Academic Council & Sub Committees

Academic Council shall, subject to the financial constraints determined by the Governing Authority and to review by that authority, control the academic affairs of the University, including the curriculum of, and instruction and education provided by, the University. The functions of Academic Council shall include: 

1.1 to design and develop programmes of study 

1.2 to establish structures to implement those programmes 

1.3 to make recommendations on programmes for the development of research 

1.4 to make recommendations relating to the selection, admission, retention and exclusion of students 

1.5 to propose the form and contents of statutes to be made relating to the academic affairs of the University, including the conduct of examinations, the determination of examination results, the procedures for appeals by students relating to the results of such examinations and the evaluation of academic progress 

1.6 to make recommendations for the awarding of fellowships, scholarships, bursaries, prizes or other awards 

1.7 to make general arrangements for tutorial or other academic counselling 

1.8 to perform any other functions, not in conflict with the Universities Act, 1997, which may be delegated to it by the Governing Authority, and 

1.9 to implement any statutes and regulations made by the Governing Authority relating to any of the matters referred in this subsection  Academic Council normally meets five times in the academic year.

By decision of the Governing Authority of Dublin City University on 9 June 2005, and subsequent decisions of Academic Council, including the decision made at the meeting of Academic Council of 5 December 2012 and approved at the Governing Authority meeting of 14 February 2013, and including changes which came about as consequence of Incorporation, the membership of Academic Council is determined as follows: 

2.1 Ex officio members: 

• President – Chair
• Vice-President Academic Affairs (Registrar) – Deputy Chair
• Member of Academic Affairs’ Secretariat – Secretary
• Deputy President
• Deputy Registrar     
• Vice-President for Research
• Academic Secretary
• Executive Deans of Faculty (x5)
• Dean of Graduate Studies
• Dean of Strategic Learning Innovation
• Dean of Teaching and Learning
• Chair of Examination Appeals Board
• DCU Chair of Digital Learning
• Representative of Faculty Administration
• Student’s Union Vice-President for Academic Life       

2.2 Members selected from Directors of Units 

• Five members selected from the Directors of Units 

2.3 Members selected by Faculties 

• Fifteen members of academic staff from each Executive Faculty      

2.4 Elected student members:  Seven members, one each from the following: 

• DCU Business School
• DCU Institute of Education
• Faculty of Engineering and Computing
• Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
• Faculty of Science and Health
• Postgraduate research students
• Postgraduate taught programme students   

2.5 Co-option 

There is provision for the co-option of a further three members to Academic Council, should the Chair deem this to be necessary. 

2.6 Changes to post titles 

In the event that University structures change, and changes ensue to the titles of the posts above, consequent changes shall be made to the membership of Council, under the direction of the Chair and subject to approval by the Governing Authority. 

2.7 Codicils with respect to membership 

• 2.7.1      Members selected from Directors of Unit: 
  • This group must include:
    • Director of Quality Promotion
    • Director of Registry
    • Director of Student Support and Development

The selection of the remaining two members is a matter for all Directors of Unit in consultation with the Chief Operations Officer. 

• 2.7.2 Members selected by Faculties: 
  • The method of selection of these members is a matter for Faculties subject to the following conditions: 
  • The group of fifteen from each Faculty should be drawn from an appropriate range of levels of academic staff from an appropriate range of academic disciplines, but must include: 
    • The Associate Dean for Research
    • The Associate Dean for Teaching and Learning/Education
    • Each Head of School (or Group in the case of DCUBS)
    • A minimum of four faculty members who have significant responsibility for taught programmes     
  • Academic staff members selected from Faculties normally hold office for three years. 

2.8 Elected student members 

Elections for officers of the Students’ Union take place in Semester 2 of each academic year in accordance with approved procedures. The officers’ term runs for one year, from 1 June to 31 May.     

2.9 Membership Status 

All members of Academic Council are members in their own right and are not on the Council as representatives. 

2.10 Substitution of Representation 

Substitution of representation is not permitted as a matter of course. If, however, a member wishes to speak to an agenda item and cannot be present, a substitute may attend for that item subject to permission from the Chair.  

3.1 Academic Council shall be re-constituted every three years, i.e. 2013, 2016, etc., normally at the end of the academic years 2012/13, 2015/16, etc. Within each three-year period, where an ex officio member steps down from University office, he/she will cease to be a member of Academic Council and will be replaced by the new office-holder. 

