likewise, in the case of PhD by Creative Practice, the LRC should be consulted on the best way to archive the documentation of the original creative practice.

9.5.3 Candidates may wish to order hardbound versions of the final thesis for their own records. Candidates order such copies at their own discretion and own expense.

10. Appeals

10.1 The general precepts of the University Appeals Procedure apply to appeals against PhD decisions and these regulations should be read in conjunction with the Academic Appeals Procedure. Under these regulations, a University officer may act through their properly appointed nominee. The regulations herein relating to appeals shall have precedence over the Academic Appeals Procedure.

10.2 A candidate has the right to appeal against any decision that affects their progress. Appeals must be in writing (or in another permanent form) and should be submitted to the University Secretary within 21 days of receipt of the decision against which the candidate is appealing. An extension to this time limit will be permitted only in exceptional circumstances, e.g., when, for reasons outside their control, a candidate did not receive timely notification of their result.

10.3 An unsatisfactory result does not in itself constitute a valid basis for an appeal. Those hearing the appeal will not attempt to re-assess the candidate, nor to appraise the professional judgement of those involved in making the decision.

10.4 The permissible grounds for appeal are as follows:

(a) additional information is available that was not, and could not, reasonably have been made available at the time of the original decision and which had it been available could have led a different decision being made. (b) there was a material irregularity in procedures.

10.5 If the basis of the candidate’s appeal is information that could have been made known prior to the decision being made, the candidate must give a satisfactory reason for the information not being made available at that time.

10.6 A candidate’s disagreement with the academic judgement of an assessor does not provide a valid ground for appeal.

10.7 Any candidate considering an appeal is encouraged to contact the Students’ Union for advice and assistance.

10.8 Appeals must be in writing. The candidate’s written statement should provide the following information in support of their appeal:

• up-to-date contact address for correspondence, including email address
• decision or result being appealed
• the grounds for appeal
• supporting evidence
• the remedy being sought

10.9 The University Secretary will acknowledge receipt of the Appeal within three working days of receipt and pass the appeal to the Deputy Principal who will hear the appeal within 30 days of receipt of the appeal. This timescale may be extended where the Deputy Principal is absent from the University through leave or illness. The Deputy Principal will provide a copy of the response to the University Secretary.

10.10 Where a reconsideration of the candidate’s case gives rise to a change in decision this must be ratified by the original decision making body (e.g. Graduate School Academic Board, or Research Strategy Committee).

10.11 The decision of the Deputy Principal is final and concludes the University’s internal procedures.

Independent review

10.12 The University’s internal procedures having been exhausted, a candidate may seek review of their complaint by an independent person, the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman [SPSO].

10.13 The Ombudsman is independent and their staff will advise whether or not the complaint is one that they can investigate. Normally the candidate will have to tell the Ombudsman about their complaint within 12 months of first knowing about the problem about which they are complaining, although the Ombudsman may look at complaints outside this limit if they think there is good reason to do so.

10.14 There are some restrictions on what the Ombudsman can investigate. For example, they cannot consider the subject matter of complaints about personnel matters or matters of academic judgement. However, they may be able to investigate the manner in which the complaint was handled. If the complaint is appropriate to their office and is investigated, the Ombudsman’s staff will send details of how this will be done.

10.15 The complaint should be submitted in writing to the Ombudsman, and should include any relevant documents including correspondence with the University and the University’s response to the complaint. This can be sent to the Ombudsman without cost at the freepost address given below. A candidate may discuss the complaint with an Investigator at the SPSO before deciding to submit.

10.16 The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman has an online complaint form accessible through the website, although papers in support of the complaint would still have to be supplied to the Ombudsman by post or other means. The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman can also supply paper complaint forms direct to complainants.

10.17 Further information may be accessed through the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman website or by calling their office for advice. Contact details are:

Scottish Public Services Ombudsman Bridgeside House 99 McDonald Road Edinburgh EH7 4NS

Freepost address Freepost SPSO (no stamp required) Phone 0800 377 7330 website https://www.spso.org.uk/

11. Appendix One

Graduate School Academic Board

The purpose of the Graduate School Academic Board is to provide an institution level forum for consistent decision making on matters relating to the doctoral candidate journey. The Board may make recommendations for enhancement of the quality framework governing the doctoral candidate journey, based on evaluation of reports and individual candidate cases.

Terms of reference The Graduate School Academic Board has delegated authority from the Research Strategy Committee as set out below:

PhD, MPhil and Professional Doctorate candidates

• To receive summary information on applications from the School’s Doctoral Research Co-ordinators.
• To approve the appointment of Supervisory Teams for new candidates and any subsequent changes to the composition of the Supervisory Team.
• To approve applications for prior credit
• To approve requests to suspend studies.
• To approve examination arrangements, including any exceptional arrangements, for example permission to hold the viva at a location other than QMU and permission to exceed the word limit.
• To approve requests to submit early and requests to extend the submission deadline, either for the viva or amendments thereafter.
• To consider Examiners’ reports and make recommendations for award to Senate through the Research Strategy Committee.
• To approve requests to restrict publication on theses.
• To consider recommendations for de-registration and make recommendations to the Research Strategy Committee.
• To approve requests for change from part-time to full-time study, or vice versa.
• To approve requests for change from campus based to non-resident status, or vice versa.
• To respond to operational issues and make recommendations regarding the provision of appropriate resources and facilities.

Professional Doctorate Candidates

• To agree the assessment schedule.
• To approve changes to modules.
• To monitor quality and approve the annual programme report, including module evaluations.

PhD and MPhil candidates

• To approve outline proposals including confirmation that adequate resources are in place.
• To approve assessment panel recommendations on probationary viva outcomes.
• To approve assessment panel recommendations on assessment seminar outcomes.
• To approve requests for extension to the submission deadline for outline proposals, probationary viva and assessment seminars.
• To consider recommendations for a transfer to MPhil and make recommendations to the Research Strategy Committee.

Reports and reporting lines

• To consider an annual summary of all doctoral candidate activity, monitoring provision against internal and external indicators in line with Chapter B11 of the QAA Quality Code.
• To consider periodic reports on the status of all doctoral candidates to maintain oversight of progress and identify any trends.
• To review a summary of candidate and Supervisor progress reports and make recommendations for addressing issues of concern, factors to aid candidate progress or issues pertaining to Supervisor/candidate relationships.
• To remit particular issues for discussion and/or review by standing Committees of Senate or of Court as appropriate.
• To submit relevant minutes to the Health Sciences and Arts, Social Sciences and Management School Academic Boards.
• To act and advise on issues remitted to it by other Committees of Senate and Court, and
• To submit minutes of its face to face meetings, and other key papers, including all award and de-registration recommendations to the Research Strategy Committee.

Convener: Head of Graduate School

Deputy Convener: To be appointed from the membership of the Board Ex Officio : School Doctoral Research Co-ordinators Nominated: Six nominated research active staff with experience of doctoral supervision and/or examination from each School

Secretary: Graduate School Officer Method of Working

Virtual Business is processed virtually on a fortnightly basis. Summary reports of all decisions are presented to the full membership at the face-to-face meetings (see below for details).

Face-to-face The Graduate School Academic Board meets at least four times a year. Additional meetings may exceptionally be called at the discretion of the Convener.

12. Appendix Two

BUSINESS METHODS IN THE SCOTTISH TOURIST INDUSTRY

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

QUEEN MARGARET UNIVERSITY

13. Appendix Three

Conflict of interest examples to be considered during the process of selecting and nominating examiners for final PhD thesis examination

• Undergraduate open days
• Order a prospectus
• Subject areas
• Why study at Manchester Met?
• Chat to our current students
• How to apply
• Schools and colleges
• Parents and guardians
• Mature students
• Online learning
• Admissions policies and procedures
• Virtual tour
• Postgraduate open days
• Join us in January 2024
• Find a postgraduate course
• Professional development
• Research study
• Information for employers
• Funding and the levy
• Employer case studies
• Apprenticeship information for students
• Student case studies
• Apprenticeship Research Unit
• How to apply for accommodation
• Living in halls
• Your contract
• Rent a private property
• Course enquiries Ask us a question
• Find your country
• Before you apply
• When you have an offer
• Apply for your visa
• Exchange to Manchester Metropolitan
• Join us in January 2025
• Study abroad
• Becoming a partner
• Innovation Work with world-leading academics
• Leadership and growth Get training and support from specialists
• Talent, recruitment and development Connect with our students. Develop your people
• Conferences and events Hire our spaces, technology and facilities
• Championing creative excellence
• Driving economic growth
• Leading sustainability
• Tackling inequalities
• Transforming health
• Case studies
• Research Excellence Framework
• Engaging the public with our research
• Equality, Diversity and Inclusion
• Our commitment to researchers
• Why study a doctoral degree
• Choose Manchester Met
• PhDs and Doctoral Degrees
• Research degree subjects
• Postgraduate research fees
• Scholarships
• Doctoral College
• News and events
• Academic partnerships
• Ethics and Governance
• Responsible metrics
• Internationalisation
• Board of Governors
• Vice-Chancellor
• University Executive Group
• Faculty of Arts and Humanities
• Faculty of Business and Law
• Faculty of Health and Education
• Faculty of Science and Engineering
• Institute for Children's Futures
• Institute of Sport
• Professional Services
• Honorary graduates
• Environment
• Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
• Close Search mmu.ac.uk Search
• Undergraduate
• Postgraduate
• Apprenticeships
• Become a degree apprentice
• Accommodation
• Course enquiries
• International
• Study at Manchester Met
• International partnerships
• Business and employers
• Leadership and growth
• Talent, recruitment and development
• Conferences and events
• Our research
• Research Integrity
• Our strategy
• Economic growth
• Current students
• Research study home
• Masters by Research
• Postgraduate research opportunities
• Professional doctorates
• Doctoral loans
• Doctoral training partnerships
• Doctoral scholarships

Research regulations and guidance

• Doctoral Services
• Academic leadership
• Training and development
• Fund your research degree

Links to help you find key documents explaining how we regulate and govern our research.

This page is a collection of guidance, useful links and resources for research students as well as staff involved in the supervision or examination of research.

Postgraduate research regulations have been updated and are listed below. Please see the guidance and procedure documents section for further information.

Regulations for Professional Doctorate Research Degrees Regulations for Postgraduate Research Degrees - Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Regulations for Postgraduate Research Degrees - PhD by Published Works Regulations for Postgraduate Research Degrees - Master of Philosophy (MPhil) Regulations for Postgraduate Research Degrees - Master’s by Research Regulations for Higher Doctorate Degrees

Guidance and procedure documents

Annual Progress Reviews Guidance

Proofreading Guidance Research Degree Handbook Guidance on Concessions Guidance on Postgraduate Research Supervision Guidance on the Examination of Postgraduate Research Degrees Guidance on Thesis Submission for Postgraduate Research Degrees Postgraduate Research Student Withdrawal Policy Procedure for the Consideration of Exceptional Factors  and Exceptional Factors form RDEF Procedure to Support Postgraduate Research Progress  

If you have any questions about the regulations or guidance documents, please contact [email protected] .