3.2 The names of academic staff members selected by Executive Faculties should be notified to the Office of the Vice-President Academic Affairs (Registrar) by the end of August of the relevant academic year. 

3.3 Any vacancy should be filled within one month of it arising and the Office of the Vice President Academic Affairs (Registrar) will update the membership accordingly.    

Meetings of Academic Council shall be conducted in accordance with its Standing Orders in force at the time and as agreed by Academic Council.  

5.1 Academic Council may establish such and so many committees as it thinks necessary to assist it in the performance of its functions. 

5.2 A committee may consist either wholly of members of Academic Council or of such combination of members and non-members as Academic Council thinks fit.  

6.1 Chair, secretariat 

• 6.1.1 The President is Chair of the Council. In the absence of the Chair from a meeting, the VicePresident Academic Affairs (Registrar), as Deputy Chair, or such other person as may be  determined by the President, will chair that meeting. 

• 6.1.2 A member of the Academic Affairs’ Secretariat is Secretary to the Council. 

6.2 Meetings 

• 6.2.1 A schedule of meetings for each academic year is noted by Executive in advance of that year. 

• 6.2.2 Additional meetings can be convened either (i) by the Council at one of its scheduled meetings; (ii) by the Chair; or (iii) by a request to the Chair signed by at least one quarter of the members of the Council and submitted at least ten working days in advance of the proposed date of the meeting. 

• 6.2.3 The normal duration of meetings will be not more than two hours. A motion to extend a meeting beyond this duration must be agreed by at least two-thirds of the members present and voting. 

6.3 Agenda 

• 6.3.1 The agenda is divided into three sections: 
  • A Adoption of the agenda, minutes of the previous meeting and matters arising from these minutes; minutes of subcommittees
  • B Policy and strategy issues
  • C Items for formal approval or noting. 

The members of the Council will, in advance of each meeting and by a specified deadline, be requested to notify the Secretary of any items in Section C that they wish to have discussed at the meeting. All items not so notified will be deemed, at the meeting, to be approved or noted, as appropriate, without discussion. 

• 6.3.2 The first item of business at each meeting will be the adoption of the agenda. 

• 6.3.3 Any member may request to have an item placed on the agenda for a meeting of the Council. The item must be submitted to the Secretary in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year. 

6.4 Minutes 

• 6.4.1 The Secretary will keep minutes of every meeting of the Council and will circulate these in draft form to all members in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year. 

6.5 Documents 

• 6.5.1 All documents for circulation to the members of the Council will be submitted to the Secretary in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year. Documents (or draft agenda items or questions) given to the Chair will be considered to have been given to the Secretary. The Secretary will cause documents for a meeting to be circulated in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year. 

• 6.5.2 A document may be tabled at a meeting provided it relates to one of the agenda items for the meeting and provided two-thirds of the members present agree to its being tabled. 

6.6 Quorum and attendance 

• 6.6.1 A meeting will not commence until at least one third of the members are present. If a quorum is not forthcoming, the Chair will set an alternative date for the meeting. 

• 6.6.2 The Chair may invite non-members of the Council to attend for specific items on the agenda. 

6.7 Mode of address 

• 6.7.1 Speakers will always address the Chair. While a member is speaking, other members will be silent. 

6.8 Motions 

• 6.8.1 A motion is a proposal which is put forward. A resolution is the acceptance of a motion by a meeting. 

• 6.8.2 For a motion to be put to a meeting, it requires a proposer and a seconder. A motion from the Chair does not require a seconder. 

• 6.8.3 For an amendment to a motion to be put, it requires a proposer and a seconder. An amendment will be put to a vote before the original motion. 

• 6.8.4 If an amendment is not carried, the Chair will put the motion in its original form to a vote. If an amendment is carried, the Chair will put the amended motion to the meeting. Before a motion or an amendment is put to a vote, the Secretary will read out the text to be voted on. 

6.9 Voting 

• 6.9.1 Where a motion has been put to the meeting, the Chair will ask the Council whether or not it assents, and the decision will normally be by acclamation. Where there appears to be a division, the Chair will call for a vote; such a vote may also be requested by any member. The results of voting will be counted and recorded by the Secretary. 

• 6.9.2 It is open to any member to propose a motion demanding a secret ballot and this motion, if seconded, can be dealt with in the usual way. 

• 6.9.3 The number of votes for and against a motion, and the number of abstentions, will be recorded in the minutes. 

• 6.9.4 If the votes for and against a proposal are equal, the Chair has an additional, casting vote as Chair. 

6.10 Points of order and closure 

• 6.10.1 A member may, at any time and without notice, interrupt debate by raising a ‘point of order’. The Chair will decide whether the point of order is admissible, and his/her ruling will be final. 

• 6.10.2 A motion for closure, if seconded in the usual way, must be put to the vote at once, without being discussed. 

6.11 Emergency items 

• 6.11.1 Any member may seek to add an item to the agenda as an emergency item. An emergency item can only be one which could not have been foreseen in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year and which must be resolved before the next scheduled meeting. A vote must be held on every proposal for an emergency item to be inscribed, and for it to be inscribed, it must get the assenting votes of at least two-thirds of the members present and voting. Members may vote only for or against the inscription of an emergency item; members abstaining will not be considered, for the purposes of the vote, to be ‘present and voting’. 

• 6.11.2 Occasionally, it may be appropriate to deal electronically with an urgent item which needs to be resolved before the next scheduled meeting. The permission of the Chair to do this must be sought in all cases. If permission is granted, the Secretary will cause the documentation relating to the item to be circulated and will request responses by a specified date and time. After the deadline has passed, the Secretary will inform the Council of the outcome of the discussion. The outcome will be noted in the minutes of the next scheduled meeting. 

6.12 Questions 

• 6.12.1 Any member of staff may submit a question relevant to the work of the Council for reply at the Council. Questions must be e-mailed to the Secretary in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year. The Chair will judge if a question is relevant to the work of the Council and, if it is, he/she will circulate it to all members at least five working days in advance of the meeting. If he/she decides that a question is not relevant, he/she must inform the next meeting of Academic Council of the text of the question and why it was judged not to be relevant. Questions may be answered either orally or in writing. The minutes of each meeting will record the text of all questions and replies. 

• 6.12.2 A question may be submitted as an emergency question under the same conditions and following the same procedure as set out in the foregoing paragraph on emergency items.  

6.13 Other business

The rubric ‘other business’ on each agenda will be used only (a) to inform the meeting of agenda items which are proposed for the next meeting or (b) to convey briefly other items of information of a factual nature. 

6.14 Interpretation

Where a dispute arises as to the interpretation of these orders, the decision of the Chair is final.

The Education Committee (EC), established in 2008 by the University’s Executive, is responsible for the shaping of University strategy in relation to academic affairs. It is a subcommittee of Academic Council and makes recommendations to Council on academic affairs, including validation proposals for new programmes, as appropriate and necessary. It also makes recommendations to Executive, as appropriate and necessary, on matters relating to academic affairs that also come within the purview of Executive. 

The EC may delegate some of its functions to its Standing Committee (the Education Committee Standing Committee, or ECSC). 

The minutes of EC meetings, once approved by the EC, are sent to Academic Council for approval.  The minutes of ECSC meetings are appended to the minutes of EC meetings once approved by the EC, and are thereby sent to Academic Council for approval. Validation reports (see Section 2.3 below) are submitted separately to Academic Council for approval.  

​​​​The remit of the EC includes: 

2.1 In the context of, and taking account of developments in, overarching University strategic planning: 

• 2.1.1 engaging in strategic planning in relation to academic affairs

• 2.1.2 determining a list of core strategic matters, relating to academic affairs, for discussion in the course of the year

• 2.1.3 making recommendations in respect of these core strategic matters. 

2.2 Maintaining oversight of the University’s suite of undergraduate and postgraduate programmes to: 

• 2.2.1 ascertain trends in terms of student recruitment, retention, progression and graduation (including overall size and balance of (a) undergraduate and postgraduate provision and (b) EU and non-EU student participation

• 2.2.2 identify (a) areas of duplication (within and across Faculties); (b) areas in which no programmes exist though the University has expertise; (c) areas of actual or potential cross-Faculty or cross-institutional co-operation

• 2.2.3 recommend the retirement of programmes as appropriate and necessary

• 2.2.4 stimulate developments and collaboration on the basis of the above.  