Other useful documents and links

Oral Examination by Video Conference Policy Regulations for the Payment of University Fees Intellectual Property Policy Guidelines on Good Research Practice Procedure for the Investigation of Misconduct in Research

Pregnancy and Maternity Guidelines for Students

Assessment arrangements for disabled students Appeals and complaints Ethics and research governance   PGR Systems List Visiting Research Students Policy Academic Awards Admissions Procedure (to follow)‌ Occasional worker claim form

Previous year postgraduate research regulations and guidance (2019-20)

Guidance on Milestones for Postgraduate Research Degrees  - updated January 2022

Research Degrees Handbook‌ Regulations for Postgraduate Research Degrees‌‌‌ Institutional Code of Practice for Postgraduate Research Degrees Guidelines on the Examination of Postgraduate Research Degrees Code of Practice on Extensions and Suspensions  

Ask us a question about our research regulations and guidance.

Study at Cambridge

About the university, research at cambridge.

• Undergraduate courses
• Events and open days
• Fees and finance
• Postgraduate courses
• How to apply
• Postgraduate events
• Fees and funding
• International students
• Continuing education
• Executive and professional education
• Courses in education
• How the University and Colleges work
• Term dates and calendars
• Visiting the University
• Annual reports
• Equality and diversity
• A global university
• Public engagement
• Give to Cambridge
• For Cambridge students
• For our researchers
• Business and enterprise
• Colleges & departments
• Email & phone search
• Museums & collections
• Course Directory
• Qualification types

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Postgraduate Study

• Why Cambridge overview
• Chat with our students
• Cambridge explained overview
• The supervision system
• Student life overview
• In and around Cambridge
• Leisure activities
• Student unions
• Music awards
• Student support overview
• Mental health and wellbeing
• Disabled students
• Accommodation
• Language tuition
• Skills training
• Support for refugees
• Courses overview
• Department directory
• Funded studentships
• Part-time study
• Research degrees
• Visiting students
• Finance overview
• Fees overview
• What is my fee status?
• Part-time fees
• Application fee
• Living costs
• Funding overview
• Funding search
• How to apply for funding
• University funding overview
• Research Councils (UKRI)
• External funding and loans overview
• Funding searches
• External scholarships
• Charities and the voluntary sector
• Funding for disabled students
• Widening participation in funding
• Colleges overview
• What is a College?
• Choosing a College
• Applying overview
• Before you apply
• Entry requirements
• Application deadlines
• How do I apply? overview
• Application fee overview
• Application fee waiver
• Life Science courses
• Terms and conditions
• Continuing students
• Disabled applicants
• Supporting documents overview
• Academic documents
• Finance documents
• Evidence of competence in English
• AI and postgraduate applications
• Terms and Conditions
• Applicant portal and self-service
• After you apply overview
• Confirmation of admission
• Student registry
• Previous criminal convictions
• Deferring an application
• Updating your personal details
• Appeals and Complaints
• Widening participation
• Postgraduate admissions fraud
• International overview
• Immigration overview
• ATAS overview
• Applying for an ATAS certificate
• Current Cambridge students
• International qualifications
• Competence in English overview
• What tests are accepted?
• International events
• International student views overview
• Akhila’s story
• Alex’s story
• Huijie’s story
• Kelsey’s story
• Nilesh’s story
• Get in touch!
• Events overview
• Upcoming events
• Postgraduate Open Days overview
• Discover Cambridge: Master’s and PhD Study webinars
• Virtual tour
• Research Internships
• How we use participant data
• Postgraduate Newsletter

The degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) is the University's principal research degree for graduate students and is available in all faculties and departments.

A Cambridge PhD is intellectually demanding and you will need to have a high level of attainment and motivation to pursue this programme of advanced study and research.

In most faculties, a candidate is expected to have completed one year of postgraduate study, normally on a research preparation master's course, prior to starting a PhD.

Completion normally requires three or four years of full-time study, or at least five years of part-time study, including a probationary period.

Terms of research are normally consecutive and, for full-time students, require residency in Cambridge. Not all departments offer part-time research degrees.

Various routes to the PhD are possible and, if you are made an offer of admission, it will be made clear whether you are required to study for a master's degree or certificate in the first instance, or will be admitted directly to the probationary year for the PhD. You are registered for the PhD only after a satisfactory progress assessment at the end of the probationary year (five terms for part-time degrees). The assessment is designed also to focus your mind on the stages necessary for the completion of your research within the normal time limit and to address any structural problems that have arisen during the first year. Students must pass the first year assessment in order to continue their PhD study.

During your PhD, your effort will be focused on writing a dissertation. The word count of the dissertation is dependent on the department and the Student Registry or Educational Student Policy will be able to tell you the maximum word limit. This must represent a significant contribution to learning, for example through the discovery of new knowledge, the connection of previously unrelated facts, the development of a new theory, or the revision of older views, and must take account of previously published work on the subject. Some Cambridge dissertations go on to form the basis of significant publications.

Although you will spend long hours working independently, your department and College will both support you throughout your PhD. You are also able to attend regular seminars in your subject area and could be involved in teaching, perhaps giving seminars or supervising, or in the social life of your department and College.

PhD course search

Go to the Course Directory and filter courses using the relevant checkboxes.

Term Information

Explanation of terms

Postgraduate admissions office.

• Admissions Statistics
• Start an Application
• Applicant Self-Service

At a glance

• Bringing a family
• Current Postgraduates
• Cambridge Students' Union (SU)

University Policy and Guidelines

Privacy Policy

Information compliance

Equality and Diversity

Terms of Study

About this site

About our website

Privacy policy

© 2024 University of Cambridge

• Contact the University
• Accessibility
• Freedom of information
• Privacy policy and cookies
• Statement on Modern Slavery
• University A-Z
• Undergraduate
• Postgraduate
• Research news
• About research at Cambridge
• Spotlight on...

Browser does not support script.

• Autumn Term events schedule
• Student Voice
• You've got this
• LSE Volunteer Centre
• Key information
• My Skills and Opportunities
• Student Wellbeing Service
• PhD Academy
• LSE Careers
• Student Services Centre
• Timetable publication information
• Students living in halls
• Faith Centre

A-Z Guidance and Regulations

Find guidance documents and forms relating to the PhD Academy's activities. If you can't find what you need, submit an enquiry .

Appeals regulations for research students 

Appeals submission form: research students  [DOC]

Complaints procedure for students 

Copyright guidance

COVID -19 Financial Support Guidance 

COVID-19 Extension form: Original Scheme  [DOC]

COVID-19 Extension form: Phase 3  [DOC]

Disciplinary procedures for students 

Doctoral Community Fund Pilot Project  [PDF]

Examination entry form   [DOC]

Examination re-entry form  [DOC]

Examiner Fees and Expenses Claim Form

Examiner replacement form  [DOC] Extension to submission deadline 

Fieldwork 

Formatting and binding your thesis  

Guidance for final thesis submission to Library

Guidelines for MPhil/PhD examinations  

Interruption to your studies 

Mission Statement

Nominating Examiners for MPhil and PhD Examinations  [PDF]

  Parental leave policy for research students . Please direct queries on parental leave for research degree students to James Ringer, Head of Scholarships and Financial Support ( [email protected] ).

Part-time study 

PhD Log-Guide for Academic Departments

PhD Log Instructions for Students

Regulations on assessment offences: plagiarism 

Regulations on assessment offences: other than plagiarism  

Regulations for Research Degrees 

Remediation and Withdrawal Policy

Replacement Degree Certificate Application

Research Ethics

Researcher safety

Residing outside the UK (ROUK)  

Statement on Editorial Help  [PDF]

Statement of Service Level  [PDF]

Statement on term dates and vacations  [PDF]

Student charter 

Student Handbook 2023/24  [PDF]

Student Event Funding Competition Guidance and Application

Study Elsewhere

Supervisor Handbook

Template for the front pages of your thesis  [PDF]

Transfer of Programme

Withdraw from programme

Staff guidance for Change of Circumstances

The PhD journey From registration right through to graduation

Registration and Enrolment 2023/24 Information for new MPhil/PhD and visiting research students

Support and wellbeing Our team are here to help you with your needs

Academic department PhD contacts Get in touch with your department

The team How to Contact Us

Alternatively, use our A–Z index

Attend an open day

Discover more about this subject area

PhD Education / Entry requirements

Year of entry: 2024

• View full page

Academic entry qualification overview

• Bachelor's (Honours) degree at 2:1 or above (or overseas equivalent); and
• Master's degree in a relevant subject - with an overall average of 60% or above, a minimum mark of 60% in your dissertation (or overseas equivalent)

English language

• IELTS test minimum score - 7.0 overall, 7.0 in writing, 6.0 in other sections.
• TOEFL (internet based) test minimum score - 100 overall, 25 in all sections.
• Pearson Test of English (PTE) UKVI/SELT or PTE Academic minimum score - 76 overall, 76 in writing, 70 in other sections.
• To demonstrate that you have taken an undergraduate or postgraduate degree in a majority English speaking nation within the last 5 years.
• Other tests may be considered.

English language test validity

Some English Language test results are only valid for two years. Your English Language test report must be valid on the start date of the programme.

Other international entry requirements

We accept a range of qualifications from different countries. For these and general requirements including English language see entry requirements from your country.

The University requires you to reside within a commutable distance from Manchester during your time as a registered student, unless you are on approved fieldwork/a formal placement or are on a period of Submission pending. This is to ensure that you are able to meet attendance expectations and participate in wider research activities within your discipline area and/or School.

• Schools & departments

Depending on the field of study you are interested in, you may be able to apply for a pre-defined PhD project, or you may need to develop your own research idea.

Research in the fields of medicine, science and engineering tend to require you to:

• apply for a project that already has specific, pre-defined aims
• compete for a place on a partially or fully funded programme (often with competitive application processes).

Research in the fields of arts, humanities and social sciences tend to require you to:

• develop your own research idea (be prepared to adapt your original idea)
• source your own funding, although some funded projects may be available.

PhD research projects

Doctoral training centres and partnerships, developing your own research idea, professional doctorates.

Rules and regulations

PhD by Publication regulations

Updated on 25 May 2016

Regulations for candidates for a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) by Publication

(Note: The powers and duties conferred upon the Senatus under the sections marked + have been delegated to the individual School Boards.)

1.1 The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by publication may be awarded following successful completion of a narrative thesis presented along with a portfolio of relevant published work which reflects specialised, original, advanced knowledge, understanding and practice at the frontiers of the subject or professional area.

1.2 In cases where the portfolio of relevant published work contains multi‐authored works then a clear and verifiable account must be given of the candidate’s original and individual contribution to the work in question.

1.3 The narrative thesis shall consist of a critical analysis of the work submitted (between 10,000 and 20,000 words in length) covering the development of the candidate’s submitted work and its contribution to the field in general.

2.1 The Degree is granted on the basis that the narrative thesis and portfolio of published work, taken together, demonstrates that the candidate’s work has involved the creation and interpretation of new knowledge and understanding, through original research, or other advanced scholarship, of a quality that has satisfied peer review, extended the forefront of the discipline, and has been published in an appropriate scholarly context.

2.2 The published work should demonstrate

• a systematic acquisition, understanding and interpretation of a substantial body of knowledge which is at the forefront of an academic discipline or area of professional practice;
• the general ability to conceptualise, design and implement a project for the generation of new knowledge, applications or understanding at the forefront of the discipline;
• an appropriate level of understanding of applicable techniques for research and advanced academic enquiry.

+ 3.1 Before being admitted as a candidate for the Degree, a candidate must have obtained, as a minimum, a Degree with Honours of the First or Second class in the University or in another university or institution recognised for this purpose by the Senatus Academicus. A relevant Master's Degree can compensate a first degree classification by one level. Individual Schools may apply additional requirements. The Senatus may, in exceptional circumstances, admit a candidate who possesses such other qualifications as it may approve for the purpose.

3.2 A candidate must not already possess a doctoral degree in the same discipline as the proposed submission for the degree of PhD by Publication.

+ 4 An application for admission as a candidate for the Degree must be submitted to the Senatus Academicus.

Duration of study

5.1 The normal and minimum period of registration for the Degree shall be 12 months of part‐time study.

5.2 The maximum period of registration for the Degree shall be two calendar years of part‐ time study. An extension to this maximum period may be granted by the appropriate School Board for good cause on the recommendation of the supervisor(s).

Matriculation

6 A candidate for the Degree shall be required to matriculate in the University as a part‐time student and to pay the prescribed tuition, matriculation and/or submission fees applicable.

Supervision

7.1 A supervisor or supervisors of the candidate's work shall be appointed by the School Board.

7.2 A candidate shall report to the supervisors on such occasions and in such manner as the supervisors may require.

Examination

+ 8.1 The Senatus, on the recommendation of the School Board, shall appoint the University member of a committee to examine the thesis. The Court, on the recommendation of the Senatus as advised by the School Board, shall appoint two external examiners who shall not be members of the University.

8.2 An Examining Committee shall consist of three members: one internal examiner who shall be the convener, and two external examiners. The candidate's supervisor(s) may not be examiners.

9 Each member of the Examining Committee must be provided with a complete copy of the narrative thesis and the portfolio of published works in an approved style. Each copy shall be accompanied by a declaration signed by the candidate that work to be examined has not been accepted in fulfilment of the requirements for any other degree or professional qualification.

10 Each candidate for the Degree shall be required to submit to a viva voce examination.

11 The Examining Committee shall report to the Registry within a period of three months from the date of submission of the narrative thesis and portfolio by the candidate. Thereafter, the report of the Examining Committee shall be submitted to the Senatus at the meeting immediately following the date of the receipt of the report by the Registry.

12 The examiners shall prepare a joint report after the viva voce examination which shall include an agreed recommendation. In the exceptional case of irreconcilable disagreement between the examiners, each shall submit a separate report and the Senatus shall have the power to recommend to the Court the appointment of a further external examiner or examiners to examine the thesis.

Approved by Senate on March 28 2012 Amendments approved by Senate on May 25 2016

Quality and Academic Standards

Browser does not support script.

• Undergraduate
• Executive education
• Study Abroad
• Summer schools
• Online certificate courses
• International students
• Meet, visit and discover LSE

MPhil/PhD Law

• Graduate research
• Department of Law
• Application code M3ZL
• Starting 2024
• Home full-time: Closed
• Overseas full-time: Closed
• Location: Houghton Street, London

LSE Law is the UK's pre-eminent research institution for law. Our academics are the authors of influential and often path-breaking scholarship, and many have globally leading reputations. As one of UK's largest law departments, with over 70 academic members of staff, LSE Law is well known for its interdisciplinary and contextual approaches to the study of law.

Our PhD Law programme offers the opportunity to undertake advanced legal research at one of the world's best law schools. Students in our PhD programme receive excellent training, and work under the supervision of leading scholars with strong international, comparative and interdisciplinary commitments. Our doctoral students become members of a lively academic community which is at the cutting-edge of legal scholarship and which plays a major role in the education of lawyers and law teachers from around the world.

Students in our PhD programme work under the supervision of two academics. We also provide specialised training for PhD students, both through our own training course and through courses run by other units of LSE, especially the Department of Methodology and the PhD Academy. PhD students are also welcome to attend any other LSE course, subject to the approval of the lecturer. We aim to provide our PhD students with the opportunity to gain teaching experience, and also offer the opportunity to become involved with the organisation of mooting, academic conferences, pro bono work, and our working paper series. Each year two PhD students also serve as Masters advisers/PhD Representatives.

Programme details

For more information about tuition fees and entry requirements, see the fees and funding and assessing your application sections.

Entry requirements

Minimum entry requirements for mphil/phd law .

Our normal minimum entry requirement is a completed LLM degree or other masters-level qualification, awarded with an average mark of 70% (distinction/first class honours) or equivalent. Exceptionally, we may admit students who do not meet this requirement, where there is strong, alternative evidence of your suitability for our PhD programme.

Although we accept applications from students who have not yet completed their LLM or equivalent degree by the application deadline, we give priority within the admissions process to students who have already obtained the required grade by this date. Strong candidates who are currently completing their LLM/other masters degree may therefore wish to defer their application until they have received the requisite grade. Offers of admission and funding that are made to applicants who are currently undertaking their LLM/other masters degree are made on a “conditional” basis, meaning that the offer cannot be confirmed until the minimum entry requirement has been achieved. Conditional offers must be confirmed by the end of July of the year of entry at the latest. This means that current master students who will not have their final grades/transcript by the end of July (including students on the LSE LLM degree) are not eligible to apply to the PhD programme, unless they already hold another masters degree with the requisite grade.

It must be emphasised that meeting the minimum entry requirement does not guarantee entry. The PhD programme is heavily over-subscribed, meaning that the large majority of applicants who meet this requirement each year do not receive a place. We select students based on a variety of factors, including past academic performance, motivation for doctoral study, the viability of the applicant’s research proposal and its anticipated contribution to legal scholarship, the availability of suitable supervisors, and the diversity of the incoming PhD cohort, including diversity of subject-areas.

Research proposal

Your application should give us a clear idea of what you want to research and why.

You should state the general area in which you wish to undertake research, and provide a detailed outline of the specific questions you intend to investigate within that field. You should indicate the ways in which your proposed study would be a significant and original contribution to knowledge. You should identify the materials you expect to need, where you expect to find them, and the methods and/or framework of analysis you propose to use. Finally, you should explain how your proposed project is a good fit with other research work done within the Law School.

More detailed information on the admissions requirements for the programme, and guidance on what is required to form a successful research proposal is available in the LSE Law PhD programme FAQs page .

Competition for places at the School is high. This means that even if you meet our minimum entry requirement, this does not guarantee you an offer of admission. 

If you have studied or are studying outside of the UK then have a look at our  Information for International Students  to find out the entry requirements that apply to you.

Assessing your application

We welcome applications from students whose proposed research projects complement the academic interests of members of staff at the School, and we recommend that you investigate staff research interests before applying. Applicants may wish to approach potential supervisors at the Law School to gauge their availability in a particular year and/or their willingness to supervise a specific research topic. However, you are not required to contact potential supervisors before applying, and doing so provides no advantage in the admissions process. If your application is successful, two academic members of staff will be appointed to supervise you.

We carefully consider each application on an individual basis, taking into account all the information presented on your application form, including your:

- academic achievement (including existing and pending qualifications) - statement of academic purpose - references - CV - outline research proposal - sample of written work.

See further information on supporting documents

You may also have to provide evidence of your English proficiency. You do not need to provide this at the time of your application to LSE, but we recommend that you do.  See our English language requirements .

In most instances, we hold a brief interview with shortlisted applicants as part of the admissions process. This is typically conducted by an applicant’s potential supervisors, it takes place virtually (e.g. over Zoom), and it lasts about half an hour. The purpose of the interview is to further assess both the applicant’s motivation for doctoral study and the feasibility of the proposed research project. No preparation is required for the interview, although we recommend that you look over the material that you have submitted with your application beforehand.

When to apply

The application deadline for this programme is 1 December 2023 . To be considered for any LSE funding opportunity, you must have submitted your application and all supporting documents by the funding deadline. See the fees and funding section for more details. Candidates are responsible for ensuring that any necessary supporting materials (e.g. letters of reference sent by referees on their behalf) reach the LSE in good time, and are advised to start the admissions process as early as possible as a result.

Fees and funding

Every research student is charged a fee in line with the fee structure for their programme. The fee covers registration and examination fees payable to the School, lectures, classes and individual supervision, lectures given at other colleges under intercollegiate arrangements and, under current arrangements, membership of the Students' Union. It does not cover  living costs  or travel or fieldwork.

Tuition fees 2024/25 for MPhil/PhD Law

Home students: £4,786 for the first year Overseas students: £22,632 for the first year

The fee is likely to rise over subsequent years of the programme. The School charges home research students in line with the level of fee that the Research Councils recommend. The fees for overseas students are likely to rise in line with the assumed percentage increase in pay costs (i.e. 4 per cent per annum).

The Table of Fees shows the latest tuition amounts for all programmes offered by the School.

The amount of tuition fees you will need to pay, and any financial support you are eligible for, will depend on whether you are classified as a home or overseas student, otherwise known as your fee status. LSE assesses your fee status based on guidelines provided by the Department of Education.

Further information about fee status classification.

Scholarships, studentships and other funding

The School recognises that the  cost of living in London  may be higher than in your home town or country, and we provide generous scholarships each year to home and overseas students.

LSE Law School nonetheless aims to ensure that all students have adequate funding for their studies, typically through the award of an LSE PhD Studentship . A Studentship covers the cost of the student’s tuition fees and also provides a generous annual maintenance stipend (£23,000 for 2023/24). Studentships come with a teaching requirement of approximately 100 hours of classroom teaching to be completed over the course of the candidate’s PhD studies. The Law School also offers an annual personal research allowance of £1,000, and other benefits such as access to our PhD Field Work fund.

There is no separate application process for LSE PhD Studentships, as funding awards are considered alongside admission to the doctoral programme. All applicants must apply by the ordinary application deadline of 1 December 2023 .

In addition to our needs-based awards, LSE also makes available scholarships for students from specific regions of the world and awards for students studying specific subject areas.  Find out more about financial support.

External funding 

There may be other funding opportunities available through other organisations or governments and we recommend you investigate these options as well.