2.3 In the context of 2.2 above: 

• 2.3.1 in the case of validation proposals approved by Faculties for new programmes, making recommendations as to whether or not they should be approved for further development (including development towards accreditation, where appropriate)

• 2.3.2 in the case of validation proposals involving one or more proposed partner institutions, ensuring the fulfilment of the University’s obligations with respect to collaborative provision (in conjunction with  the Office of the Executive Director of Engagement, as appropriate and necessary) and making recommendations as to whether or not the proposals should be approved for further development (including development towards accreditation, where appropriate)

• 2.3.3 in the case of proposals for other kinds of collaboration with external partner institutions, and subsequent to and/or in parallel with the University’s approved procedures for ascertaining the appropriateness of external institutions as partners, making recommendations as to whether or not the proposals should be approved

• 2.3.4 making recommendations about proposed revisions to existing programmes following approval of such revisions by Faculties. 

2.4 In conjunction with DCU Research and the Graduate Studies Office, and taking account of national and international developments with respect to graduate research (including initiatives undertaken on a collaborative basis with other institutions), reviewing the University’s position with respect to such research and making recommendations as to its scope, focus and future directions. 

2.5 Ensuring the fulfilment of the University’s obligations under the Quality and Qualifications (Education and Training) Act 2012 with respect to the approval, monitoring and review of the quality assurance procedures of Linked Providers of the University.  

The Education Standing Committee meets in the week following each Education Committee meeting.  The remit of the ECSC includes: 

3.1 Considering any and all matters delegated to it that arise from the remit of the EC as outlined under Section 2 above and making recommendations, as appropriate and necessary, to the EC.  

4.1 The membership is as follows:

• Vice-President Academic Affairs (Registrar) - Chair
• Member of Academic Affairs’ Secretariat – Secretary
• Deputy Registrar
• Dean of Teaching and Learning
• Dean of Graduate Studies
• Dean of Strategic Learning Innovation
• DCU Chair of Digital Learning
• Academic Secretary
• Executive Deans of Faculty
• Vice-President for Research 
• Director of Quality Promotion and Institutional Research
• Director of Student Support and Development
• A representative of the Associate Deans for Teaching & Learning
• Student’s Union Vice-President for Academic Life
• A member elected from Academic Council 

4.2 The Deputy President and the Institutional Analysis and Research Officer are not members of the EC but may attend meetings. 

4.3 Substitution of representation is not permitted as a matter of course. If, however, a member wishes to speak to an agenda item and cannot be present, a substitute may attend for that item subject to permission from the Chair. 

4.4 The representative from the Associate Deans for Teaching and Learning will be agreed among this group, and his/her identity notified by the group to the Secretary. At the end of each academic year, the group of Associate Deans for Teaching and Learning will be asked to nominate their representative for the coming year (who may be the current representative). 

4.5 The member elected by Academic Council will remain a member of the Education Committee for three years from the date of election, at which point a new nomination/election procedure will take place. 

4.6 Elections for officers of the Students’ Union take place in Semester 2 of each academic year in accordance with approved procedures. The officers’ term runs for one year, from 1 June to 31 May. 

4.7 Directors of units of particular relevance to the work of the EC, e.g. the Director of Information Systems and Services or the University Librarian, will not be members but will be invited to make presentations to the EC as and when appropriate. 

4.8 The membership of the ECSC must include, for each meeting, a minimum of two Executive Deans and a minimum of two other members who are not Deans. The Dean(s) of Faculty from which a validation proposal and/or a revised programme is submitted for consideration cannot be a member of an ECSC meeting at which these matters are considered. Such Deans may form part of the group of proposers which speaks to a validation proposal at the request of the ECSC. The same applies to the Associate Dean(s) for Teaching and Learning. Schedules of attendance per meeting may need to be adjusted to take account of this. 

4.9 As and when necessary, a senior member of Finance Office, and/or senior member of the Office of the Chief Operations Officer will be invited to attend ECSC meetings. 

5.1 Chair, secretariat   

• 5.1.1 The Vice-President Academic Affairs (Registrar) is Chair of the Education Committee.   In the absence of the Chair from a meeting, the Deputy Registrar or Dean of Teaching and Learning will chair the meeting. 

• 5.1.2 A member of the Academic Affairs Secretariat is Secretary to the Committee. 

5.2 Meetings 

• 5.2.1 A schedule of meetings for each academic year is noted by Executive in advance of that year. 