Further information

Fees and funding opportunities

Information for international students

LSE is an international community, with over 140 nationalities represented amongst its student body. We celebrate this diversity through everything we do.  

If you are applying to LSE from outside of the UK then take a look at our Information for International students . 

1) Take a note of the UK qualifications we require for your programme of interest (found in the ‘Entry requirements’ section of this page). 

2) Go to the International Students section of our website. 

3) Select your country. 

4) Select ‘Graduate entry requirements’ and scroll until you arrive at the information about your local/national qualification. Compare the stated UK entry requirements listed on this page with the local/national entry requirement listed on your country specific page.

Programme structure and courses

In addition to progressing with your research, you are expected to take the listed training and transferable skills courses. You may take courses in addition to those listed, and should discuss this with your supervisor. At the end of your first year (full-time), you will need to satisfy certain requirements and if you meet these, you will be retroactively upgraded to PhD status.

First year - Training courses

Doctoral Research Seminar (Compulsory) Equips students with the skills required to undertake advanced legal research. Law Department Seminar Series (Compulsory) One other relevant course: (Compulsory)

Second year - Training courses

Doctoral Research Seminar Series (Optional) PhD Seminar Series (Optional) Staff Seminar Series

Third year - Training courses

Doctoral Research Seminar Series (Optional) PhD seminar Series (Compulsory) Staff seminar Series (Optional)

Fourth year - Transferable skills courses

Doctoral Research Seminar Series (Optional) PhD Seminar Series (Optional) Staff Seminar Series (Optional)

You must note, however, that while care has been taken to ensure that this information is up to date and correct, a change of circumstances since publication may cause the School to change, suspend or withdraw a course or programme of study, or change the fees that apply to it. The School will always notify the affected parties as early as practicably possible and propose any viable and relevant alternative options. Note that the School will neither be liable for information that after publication becomes inaccurate or irrelevant, nor for changing, suspending or withdrawing a course or programme of study due to events outside of its control, which includes but is not limited to a lack of demand for a course or programme of study, industrial action, fire, flood or other environmental or physical damage to premises.

You must also note that places are limited on some courses and/or subject to specific entry requirements. The School cannot therefore guarantee you a place. Please note that changes to programmes and courses can sometimes occur after you have accepted your offer of a place. These changes are normally made in light of developments in the discipline or path-breaking research, or on the basis of student feedback. Changes can take the form of altered course content, teaching formats or assessment modes. Any such changes are intended to enhance the student learning experience. You should visit the School’s  Calendar , or contact the relevant academic department, for information on the availability and/or content of courses and programmes of study. Certain substantive changes will be listed on the   updated graduate course and programme information page ..

Supervision, progression and assessment

Supervision.

You will be assigned two supervisors who are specialists in your chosen research field, though not necessarily in your topic. 

Progression and assessment

Full-time PhD students must complete their doctorate within four years, and part-time students must complete it within eight years.

At the end of the first year (or, in the case of part-time students, second year), your progress is formally assessed. Successful completion of this assessment then sees you registered as a candidate for the PhD degree.  As part of this assessment (or ‘upgrade’) process, you will present your work-in-progress at our Upgrade Conference, attended by academic staff and PhD students. Third year doctoral students also give a seminar on their work-in-progress, again attended by academic staff and PhD students.

Student support and resources

We’re here to help and support you throughout your time at LSE, whether you need help with your academic studies, support with your welfare and wellbeing or simply to develop on a personal and professional level.

Whatever your query, big or small, there are a range of people you can speak to who will be happy to help.  

Department librarians   – they will be able to help you navigate the library and maximise its resources during your studies. 

Accommodation service  – they can offer advice on living in halls and offer guidance on private accommodation related queries.

Class teachers and seminar leaders  – they will be able to assist with queries relating to specific courses. 

Disability and Wellbeing Service  – they are experts in long-term health conditions, sensory impairments, mental health and specific learning difficulties. They offer confidential and free services such as  student counselling,  a  peer support scheme  and arranging  exam adjustments.  They run groups and workshops.  

IT help  – support is available 24 hours a day to assist with all your technology queries.   

LSE Faith Centre  – this is home to LSE's diverse religious activities and transformational interfaith leadership programmes, as well as a space for worship, prayer and quiet reflection. It includes Islamic prayer rooms and a main space for worship. It is also a space for wellbeing classes on campus and is open to all students and staff from all faiths and none.   

Language Centre  – the Centre specialises in offering language courses targeted to the needs of students and practitioners in the social sciences. We offer pre-course English for Academic Purposes programmes; English language support during your studies; modern language courses in nine languages; proofreading, translation and document authentication; and language learning community activities.

LSE Careers  ­ – with the help of LSE Careers, you can make the most of the opportunities that London has to offer. Whatever your career plans, LSE Careers will work with you, connecting you to opportunities and experiences from internships and volunteering to networking events and employer and alumni insights. 

LSE Library   –   founded in 1896, the British Library of Political and Economic Science is the major international library of the social sciences. It stays open late, has lots of excellent resources and is a great place to study. As an LSE student, you’ll have access to a number of other academic libraries in Greater London and nationwide. 

LSE LIFE  – this is where you should go to develop skills you’ll use as a student and beyond. The centre runs talks and workshops on skills you’ll find useful in the classroom; offers one-to-one sessions with study advisers who can help you with reading, making notes, writing, research and exam revision; and provides drop-in sessions for academic and personal support. (See ‘Teaching and assessment’). 

LSE Students’ Union (LSESU)  – they offer academic, personal and financial advice and funding.  

PhD Academy   – this is available for PhD students, wherever they are, to take part in interdisciplinary events and other professional development activities and access all the services related to their registration. 

Sardinia House Dental Practice   – this   offers discounted private dental services to LSE students.  

St Philips Medical Centre  – based in Pethwick-Lawrence House, the Centre provides NHS Primary Care services to registered patients.

Student Services Centre  – our staff here can answer general queries and can point you in the direction of other LSE services.  

Student advisers   – we have a  Deputy Head of Student Services (Advice and Policy)  and an  Adviser to Women Students  who can help with academic and pastoral matters.

Student life

As a student at LSE you’ll be based at our central London campus. Find out what our campus and London have to offer you on academic, social and career perspective. 

Student societies and activities

Your time at LSE is not just about studying, there are plenty of ways to get involved in  extracurricular activities . From joining one of over 200 societies, or starting your own society, to volunteering for a local charity, or attending a public lecture by a world-leading figure, there is a lot to choose from. 

The campus 

LSE is based on one  campus  in the centre of London. Despite the busy feel of the surrounding area, many of the streets around campus are pedestrianised, meaning the campus feels like a real community. 

Life in London 

London is an exciting, vibrant and colourful city. It's also an academic city, with more than 400,000 university students. Whatever your interests or appetite you will find something to suit your palate and pocket in this truly international capital. Make the most of career opportunities and social activities, theatre, museums, music and more. 

Want to find out more? Read why we think  London is a fantastic student city , find out about  key sights, places and experiences for new Londoners . Don't fear, London doesn't have to be super expensive: hear about  London on a budget . 

Quick Careers Facts for the Department of Law

Median salary of our PG students 15 months after graduating: £36,000

Top 5 sectors our students work in:

• Law and Legal Services  
• Government, Public Sector and Policy   
• Accounting and Auditing              
• Health and Social Care  
• Education, Teaching and Research

The data was collected as part of the Graduate Outcomes survey, which is administered by the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). Graduates from 2020-21 were the fourth group to be asked to respond to Graduate Outcomes. Median salaries are calculated for respondents who are paid in UK pounds sterling and who were working in full-time employment.

Once completed, the majority of our students undertake academic appointments, whether as lecturers or post-doctoral researchers. The remainder have received tenancies in barristers’ chambers or work in law firms, or NGOs and consultancies. Over the last four years, our PhD graduates have been appointed to lectureships at universities that include London School of Economics, City, Cardiff, Durham, King’s College London, Birkbeck, Liverpool, Middlesex, Queen Mary, SOAS, Southampton, University College London, Warwick and York, and outside the UK at the Graduate Institute of International Studies (Geneva), University College Dublin, Victoria University (New Zealand), Queen’s University (Canada) and St Thomas University (Canada). Other graduates have been selected for post-doctoral fellowships at the London School of Economics. New York University, Humbolt University,  the European University Institute and the University of Haifa.

Further information on graduate destinations for this programme

Support for your career

Many leading organisations give careers presentations at the School during the year, and LSE Careers has a wide range of resources available to assist students in their job search. Find out more about the  support available to students through LSE Careers .

Find out more about LSE

Discover more about being an LSE student - meet us in a city near you, visit our campus or experience LSE from home. 

Experience LSE from home

Webinars, videos, student blogs and student video diaries will help you gain an insight into what it's like to study at LSE for those that aren't able to make it to our campus.  Experience LSE from home . 

Come on a guided campus tour, attend an undergraduate open day, drop into our office or go on a self-guided tour.  Find out about opportunities to visit LSE . 

LSE visits you

Student Marketing, Recruitment and Study Abroad travels throughout the UK and around the world to meet with prospective students. We visit schools, attend education fairs and also hold Destination LSE events: pre-departure events for offer holders.  Find details on LSE's upcoming visits . 

How to apply

Virtual Graduate Open Day

Register your interest

Related programmes, mphil/phd international relations.

Code(s) M1ZR

LLM, Master of Laws

Code(s) M3U1, M3U4 (extended part-time – 48 months)

MRes/PhD Political Science

Code(s) M1ZN

MPhil/PhD Gender

Code(s) Y2ZG

Request a prospectus

• Name First name Last name
• Address Address Line 1 Address Line 2 City County Postcode Country

Speak to Admissions

Content to be supplied

• Accessibility Tools
• The home of current students
• Academic Life
• Academic Regulations
• Research Guidance

Guide to PhD by Published Work

• Student News
• IT Service Desk
• Student Spaces
• Postgraduate Research
• Students' Union

Guide to PhD/MD by Published Work and Senior Doctorate

1. admission to degree.

Applicants for a PhD by Published Work should meet the general entry conditions for a doctoral level research degree as defined in the Guide to Research Student Admissions .

An applicant will be required to submit a detailed list of published works which they intend to be included in the final submission together with a statement of their contribution to any multi-authored papers/collaborative work to the relevant Executive Dean or nominee.

The applicant must also provide a brief critical summary of the publications to be submitted which contextualises the works, demonstrates the coherence of the works and identifies the contribution to the advancement of knowledge which the works represent. The brief critical summary should also indicate the methodology adopted in the research. The brief critical summary should be no more than one page in length.

The relevant Executive Dean or nominee will reach a decision on whether the applicant should be permitted to register for the degree of PhD by Published Work.

2. Duration of Candidature

A candidate shall be required to complete a minimum period of candidature of six months from the date of enrolment during which the candidate will prepare the submission and critical review under the guidance of an adviser.

All candidates are required to submit for the degree no later than 12 months after the date of enrolment.

3. Definition of Published Work

In order to be eligible for consideration as a “published work”, a piece of work must have been published in such a way as to be generally available for consultation by scholars or other interested persons and must be traceable in ordinary catalogues. All work must have been internationally peer reviewed and must have been published no more than seven years prior to the date of submission.

Examples of eligible published work include, but are not limited to: 

• Academic paper;
• Journal article;
• Technical report;
• Book chapter;
• Scholarly text book;
• A single book.

Electronic works may be considered as eligible, but the candidate should provide evidence that the work will continue to be publicly available for the foreseeable future in the present form.

The published work submitted for the degree must constitute a corpus of publication tending towards a coherent thesis, rather than a series of disconnected publications.

The published work submitted for the degree must be substantially different from any work which may have previously been submitted for any degree at this or any other institution.

The published works should be of a standard equivalent to that of a “traditional” PhD in the relevant academic area and should demonstrate the candidate’s original contribution to knowledge.

4. Quantity of Work

The number of works will depend on both the academic area and the type of published works included in the submission, but the submission should normally comprise between three and ten works. However, the issue of number is subservient to the question of the quality and impact of the output. 

The overall volume of work submitted should be approximately equivalent to a “traditional” PhD (see Guide to the Submission and Presentation of a thesis for research Students for more details on word count).

5. Format of Submission

The work to be submitted shall comprise:

a) An abstract providing a summary of the published work containing all of the main concepts and conclusions of the published work that shall be no more than 300 words in length;

b) A summary sheet listing all of the published work submitted together with a statement of the extent of the candidate’s contribution to multi-authored work, substantiated by all the co-authors;

c) A copy of each publication numbered in accordance with point b) above;

d) A critical review stating the aims and nature of the research, the inter-relationship between the published work and the main contribution and/or addition to learning of the published work;

e) Evidence of the status of all the published work submitted.

The submission should be presented as a single bound volume where possible. Where complete books are presented as part of the submission, these must be provided separately in the original binding. Chapters of books and articles/papers should be presented as reprints and be bound into the main submission. See the Guide to the Submission and Presentation of a Thesis for Research Students for more details on binding conventions.

6. The Critical Review

The critical review should be between 5,000 and 10,000 words in length. The critical review should set the published works in the context of existing literature and should evaluate the contribution that the research in the submitted published works makes in the advancement of the research area. The critical review should indicate the coherence of the works, linking the works to the research methodology adopted by the candidate.

The critical review of the published works is fundamental to the establishment of the coherence and quality of the submission and hence to the case for the award of the degree. 

In particular the critical review should: 

• Show how the works make a significant and coherent contribution to knowledge;
• Provide an assessment of the impact of the works contained in the submission;
• Explain the relevance and criteria for selection of any methodologies used;
• Outline the themes that give the works their defining coherence;
• Clearly state the candidate’s role in all co-­authored works;
• Show how specific publications have been tailored for publication (editing out of experimental data, for example);
• Review any referenced publications which are not presented as part of the submission. 

Particular attention should be paid to ensuring that factors such as availability of raw data from which cited works draw conclusions are fully taken into account in the critical review.

7. Role of Adviser

Every candidate will have an adviser appointed by the candidate’s Executive Dean or nominee. The adviser must be a member of staff at Swansea University. The adviser will support, advise and guide the candidate through the drafting of the critical review and the process of submission and examination of the published work.

The role of the adviser is to:

• Support and advise on the development of the critical review;
• Guide the candidate in relation to the coherence of the body of work to be submitted;
• Offer guidance on the preparation of the oral examination;
• Suggest suitable examiners to the Executive Dean.

8. Assessment

Candidates for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Published Work shall be assessed through an oral examination (Viva Voce).

9. Oral Examination

A PhD by Published Work should reflect the same academic standards as those that operate for a PhD based upon an approved programme of supervised research. Examiners should assess the scope and significance of the body of published work and should consider its strengths and weaknesses.

In examining a submission, the examiners should:

• Evaluate the intellectual merit of the candidate’s submitted published work;
• Establish if a satisfactory case is made for coherence between the publications in the critical review;
• Assess the contribution to knowledge represented by the publications and made apparent in the critical review;
• Evaluate the rigour with which the candidate has contextualised and analysed their publications in the critical review;
• Evaluate the appropriateness of the methods employed in the research and the correctness of their application;
• Assess the candidate’s contribution to the research embodied in multi-authored works and establish the candidate’s ‘ownership’ of the published work;
• Establish the candidate’s appreciation of the state of historical and current knowledge within the candidate’s research area.

In some cases the examiners may consider that the works do not contain sufficient detail to allow some of the above judgments to be made. This may particularly be the case for journal articles where a journal’s policy may not allow inclusion of detailed data. This lack of detailed data should be addressed in the critical review accompanying the submission of published work and in the oral examination. Candidates may also include relevant raw data as appendices to the submission.

We use cookies on reading.ac.uk to improve your experience, monitor site performance and tailor content to you

Read our cookie policy to find out how to manage your cookie settings

This site may not work correctly on Internet Explorer. We recommend switching to a different browser for a better experience.

PhD by Distance

Our PhD by Distance programme allows you to benefit from our world-class support and the expertise of a Reading-based supervisor, while conducting your research in a location that suits your circumstances. 

The programme is available to candidates who need to study for most of their registration period at another site, whether in the UK, or worldwide. Acceptance for PhD by Distance is subject to the approval of the supervisors and the relevant school or department.

There are several reasons why you may wish to base yourself away from the University of Reading while undertaking your PhD:

• You have an extensive fieldwork element to your research
• You have responsibilities (e.g. caring or employment) that prevent you from attending on campus
• You are already based and/or employed in an environment that is relevant and conducive to their research
• You do not reside within travelling distance of the University
• You are based in a UK research organisation/institution with a collaborative agreement with the University of Reading in place  

What the programme offers

On the PhD by Distance programme, you will benefit from:

• the opportunity to study on  either a part-time (4-6 years duration) or full-time basis (3-4 years duration)
• supervision from one or more leading University of Reading academics, working at the forefront of their field
• access to a range of high-quality training, delivered on campus or online (see section below on Training)
• access to extensive online Library resources
• a PhD qualification which is delivered and examined at the same high academic standard as a campus-based PhD and a standard PhD degree certificate which does not state the mode of study on it.

Training for PhD by Distance students

The doctoral and researcher college provides a suite of generic researcher training open to all doctoral researchers at reading; this complements subject-specific training available via schools. the specific content of the programme changes from year to year but broadly includes the following: .

• Live online training (available off-campus) – A selection of our training sessions in the Reading Researcher Development Programme (RRDP), typically representing not less than 100 hours of learning, is delivered live online each year. UK time zone applies
• Recorded tutorials (available off-campus) – A small but growing selection of recorded tutorials on key topics such as managing data, academic English and research funding 
• Face-to-face training (available on campus only) - Other RRDP training sessions and selected longer programmes are offered face-to-face only. Students registered By Distance have access to face-to-face training when physically present on campus.     

By Distance study entails reduced access to training opportunities and on-campus experience. By Distance candidates are encouraged to discuss and mutually agree overall training plans with their supervisor and seek supplementary training external to Reading (e.g. via an employer or nearby institution) as appropriate.

Induction and physical attendance

A University-wide induction event is held by the Doctoral and Researcher College near the start of each term for all new doctoral researchers. PhD by Distance students studying at Reading in the first term are expected to attend. Where it is not possible for PhD by Distance students to attend in person (i.e. they are not on campus), a recording of the induction will be made available on the virtual learning environment.

Students registered By Distance will benefit from being physically present on campus for periods of time, for instance to attend induction and selected training, to meet their supervisor and peers, and to attend at key points such as Confirmation of Registration. It is strongly recommended that the first month of their programme be spent on campus. 

Eligibility

You must meet the following criteria:

• Satisfy the academic and English language entry requirements for PhD study
• The candidate has a research project which can be undertaken successfully by distance; regular access to campus should not be essential for successful completion of the research
• The candidate must be able to demonstrate that they have the time to undertake a PhD on the selected mode (full-time or part-time). Part-time doctoral study at Reading typically equates to between 50% and 60% of full-time
• The candidate has independent access to the resources needed to successfully complete their research; this will vary between candidates and projects but may include access to archives, facilities, data collection, digital infrastructure or space in their off-campus location
• The candidate is well motivated to work alone; they understand that By Distance registration is not an online learning programme and has reduced access to campus training
• The candidate and School/Department have discussed the suitability of their research project and personal circumstances for study by distance
• The candidate, where appropriate, has access to support from a local supervisor or mentor with experience in the academic field and also of supporting students or equivalent researchers. Advisors/mentors may be appointed to provide a regular point of contact, and are normally in a position to act as an ‘advocate’ and provide pastoral care if needed.
• Will study at least two-thirds of your minimum registration period off campus   

If you are intending to study in the Henley Business School, then please check with the  relevant Department within the Business School  about whether PhD by Distance is available before you apply.

A PhD by Distance is not suitable for all candidates. In offering a PhD By Distance programme specific consideration is given to the suitability of the research project, and whether it can be completed successfully without regular access to campus. Further consideration is given to areas of supervision, support, transferable and subject-specific skills training, research environment , progression milestones and the examination process in order to ensure off campus research students receive a comparable (although, not similar) experience to on campus students registered on ‘standard’ PhD programmes.

Fees for PhD by Distance programmes can be found on the fees webpage

• How to apply

Before starting your application, you are strongly advised to  navigate to the PhD webpages of your chosen school or department  to read the specific guidance on how to apply, as the requirements can vary. Once you have read the guidance, you will need to make a formal application through the University's  online application system , highlighting that you wish to study for a PhD by Distance (full or part-time). If you have questions about PhD by Distance in a specific school or department, then please contact the relevant School/Department PGR Administrator in the  School PGR Support Team . 

Immigration considerations for international students

PhD by Distance students must ensure that when visiting the University that they obtain the correct visa. The correct type of visa depends upon the period of time which a student intends to spend physically at the University.

PhD by Distance students can visit the University for up to six months within each academic year with a maximum of eighteen months in total for the duration of their programme. Students must discuss their intentions with the Doctoral Research Office (DRO) well in advance of any planned visit to the University. The DRO is well-placed to provide information on a range of immigration-related matters related to Postgraduate Research Programmes [email protected]

Examination

The normal expectation is that the viva of a PhD by Distance student will take place in Reading. Where this is not feasible, online examinations will be arranged.

Further information

Further information on PhD by Distance study can be found in the University's guidance on PhD by Distance .  