• 5.2.2 Additional meetings can be convened either (i) by the Committee at one of its scheduled meetings; (ii) by the Chair; (iii) by a request to the Chair signed by at least one one-third of the members of the Committee and submitted at least ten working days in advance of the proposed date of the meeting. 

• 5.2.3 The normal duration of meetings will be not more than two hours. 

5.3 Agenda 

• 5.3.1 The first item of business at each meeting will be the adoption of the agenda. 

• 5.3.2 The agenda is divided into three sections:  A Adoption of the agenda, minutes of the previous meeting and matters arising from these minutes B Strategic matters  C Programme and module specific matters 

• 5.3.3 Any member may request to have an item placed on the agenda for a meeting of the Committee. The item must be submitted to the Secretary in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year. 

5.4 Minutes 

The Secretary will keep minutes of every meeting of the Committee and will circulate these in draft form to all members in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year. 

5.5 Documents 

• 5.5.1 All documents for circulation to the members of the Committee must be submitted to the Secretary in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year.  Documents (or draft agenda items or questions) given to the Chair will be considered to have been given to the Secretary. The Secretary will cause documents for a meeting to be circulated in accordance with the schedule of notification/ submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year. 5  

• 5.5.2 A document may be tabled at a meeting provided it relates to one of the agenda items for the meeting and provided two-thirds of the members present agree to its being tabled. 

• 5.5.3 Documents will be made available in electronic format only. 

5.6 Quorum and attendance 

• 5.6.1 A meeting will not commence until at least one third of the members are present. If a quorum is not forthcoming, the Chair will set an alternative date for the meeting. 

• 5.6.2 The Chair may invite non-members of the EC to attend for specific items of the agenda. 

5.7 Mode of address  Speakers will always address the Chair. While a member is speaking, other members will be silent. 

5.8 Motions 

• 5.8.1 A motion is a proposal which is put forward.  A resolution is the acceptance of a motion by a meeting. 

• 5.8.2 For a motion to be put to a meeting, it requires a proposer and a seconder.  A motion from the Chair does not require a seconder. 

• 5.8.3 For an amendment to a motion to be put, it requires a proposer and a seconder. An amendment will be put to a vote before the original motion. 

• 5.8.4 If an amendment is not carried, the Chair will put the motion in its original form to a vote. If an amendment is carried, the Chair will put the amended motion to the meeting.  Before a motion or an amendment is put to a vote, the Secretary will read out the text to be voted on. 

5.9 Voting 

• 5.9.1 Where a motion has been put to the meeting, the Chair will ask the Committee whether or not it assents, and the decision will normally be by acclamation. Where there appears to be a division, the Chair will call for a vote; such a vote may also be requested by any member. The results of voting will be counted and recorded by the Secretary. 

• 5.9.2 It is open to any member to propose a motion demanding a secret ballot and this motion, if seconded, can be dealt with in the usual way. 

• 5.9.3 The number of votes for and against a motion, and the number of abstentions, will be recorded in the minutes. 

• 5.9.4 If the votes for and against a proposal are equal, the Chair has an additional, casting, vote as Chair.  

5.10 Points of order and closure 

• 5.10.1 A member may, at any time and without notice, interrupt debate by raising a ‘point of order’. The Chair will decide whether the point of order is admissible, and his/her ruling will be final. 

• 5.10.2 A motion for closure, if seconded in the usual way, must be put to the vote at once, without being discussed. 

5.11 Emergency items 

• 5.11.1 Any member may seek to add an item to the agenda as an emergency item. An emergency item can only be one which could not have been foreseen in accordance with the schedule of notification/circulation/submission of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year and which must be resolved before the next scheduled meeting. A vote must be held on every proposal for an emergency item to be inscribed, and for it to be inscribed it must get the assenting votes of at least two-thirds of the members present and voting. Members may vote only for or against the inscription of an emergency item; members abstaining will not be considered, for the purposes of the vote, to be ‘present and voting’. 

• 5.11.2 Occasionally, it may be appropriate to deal electronically with an urgent item which needs to be resolved before the next scheduled meeting. In such an instance, the Secretary will cause the documentation relating to the item to be circulated and will request responses by a specified date and time. After the deadline has passed, the Secretary will inform the Committee of the outcome of the discussion. The outcome will be noted in the minutes of the next scheduled meeting. 