Take the next step

• Get a prospectus
• Ask us a question

• {{item.title}} {{item.title}} 0" aria-label="Find options under this page" @click="mobchildshow(true, item.title)" class="more-menu">
• {{subitem.title}}

Regulations for awards (research degrees)

Regulations for Awards (Research Degrees) 2023

List of contents, regulations for awards (research degrees), general regulations governing all research degrees , regulations for the degree of master by research (including ma, msc & ment) , regulations for the degree of master of philosophy , regulations for the award of professional doctorate, incorporating the master in research (mres) award , regulations for the awards of phd and entd (excluding phd by publication) , regulations for the award of phd by publication , regulations for the award of higher doctorates , regulations approval and ownership.

Our Regulations for Awards (Research Degrees) are also available within a single MS Word document:

Regulations for Awards (Research Degrees) 2023-24

• APPENDIX A Guidelines for alternative format research degree theses: SAH ONLY
• APPENDIX B Guidance for journal format PhD thesis within HHS
• APPENDIX C Guidelines for alternative format research degree theses: SCE ONLY

Browser does not support script.

Go to…

• School leadership
• Undergraduate study

Postgraduate study

• Pharmaceutical medicine
• Professional training
• Our departments
• Comprehensive Cancer Centre
• Institute of Pharmaceutical Science
• Our connections

Research & Impact

• Research facilities
• Maplethorpe Fellowships

PhD Opportunities at the Institute of Pharmaceutical Science

About our postgraduate research studies.

The Institute of Pharmaceutical Science (IPS) is an enabling and rich environment for students to undertake their postgraduate research studies. Across the three research groups of Drug Discovery, Medicines Development, and Medicines Use; we have approximately 100 students on 3, 3+1, and 4-year track PhD programmes.

Most of our PhD students are embedded on one site, engendering an environment of engagement (student led seminars, social activities, annual symposium day), interdisciplinary curiosity, and experience of cutting edge and diverse methodology platforms. This results in a unique, strong and exciting research journey.

The research experience of our PhD students can be further strengthened from competitive internal funds to allow you to travel to learn techniques in collaborator labs, or funds for conference participation from the Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine and the Centre for Doctoral Studies.

• Drug Discovery
• Medicines Development
• Medicines Use

Types of Scholarships

Our PGR student body is international and this is reflected in the diversity of routes by which our students are funded. King's has annual application rounds of certain initiatives such as Medical Research Council- Doctoral Training Programme (MRC-DTP), London Interdisciplinary Doctoral Partnership funded by BBSRC (LIDo-DTP), and the King’s-China Scholarship Council (K-CSC).

Other PGR students may be funded by Industry, foreign government organisations, or self-funded. Some programmes have specific application procedures that must be adhered to and can be found below with particular timelines during the year.

If you need help discussing a research project you have seen advertised, or you need help in devising a research project but are unsure who might be the best person to supervise it, it is best to identify our research staff in Drug Discovery, Medicines Development, and Medicines Use. This will also give you a more detailed understanding of the range of expertise of specific academics and research activity within IPS.

Centre For Pharmaceutical Medicine PhD Studentships

New phd opportunities to start in 2022.

• Understanding emerging models of patient engagement and their impact on the research, development and use of medicines (C. Copeland & G. McClelland)
• Machine learning based algorithms to improve the clinical management and outcomes of patients with cardiovascular disease (M. Alhnan & A. Ferro)
• Appraising the accelerated approval of medicines used for cancer care (S. A. Jones & Y Kamel)
• Developing a case to widen the access to topical onychomycosis therapies and provide personalised treatment (S. A. Jones & G. McClelland)
• Understanding how the regulation of borderline substances influences medicine quality: Vitamin D as a case study (S. A. Jones & C. Naraynassamy)
• Exploring new digital platforms to provide patient information on how to use medicines (M. Alhnan & G. McClelland)
• Theranostic hydrogen sulphide dressings in wound healing (A. Dyson & A. Lockett)
• Exploring Antipsychotic-Associated Pneumonia through host-immune responses (C. Copeland, R. Amison & Paul Rees)

How to apply

King’s Apply

Unless guided by programme specific calls, application is via King's Apply.

Postgraduate Apply - Contact Us

Contact the team if you are applying for Postgraduate courses

Latest news

20 June 2024

Mini liver model innovations promise more effective drug testing

A laboratory-grown mini liver model uniquely created with liver cells and a synthetic nanoscaffold…

28 May 2024

King's biotech spinout Pheon Therapeutics Raises $120m to develop novel anticancer agents

The investment raised at the close of its Series B funding round will enable Pheon Therapeutics…

21 May 2024

Scientists' new drug-delivery technology is possible breakthrough for multi-strain vaccines

The new ‘plug and play’ system could also usher in next-generation treatments that can both prevent…

24 April 2024

Cows' milk particles used for effective oral delivery of drugs

New research has found that tiny particles present in cows’ milk could offer, for the first time, an…

Labour Victory: The Implications for Data Protection, AI and Digital Regulation in the UK

On Friday 5 July 2024, voters in the UK elected the Labour Party to form a new government. Below we share our initial thoughts on what a Labour government might mean for the development and regulation of data protection, artificial intelligence and digital products and services in the UK.  

Data protection

What is the Labour Party’s policy?

Labour’s election manifesto commits to “improv[ing] data sharing” across public services, with a “single unique identifier” to “better support children and families”. The Labour Party also intends to create a “National Data Library” to bring together existing research programmes and “help deliver data-driven public services”. Notably, Labour’s manifesto was silent on wider data protection reform.

What is the context?

The National Data Library forms part of the Labour Party’s broader national industrial strategy that “supports the development” of the AI industry in Britain, including by removing “planning barriers to new data centres” (a topic that my private equity real estate colleagues have written about  here ). Although the specifics of the National Data Library have not been publicised, governments and industry alike are increasingly focused on the opportunities presented by large-scale data repositories — see, for example, the European Health Data Space.

Whether Labour seeks to resurrect the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill — the Conservative Party’s attempt to revise the UK’s GDPR-based legislative framework — remains to be seen. Readers may recall that Labour MPs in the House of Commons were broadly supportive of the Bill, which appeared to be close to passing but ultimately fell due to the timing of the General Election.

Data protection reform is not a critical issue for most voters, but the DPDIB proposed a number of helpful changes to the current regime, as well as a partial restructuring of the Information Commissioner's Office, and it would be surprising if the Labour Party didn’t put some type of data protection reform back on the table — albeit perhaps not during its first year in power. 

Who does it affect?

Although some private sector actors play a role in the provision of public services, introducing a single unique identifier is likely to have limited impact for most businesses. By contrast, the development of a National Data Library — i.e., a centralised, secure platform to bring together high-quality data for scientists and start-ups — will be of great interest to research institutions and life sciences companies as well as the private capital and venture firms that invest in the sector.

As regards the reform (or not) of the UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018, time will tell. The European Commission must decide by June 2025 whether to renew its finding of UK data adequacy. Some European legislators have suggested that passing the DPDIB into law could impact the decision to renew adequacy — and although there is an element of sabre-rattling to those comments, it wouldn’t be surprising to see the Labour Party wait until the adequacy finding is renewed before deciding how, if at all, to revise the UK’s data protection laws.

Artificial Intelligence

Labour’s election manifesto states that it will introduce “binding regulation” on the handful of companies that are developing the most powerful AI models, as well as ensuring that the UK’s industrial strategy “supports the development of the AI sector”. As described above, the Labour Party intends to encourage the building of new data centres — and will also ban “the creation of sexually explicit deepfakes”.

Unlike the European Union, whose AI Act is a comprehensive and wide-ranging law governing the development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence, the previous UK government introduced a light-touch regulatory framework for AI that relies on existing laws and regulatory authorities. The Labour Party’s stated position broadly maintains the status quo in the UK. However, organisations in the UK that have European operations or place or put AI systems into service in the EU are likely subject to the AI Act, and therefore will need to determine whether or not to put in place a Europe-wide AI governance framework that also applies to their UK business (i.e., undercutting of a light-touch regulatory framework).

The Labour Party has not provided further details about what constitutes a “powerful AI model”, but one can reasonably assume that the majority of companies operating in the UK will not fall into this bucket. Indeed, most organisations are users of AI (i.e., rather than developers), and even those businesses that develop AI-enabled products or services are — with a small number of exceptions — also unlikely to be caught. But as with all manifesto pledges, the devil will be in the detail. And given that the global direction of travel is towards introducing AI laws that apply broadly, it will be interesting to see whether the Labour Party changes — that is to say, hardens — its approach during its time in government.

Digital regulation

Labour’s election manifesto states that it will “build” on the Online Safety Act, “bringing forward provisions as quickly as possible, and explore further measures to keep everyone safe online, particularly when using social media”. The Labour Party also intends to give coroners “more powers to access information held by technology companies after a child’s death” and to create a “Regulatory Innovation Office” which will help existing regulators “update regulation, speed up approval timelines and co-ordinate issues that span existing boundaries”. Interestingly, the manifesto is silent on facial recognition.

Like the EU’s Digital Services Act, the OSA forms part of an alphabet soup of post-GDPR digital regulation that is, or soon will be, in effect (see also the DMA, the NIS2 Directive and DORA). The access to children’s data is a highly emotive issue, and although the OSA already contains certain information gathering powers in the case of a child’s death, the Labour manifesto suggests that it does not consider these powers are sufficient. Watch this space. 

The introduction of a Regulatory Innovation Office comes at a particularly interesting time, given the breadth of work that regulators are now expected to handle, in respect of both current and upcoming laws. A case in point is that the UK’s current approach to AI regulation does not involve the creation of a new dedicated regulatory authority. Rather, the ICO, FCA and MHRA (among others) will be tasked with developing guidance for and taking enforcement action again organisations under their respective authorities.

The RIO will likely benchmark and track the performance of the UK’s regulators, and we will be watching closely to see whether this oversight impacts the ICO’s largely hands-off approach to enforcement.   

The Online Safety Act has broad application — including on an extra-territorial basis — to online services that allow users to share content or interact; social media companies, online search services, messaging platforms and mobile games will all be caught. The intense focus on artificial intelligence during the past 18 months has meant that the application of the OSA may have been overlooked by some businesses that, upon further investigation, are likely to be in scope.

Given that Labour’s manifesto suggests that this will be an area of regulatory — and possibly legislative — focus going forward, it would now be a good time for companies that haven’t done so to assess whether they are or may be in scope of the OSA.   

Subscribe to Ropes & Gray Viewpoints by topic  here .

Related Services

Stay Up To Date with Ropes & Gray

Ropes & Gray attorneys provide timely analysis on legal developments, court decisions and changes in legislation and regulations.

Stay in the loop with all things Ropes & Gray, and find out more about our people, culture, initiatives and everything that’s happening.

We regularly notify our clients and contacts of significant legal developments, news, webinars and teleconferences that affect their industries.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• 02 July 2024

UK election: three research priorities for the next government

You have full access to this article via your institution.

Unless more equitable ways of funding UK universities are found, students could end up with fewer places to choose from. Credit: Oli Scarff/AFP/Getty

“Shock delay to net-zero pledges turns UK from climate leader to laggard.”

This unflattering headline from a 2023 Nature editorial gives a flavour of the disconnect between the UK government and scientific community since the country’s last general election in December 2019. “Equality and diversity efforts do not ‘burden’ research — no matter what the UK government says”, from 2020, offers another snapshot.

The next election will take place on 4 July. The two main contenders for prime minister are incumbent Rishi Sunak of the Conservative Party and opposition leader Keir Starmer of the Labour Party. Opinion polls predict a clear majority for Labour. Universities and science matter in this election, as Nature ’s news team reports . A survey commissioned by the non-profit organization Campaign for Science and Engineering in London found that investments in health-care and environmental research are clear priorities for the public. But to achieve these and other goals, the incoming government needs to get a grip on at least three urgent priorities.

Reconnect with the world

Researchers were hit hard by the United Kingdom’s formal exit from the European Union on 31 January 2020, following a referendum in 2016. It came as a huge relief when, last year, the government negotiated an agreement that allowed UK researchers to rejoin the EU’s Horizon Europe funding scheme. But, in other respects, the country has grown more isolated.

UK general election: five reasons it matters for science

Many topics, including climate change and the regulation of artificial intelligence , are ripe for closer international collaboration. The government’s decision to delay the implementation of climate targets was rightly criticized. So was the closure of popular funding schemes that encouraged research partnerships between scientists in the United Kingdom and counterparts in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

The UK authorities also make it hard for researchers from many LMICs to get visas to work, study and even attend conferences in the country, compared with researchers from high-income nations, according to London’s Royal Society . The number of applications to UK universities by international students (who are mostly at the master’s and PhD stages) is falling, in part because such students are no longer allowed to bring dependants. The incoming government must understand that such policies damage both research and international links.

Fix university finances

There’s a paradox at the heart of UK research. Although research funding has been increasing and now stands at nearly 3% of gross domestic product, 40% of universities in England are forecast to be in deficit by the end of this year , according to the Office for Students, the universities regulator, and there are fears a few could go bust. A key reason is that student fees, introduced in 1998 under a Labour government, have become the largest source of income for public universities. These have not increased since 2017, meaning that university income has not kept up with expenses. This situation is untenable and needs fixing.

We can make the UK a science superpower — with a radical political manifesto

Big research-intensive universities are at lower risk, partly because they have comparatively large numbers of international students, most of whom pay higher fees, and also because their members receive the lion’s share of research funding. By contrast, many smaller universities are cutting courses and laying off staff. Such universities tend to cater for a higher proportion of students from low-income families. A solution must be found to distribute funding more equitably and avoid a situation in which research and teaching become more concentrated in fewer institutions.

No more ministerial meddling

The past five years have seen members of the government openly interfering in the workings of research and higher education. Examples include official government websites discouraging students from enrolling on what they call “rip-off” or “Mickey Mouse” degrees, which are widely understood to include many in media and journalism. The British Academy, the national academy for the humanities and social sciences, has pointed out the value of these degrees to the nation’s £108-billion (US$137 billion) creative economy.

UK research assessment is being reformed — but the changes miss the mark

Ministers have also sought to influence decisions made by the national funding agency, UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), and told universities that there is no need for them to comply with equality initiatives such as the Athena SWAN charter, an internationally recognized scheme for gender equality, devised in the United Kingdom. Such interference should not come as a surprise — warnings were sounded in 2017, following the passage of a law in which ministers gave themselves more power to interfere in this way. All political parties need to understand that ‘arms length’ expert bodies should be operationally autonomous. No credible government would interfere in the running of the Office for Budget Responsibility or the Office for National Statistics. UKRI needs to be treated in the same way.

The past five years have been particularly unpredictable for researchers in the United Kingdom, which has had four prime ministers in that time. Higher education and research need conditions of greater stability to thrive. They also need appropriate and stable funding, consistent dialogue between ministers and the research community, and a respect for the autonomy of educational and research institutions. This is not too much to ask.

Nature 631 , 7 (2024)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-02169-z

Reprints and permissions

Related Articles

Regulate to protect fragile Antarctic ecosystems from growing tourism

Correspondence 09 JUL 24

Scientists relieved by far-right defeat in French election — but they still face uncertainty

News 08 JUL 24

COVID tsar Patrick Vallance appointed UK science minister

UK election: scientists welcome Labour’s landslide win

News 05 JUL 24

Give UK science the overhaul it urgently needs

Comment 04 JUL 24

How farming could become the ultimate climate-change tool

Spotlight 19 JUN 24

Al Medical Engineering at School of Biomedical Engineering

Tsinghua BME offers faculty positions in the emerging research direction of AI Medical Engineering

Beijing, China

Tsinghua University

Shanghai Jiao Tong University Global Recruitment

Interested applicants can send CV to the relevant department/school.

Shanghai, China

Shanghai Jiao Tong University

Faculty Positions in School of Engineering, Westlake University

The School of Engineering (SOE) at Westlake University is seeking to fill multiple tenured or tenure-track faculty positions in all ranks.

Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China

Westlake University

Postdoctoral Fellow – Thoracic and Head & Neck Medical Oncology

Postdoctoral Fellow – Thoracic and Head &Neck Medical Oncology – KRAS-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Houston, Texas (US)

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

Postdoctoral Fellow - Biostatistics

Memphis, Tennessee

The University of Tennessee Health Science Center (UTHSC)

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Cookies on GOV.UK

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

• Universal Credit

The Universal Credit (Administrative Earnings Threshold) (Amendment) Regulations 2024 (SI 2024/****)

A report by the Social Security Advisory Committee (SSAC) and statement from the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.

Unnumbered act paper

PDF , 931 KB , 47 pages

Order a copy

This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.

Ref: ISBN 978-1-5286-4736-6, E03086295 04/24

PDF , 869 KB , 53 pages

Report by the Social Security Advisory Committee ( SSAC ) under Sections 172(1) and Section 174(1) of the Social Security Administration Act 1992 and statement by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in accordance with Section 174(2) of that Act.

Is this page useful?

• Yes this page is useful
• No this page is not useful

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.

To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. Please fill in this survey (opens in a new tab) .

Advertisement

What to Expect as the U.K. Changes Prime Ministers

The transition of power in Britain is a matter of hours, not months.

• Share full article

By Peter Robins

Reporting from London

• July 5, 2024

When there is a clear opposition victory in Britain, the transition of power takes place with ruthless speed.

The Cabinet Manual , which sets out the official guidance on the process, says that “the incumbent prime minister and government will immediately resign and the sovereign will invite the leader of the party that has won the election to form a government.”

“Immediately,” in practice, means Friday morning. The result in Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s own constituency in northern England, where he held on to his seat , was announced shortly before 5 a.m. local time. He was on a flight back to London not long afterward.

Departing prime ministers traditionally pose with their families for a final set of photographs in Downing Street, their home and workplace while in office.

Mr. Sunak is then expected to give one last speech in Downing Street, around 10:30 a.m. local time (5:30 a.m. Eastern).

After that comes a short drive to Buckingham Palace, usually trailed by news helicopters, to resign in a private meeting with the monarch, now King Charles III.

The next prime minister, Keir Starmer, is likely to be close behind. In 2016, according to the House of Commons library , the car of the incoming leader, Theresa May, arrived at the palace 32 seconds after her predecessor, David Cameron, had left.

A new leader’s appointment also takes the form of a private meeting with the king, usually right after the resignation. It’s known as “kissing hands,” though it involves little ceremony and no kissing.

Expect a photographed handshake, followed by another prime ministerial speech in Downing Street, this one by Mr. Starmer. That’s expected around 12:20 p.m. local time.

Standard practice is for the new prime minister to move into No. 10 Downing Street more or less immediately, applauded by the permanent civil service staff on arrival.

Mr. Starmer will then appoint other ministers. There is not usually much suspense: British opposition parties maintain a “shadow cabinet” of candidates for government positions. Labour has told British news outlets that Mr. Starmer expects to announce his full cabinet by about 8 p.m. (3 p.m. Eastern).

More junior appointments are expected to follow on Saturday, with an afternoon pause while the England men’s soccer team plays Switzerland in the quarterfinals of the Euro 2024 tournament.

Trending News

Related Practices & Jurisdictions

• Financial Institutions Banking
• Communications Media Internet
• Administrative Regulatory
• United Kingdom
• European Union

Welcome to the UK Regulation Round Up, a regular bulletin highlighting the latest developments in UK and EU financial services regulation.

Key developments in June 2024:

PRIIPs Regulation:  The Joint Committee of the European Supervisory Authorities (“ ESAs ”) published an  updated version  of its Q&As (JC 2023 22) on the Key Information Document under the PRIIPS Regulation (EU/ 1286/2014 ).

FCA Handbook:  The UK Financial Conduct Authority (“ FCA ”) published  Handbook Notice 120 , which sets out changes to the FCA Handbook made by the FCA board on 27 June 2024.

Appointed Representatives:  The FCA published a new  webpage  for firms with overseas appointed representatives.

Cryptoassets:  The European Banking Authority (“ EBA ”) and European Securities and Markets Authority (“ ESMA ”) published a joint  final report  (EBA/GL/2024/09 / ESMA75-453128700-10) on two sets of guidelines on suitability assessments of the management body and holders of qualifying holdings under the Regulation on markets in cryptoassets (EU/2023/1114) (“ MiCA ”).

FCA Round-up:  The FCA has published its  regulation round-up  for June 2024, which includes items on the consumer duty, investment labels and the firm details attestation form.

Bank of England Financial Policy Committee:  The Bank of England published the  financial policy summary and record  of the meeting of its Financial Policy Committee on 11 June 2024, including commentary on the private equity industry.

Consumer Duty:  The FCA published its  findings  following a multi-firm review of 20 large insurance firms in outcomes monitoring under the Consumer Duty. Please refer to our dedicated article on this topic  here .

AML / CTF:  The EBA published a  press release  welcoming the new package of legislative proposals designed to strengthen and modernise the EU anti-money laundering (“ AML ”) and counter-terrorist financing (“ CTF ”) framework. It has also set out its AML and CTF priorities for 2024/25.

Investment Firms Regulation:  Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/1771  containing regulatory technical standards (“ RTS ”) specifying the details of the scope and methods for prudential consolidation of an investment firm group under the Investment Firms Regulation (EU/2019/2033) was published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Digital Trading:  The FCA published a  research note  on digital engagement practices of trading apps.

AML:  The Regulation on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing (EU/2024/1624), the Regulation establishing the Anti-Money Laundering Authority (AMLA) (EU/2024/1620) and the Sixth Money Laundering Directive (EU/2024/1640) have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union ( here ,  here  and  here ).

ESG:  The Network for Greening the Financial System published the  second edition  of its guide on climate-related disclosure for central banks.