5.12 Other business 

The rubric ‘other business’ on each agenda will be used only (a) to inform the meeting of agenda items which are proposed for the next following meeting or (b) to convey briefly other items of information of a factual nature. 

5.13 Interpretation 

Where a dispute arises as to the interpretation of these orders, the decision of the Chair is final. 

The University Standards Committee was established by a decision of Executive on 6 April 2006.

The minutes of USC meetings, once approved by the USC, are sent to Academic Council for approval.

The University Standards Committee is responsible to Academic Council for development, maintenance and review of University academic regulations and guidelines.

The remit of the USC includes:

• (i)           Oversight of the development and operation of University regulations and guidelines in relation to academic affairs, to include responsibility for University-level regulatory issues, such as examination regulations and derogations to Marks and Standards.

• (ii)          Oversight of academic affairs with a view to maintaining good practice.

• (iii)         Oversight of developments to the University’s academic framework (e.g. changes to the existing modular system).

• (iv)         Consideration of relevant matters arising from minutes of Faculty Teaching/ Education Committees, to include:
  • requests for derogations from Marks and Standards
  • requests for changes to examination regulations
  • requests for approval of nominations/ changes to duties of external examiners for taught programmes
  • requests for readmission to programmes of study of candidates who have exceeded the maximum registration period
  • regulatory issues as highlighted in external examiners’ reports and also relevant matters from quality reviews.

• (v)          Periodically reviewing and making recommendations in relation to the University’s policies on admissions, including CAO, non-traditional, access and international admissions.

• (vi)         Considering, and where appropriate making recommendations on, relevant issues submitted by the Students’ Union.

Consideration of the above matters may, on occasion, involve consideration and approval of the regulatory aspects of decisions taken by other committees such as the Education Committee and the Graduate Research Studies Board.

The USC normally meets six times in the academic year.

3.1      The Membership List

• Dean of Teaching and Learning - Chair
• Member of Academic Affairs’ Secretariat - Secretary
• Associate Deans for Teaching and Learning/Education
• Representative from the Associate Deans for Research
• Director of Registry
• Head of the Teaching Enhancement Unit
•  Student’s Union Vice President for Academic Life
• Representative of Faculty Administration
• One representative of the Director of the Library and the Director of Information

• Systems and Services, normally on a rotating basis per academic year

• One Head of School, who may be a Group Head or the Deputy Dean in the case of DCUBS
• Dean of Graduate Studies
• Such other members as may be co-opted from time to time

3.2      Substitution of representation

Substitution of representation is not permitted as a matter of course.  If, however, a member wishes to speak to an agenda item and cannot be present, a substitute may attend for that item subject to permission from the Chair.

3.3      Representative from the Associate Deans for Research

The representative from the Associate Deans for Research will be agreed among this group, and his/her identity notified by the group to the Secretary.  At the end of each academic year, the group of Associate Deans for Research will be asked to nominate their representative for the coming year (who may be the current representative).

3.4      Representative from Faculty Administration

The representative from Faculty Administration will be agreed by the Faculty Administration Peer Group, and his/her identity notified by the Group to the Secretary.  At the end of each academic year, the FAPG will be asked to nominate their representative for the coming year (who may be the current representative).

3.5      Head of School

The Head of School is nominated by the Deans of Faculty.  At the end of each academic year, the Deans of Faculty will be asked to nominate the representative Head for the coming year (who may be the current representative).

3.6      Students Union

Elections for officers of the Students’ Union take place in Semester 2 of each academic year in accordance with approved procedures.  The officers’ term runs for one year, from 15 June to 14 June.

4.1      Chair, secretariat

• 4.1.1      The Dean of Teaching and Learning is Chair of the USC.  In the absence of the Chair from a meeting, another person as may be determined by the Dean of Teaching and Learning will chair the meeting.

• 4.1.2      A member of the Academic Affairs’ Secretariat is Secretary to the Committee.

4.2      Meetings

• 4.2.1      A schedule of meetings for each academic year is noted by Executive in advance of that year.

• 4.2.2      Additional meetings can be convened either (i) by the Committee at one of its scheduled meetings; (ii) by the Chair; (iii) by a request to the Chair signed by at least one one-third of the members of the Committee and submitted at least ten working days in advance of the proposed date of the meeting.

• 4.2.3      The normal duration of meetings will be not more than two hours.