Cryptoassets:  The EBA has published final reports containing draft RTS, implementing technical standards (“ ITS ”) and one set of guidelines under MiCA ( here ,  here ,  here  and  here ). They relate to supervisory colleges, liquidity stress tests and asset-referenced and e-money tokens.

Artificial Intelligence:  The European Commission published a  targeted consultation  on AI in the financial sector to inform Commission services on the concrete application and impact of AI in financial services, considering the development in the different financial services use cases.

ESG:  The ESAs published a  joint opinion  (JC 2024 06) on the assessment of the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation ((EU) 2019/2088) (“ SFDR ”). Please refer to our dedicated article on this topic  here .

Capital Markets Union:  The European Commission has published a  speech  given by Mairead McGuinness, European Commissioner for Financial Services, Financial Stability and Capital Markets Union. Among other things, the speech announced a delay to the European Commission applying the market risk reforms in the EU banking sector.

ESG / Securitisation: Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/1700  was published in the Official Journal of the EU. The Delegated Regulation supplements the Securitisation Regulation ((EU) 2017/2402) with regard to regulatory technical standards specifying, for simple, transparent and standardised non-ABCP traditional securitisation, and for simple, transparent and standardised on-balance-sheet securitisation, the content, methodologies and presentation of information related to the principal adverse impacts of the assets financed by the underlying exposures.

Market Abuse:  The European Commission published a  report  (COM(2024) 248 final) on the delegation of power to adopt delegated acts conferred on it by the Market Abuse Regulation (596/2014).

Retail Investment Package:  The Council of the European Union published a  press release  announcing that it has agreed its negotiating position on the retail investment package, which consists of the proposed Directive on retail investment protection (referred to as an “Omnibus Directive”) and the proposed Regulation amending the PRIIPs Regulation (1286/2014).

MiFIR:  The European Commission published for consultation a  draft Delegated Regulation  supplementing the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (600/2014) (“ MiFIR ”) as regards OTC derivatives identifying reference data to be used for the purposes of the transparency requirements laid down in Articles 8a(2), 10 and 21 of MiFIR.

Benchmarks Regulation:  The European Commission published a  report  (COM(2024) 244 final) on the delegation of power to adopt delegated acts conferred on it by the Benchmarks Regulation (EU/2016/1011).

Cryptoassets:  The EBA has published final reports ( here ,  here  and  here ) containing RTS and guidelines covering governance, conflicts of interest and remuneration under MiCA.

Market Outages:  The International Organization of Securities Commissions (“ IOSCO ”) published its  final report  on market outages (FR/043/24).

ESG:  The European Supervisory Authorities ESAs published their final reports on greenwashing in the financial services sector ( here ,  here  and  here ).

Leveraged Loans / CLOs:  IOSCO published its  final report  on good practices in the leveraged loan and collateralised loan obligation (“ CLO ”) markets.

Investment Firms Regulation:  The EBA published a  discussion paper  (EBA/DP/2024/01), produced jointly with ESMA, concerning the European Commission’s call for advice on the investment firms prudential framework in the Investment Firms Regulation (EU/2019/2033) and the Investment Firms Directive (EU/2019/2034).

Current Public Notices

Current legal analysis, more from proskauer rose llp, upcoming legal education events.

Sign Up for e-NewsBulletins

UK Elections 2024: Labour’s victory and its ripple effects on the fintech sector

In a sweeping victory that has reshaped the political landscape, the Labour Party, under Sir Keir Starmer, has secured a commanding majority in the 2024 UK General Election.

As the nation pivots towards a new era of economic policies and financial regulations, what will be the implications of this political shift, and what does the future hold for the fintech sector?

Marina Mouka

• July 8, 2024
• Tagged under:

The 2024 UK General Election has ushered in a new era with a decisive victory for the Labour Party, marking a significant shift in the political landscape. The Labour Party, led by Sir Keir Starmer, secured over 400 seats, achieving a landslide win and the largest majority in recent history.

This outcome reflects a shift in voter sentiment, with Labour’s promises of economic growth, clean energy, and enhanced public services resonating widely.

The Conservative Party, previously in power, experienced a dramatic loss, while smaller parties and independents also made notable gains. As Sir Keir Starmer prepares to form the new government, attention now shifts to the economic and financial implications of this political change.

With new policies on the horizon, there is much speculation about how this change will impact the economy, particularly the dynamic fintech industry.

Market reactions: a mix of optimism and caution

Initial market reactions were mixed. The financial sector, which includes fintech, is particularly sensitive to changes in government policies.

Investors are closely monitoring Labour’s plans, especially those related to regulatory reforms and tax changes. The FTSE 100 saw a slight dip of 0.5% in the days following the election, reflecting investor caution. However, sectors poised to benefit from increased public spending, such as construction and green energy, saw positive movements.

Reuters reports that while the City of London remains cautious, there is a general sense of resilience and readiness for the new regulatory environment.

Goldman Sachs upgraded the UK’s growth forecast post-election, predicting a 1.8% growth in GDP for 2025 , up from an earlier forecast of 1.2%. This optimism is largely driven by expectations of increased public spending and infrastructure investment. However, these measures also come with concerns about fiscal discipline and long-term economic stability.

Labour’s economic policies are set to reshape the UK’s economic landscape significantly. With a focus on public investment, the new government aims to drive growth through infrastructure projects and increased spending on healthcare and education. These initiatives are expected to create jobs and stimulate economic growth.

However, higher taxes on businesses and the wealthy are a part of the plan. Labour’s proposal to increase corporation tax to 25% could dampen business investment in the short term. Yet, this could also lead to a more equitable distribution of wealth and improved public services, which might benefit the broader economy.

The cautious approach by the financial markets suggests that while there is some apprehension, the overall outlook remains cautiously optimistic.

Policies, regulations, and the next day

Under Labour’s government, new policies aimed at promoting innovation while ensuring consumer protection are expected. The newly-formed government plans to introduce a fintech innovation fund worth £500 million to support startups and promote research and development. This initiative aims to foster a conducive environment for fintech companies, promoting growth and technological advancements.

Labour’s manifesto also includes proposals for tighter regulation on data protection and cybersecurity , reflecting growing concerns about digital security. This could lead to increased compliance costs for fintech firms but also provide a more secure environment for consumers, enhancing trust in digital financial services. Regulatory changes are expected to address the challenges faced by fintech companies, such as ensuring data privacy, preventing fraud, and managing digital identities.

Some of the pre-election pledges of the Labour Party for the financial services sector and other headline areas include:

Investments

• National wealth fund : The new government plans to establish a £7.3 billion National Wealth Fund aimed at creating 650,000 new jobs. This fund will focus on investments in green industries, such as rebuilding the steel industry, upgrading ports, building gigafactories, and accelerating carbon capture technologies.

Banking and Financial Regulation

• Open banking and finance : Labour is committed to supporting the development of Open Banking and Open Finance to enhance innovation and competition within the financial sector. They plan to continue work on a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) and set up a regulatory sandbox for testing financial products.
• Consumer protection : The party aims to reinforce consumer protection by regulating the Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL) sector and implementing strategies to combat financial fraud. They also plan to explore longer-term fixed-rate mortgages and enhance financial resilience.

Climate Finance

• Green finance : Labour intends to position the UK as a global hub for green finance by creating a comprehensive green finance regulatory framework. They aim to leverage private capital to address climate change and support the decarbonisation of homes.
• Environmental investments : They also plan to fund their green initiatives, such as Great British Energy and Warm Homes, through a windfall tax on fossil fuel giants and borrowing within fiscal rules. This will help in achieving climate goals and fostering sustainable development.

Other Headline Commitments

• Fiscal policies : Labour has pledged to maintain fiscal responsibility by ensuring day-to-day costs are covered by revenues and that the national debt is reduced as a share of the economy. They also emphasise the importance of economic stability and have committed to keeping mortgage rates as low as possible.
• Innovation and fintech : The party supports the growth of fintech and aims to maintain the UK’s leadership in this sector. This includes backing initiatives like securities tokenization, AI integration in financial services, and further development of Open Finance.

By creating a robust regulatory framework, the government aims to strike a balance between innovation and consumer protection. This approach is likely to boost consumer confidence in fintech solutions, driving greater adoption of digital financial services.

According to Addleshaw Goddard , these changes could lead to a more stable and consumer-friendly financial environment, encouraging responsible lending and borrowing practices.

Smart data and digital assets

Chris Holmes from the House of Lords, in an article published by Finextra , highlighted the importance of smart data and digital assets in the fintech sector. He emphasised the need for a Smart Data Bill to provide regulatory clarity and enable the creation of a smart data economy. This includes a 5-year roadmap to extend open banking to open finance and a 10-year plan to integrate smart data across various sectors. Holmes also discussed the legal treatment of digital assets, recommending a new class for digital assets to ensure clarity and security for users.

AI regulation and national payments vision

AI regulation is another key area of focus. Holmes’ private members bill, which aimed to establish an AI authority and regulatory sandboxes, underscored the need for structured AI governance. The National Payments Vision, following the Independent Future of Payments Review, seeks to streamline the UK’s payments ecosystem and address rising fraud, ensuring a secure and efficient financial infrastructure.

Growth and innovation

The government’s focus on digital infrastructure and cybersecurity is expected to provide a solid foundation for fintech companies. This could lead to a 15% increase in the number of fintech startups in the next two years. The establishment of the fintech innovation fund is a strategic move to maintain the UK’s competitive edge in the global market.

Labour’s commitment to digital skills training and education will also play a crucial role in supporting the fintech industry.

International competitiveness

The UK’s position as a global fintech hub could be strengthened by these developments. Enhanced international partnerships, a robust regulatory framework , and Labour’s commitment to improving digital infrastructure are expected to attract more foreign investments into the UK fintech sector.

Additionally, Labour’s foreign policy and trade strategies, focused on strong trade relationships and promoting the UK’s fintech capabilities abroad, are also expected to help UK fintech companies access new markets and expand their global footprint.

Summing up…

The outcome of the 2024 UK General Election is set to bring substantial changes across the economy, with a pronounced focus on the fintech industry. While there are challenges ahead, particularly in terms of regulatory compliance and tax increases, there are also significant opportunities, especially in public spending and innovation. The coming years will be crucial in determining how the fintech sector adapts under the new government.

Keep up with the story. Subscribe to the Bobsguide free daily newsletter.

• Read more under:

Previous Post

Safe and efficient digital billing – is Request to Pay the answer?

Visa and Mastercard extend non-EU card fee caps to 2029

bobsguide news delivered to your inbox

Subscribe to bobsguide for top news, trends & analysis

Reach Our Audience

• Advertising
• Submit Opinion

Other Publications

• Accountancy Age
• The Global Treasurer

• @ 2024  Bobsguide All rights reserved.
• | view our other publications
• | Privacy Policy
• | GDPR Compliance
• | Content Policy