4.3      Agenda

• 4.3.1      The first item of business at each meeting will be the adoption of the agenda.

• 4.3.2      The agenda is divided into three sections:
  • A             Adoption of the agenda, minutes of the previous meeting and matters arising from these minutes
  • B            External examiner nominations, and issues submitted by Faculty Teaching and Learning/Education Committees (see 2 (iv) above)
  • C            Other issues (non-Faculty specific).  The first item in this section is always ‘Marks and Standards’.

• 4.3.3      Any member may request to have an item placed on the agenda for a meeting of the Committee.  Notification must be made to the Secretary in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year.

4.4      Minutes

The Secretary will keep minutes of every meeting of the Committee and will circulate these in draft form to all members in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year.

4.5      Documents

• 4.5.1      All documents for circulation to the members of the Committee must be submitted to the Secretary in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year. Documents (or draft agenda items or questions) given to the Chair will be considered to have been given to the Secretary.  The Secretary will cause documents for a meeting to be circulated in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year.

• 4.5.2      A document may be tabled at a meeting provided it relates to one of the agenda items for the meeting and provided two-thirds of the members present agree to its being tabled.

• 4.5.3      Documents will normally be made available in electronic format only.

4.6      Quorum and attendance

• 4.6.1      A meeting will not commence until at least one third of the members are present.  If a quorum is not forthcoming, the Chair will set an alternative date for the meeting.

• 4.6.2      The Chair may invite non-members of the Committee to attend for specific items of the agenda.

4.7      Mode of address

Speakers will always address the Chair. While a member is speaking, other members will be silent.

4.8      Motions

• 4.8.1      A motion is a proposal which is put forward.  A resolution is the acceptance of a motion by a meeting.

• 4.8.2      For a motion to be put to a meeting, it requires a proposer and a seconder. A motion from the Chair does not require a seconder.

• 4.8.3      For an amendment to a motion to be put, it requires a proposer and a seconder.  An amendment will be put to a vote before the original motion.

• 4.8.4      If an amendment is not carried, the Chair will put the motion in its original form to a vote.  If an amendment is carried, the Chair will put the amended motion to the meeting.  Before a motion or an amendment is put to a vote, the Secretary will read out the text to be voted on.

4.9      Voting

• 4.9.1      Where a motion has been put to the meeting, the Chair will ask the Committee whether or not it assents, and the decision will normally be by acclamation.  Where there appears to be a division, the Chair will call for a vote; such a vote may also be requested by any member.  The results of voting will be counted and recorded by the Secretary.

• 4.9.2      It is open to any member to propose a motion demanding a secret ballot and this motion, if seconded, can be dealt with in the usual way.

• 4.9.3      The number of votes for and against a motion, and the number of abstentions, will be recorded in the minutes.

• 4.9.4      If the votes for and against a proposal are equal, the Chair has an additional, casting, vote as Chair.

4.10      Points of order and closure

• 4.10.1   A member may, at any time and without notice, interrupt debate by raising a ‘point of order’.  The Chair will decide whether the point of order is admissible, and his/her ruling will be final.

• 4.10.2   A motion for closure, if seconded in the usual way, must be put to the vote at once, without being discussed.

4.11      Emergency items

• 4.11.1   Any member may seek to add an item to the agenda as an emergency item.  An emergency item can only be one which could not have been foreseen in accordance with the schedule of notification/circulation/submission of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year and which must be resolved before the next scheduled meeting.   A vote  must be held on every proposal for an emergency item to be inscribed, and for it to be inscribed it must get the  assenting  votes  of  at  least  two-thirds  of  the  members  present  and  voting. Members may vote only for or against the inscription of an emergency item; members abstaining will not be considered, for the purposes of the vote, to be ‘present and voting’.

• 4.11.2   Occasionally, it may be appropriate to deal electronically with an urgent item which needs to be resolved before the next scheduled meeting.  In such an instance, the Secretary will cause the documentation relating to the item to be circulated and will request responses by a specified date and time.  After the deadline has passed, the Secretary will inform the Committee of the outcome of the discussion.  The outcome will be noted in the minutes of the next scheduled meeting.

4.12      Delegated authority/Chair's action

The Chair shall have delegated authority to act between scheduled meetings on:

• Matters relating to the implementation of decisions which have already been approved at previous meetings
• Items which in the view of the Chair are too urgent and important for consideration to be deferred until the next scheduled meeting, especially where any lack of timely action could damage the interest of the student or the university.

The outcomes of such actions shall be reported by the Chair to the next meeting.

4.13      Other business

• 4.13.1   The rubric ‘other business’ on each agenda  will be used only (a) to inform the meeting of agenda items which are proposed for the next following meeting or (b) to convey briefly other items of information of a factual nature.

4.14      Interpretation

• 4.14.1   Where a dispute arises as to the interpretation of these orders, the decision of the Chair is final

At its meeting of 13 June 2007, Academic Council approved the creation of the University’s Graduate Studies Board (renamed ‘Graduate Research Studies Board’ following a decision by the GSB at its meeting of 7 March 2013 and subsequent approvals). The remit of the Graduate Research Studies Board (GRSB) is to develop guidelines and good practice in the structure and delivery of postgraduate research at Master's and Doctoral level. Good practice in the structure and delivery of professional doctoral programmes falls within this remit. The GRSB oversees and helps to enhance postgraduate research studies and the postgraduate research student experience across the University, and links with Research and Innovation Support in this regard. 

The minutes of GRSB meetings, once approved by the GRSB, are sent to Academic Council for approval.  

The GRSB is responsible to Academic Council for the development, maintenance and review of postgraduate research regulations, guidelines and good practice. Good practice in the structure and delivery of professional doctoral programmes falls within this remit. 

The remit of the GRSB includes: 

1. Formulation of policy in relation to postgraduate research. 
2. Oversight of the development and operation of University regulations and guidelines in relation to postgraduate research. 
3. Consideration of matters arising from Faculty Research Committees, Faculty Awards Boards for Research Degrees and quality reviews in relation to postgraduate research. 
4. Consideration of graduate training elements submitted by Faculties for approval.
5. Consideration of, and making recommendations on, matters relating to individual students (including external examiner nominations).  

The GRSB normally meets eight times in the academic year.  

 3.1 Membership list 

• Dean of Graduate Studies - Chair
• Member of Academic Affairs’ Secretariat - Secretary
• Director of Research and Innovation Support
• Associate Deans for Research (x5)
• Representative from the Associate Deans for Teaching and Learning/Education
• Senior Administrator, Registry
• Assistant Awards Officer, Student Awards, Registry
• Representative of the Graduate Studies Office
• Representative of the postgraduate research student body
• Representative of Faculty Administration
• Head of Research, Dundalk Institute of Technology
• Two additional members who may be co-opted from time to time. 

3.2 Substitution of representation 

Substitution of representation is not permitted as a matter of course. If, however, a member wishes to speak to an agenda item and cannot be present, a substitute may attend for that item subject to permission from the Chair. 

3.3 Representative from the Associate Deans for Teaching and Learning/Education 

The representative from the Associate Deans for Teaching and Learning/Education will be agreed among this group, and his/her identity notified by the group to the Secretary. At the end of each academic year, the group of Associate Deans for Teaching and Learning/Education will be asked to nominate their representative for the coming year (who may be the current representative). 

3.4 Representative of Faculty Administration 

The representative from Faculty Administration will be agreed by the Faculty Administration Peer Group (FAPG), and his/her identity notified by the Group to the Secretary. At the end of each academic year, the FAPG will be asked to nominate their representative for the coming year (who may be the current representative). 

3.5 Representative of the postgraduate research student body 

The representative of the postgraduate research student body will normally be the Postgraduate Officer in DCU Students’ Union, once an individual has been elected to this position and that individual is a postgraduate research student. In the case of this  position being empty by the first meeting of the new academic year or the elected individual being a postgraduate taught student, the Secretary will ask the faculty postgraduate research student representatives to nominate a representative from their group for the coming year. The representative for the coming year may be the current representative.   

4.1 Chair, secretariat 

• 4.1.1 The Dean of Graduate Studies is Chair of the Board. In the absence of the Chair from a meeting, another person as may be determined by the Dean will chair the meeting. 

• 4.1.2 A member of the Academic Affairs’ Secretariat is Secretary to the Board. 

4.2 Meetings 

• 4.2.1 A schedule of meetings for each academic year is adopted by Executive in advance of that year. 

• 4.2.2 Additional meetings can be convened either (i) by the Board at one of its scheduled meetings; (ii) by the Chair; or (iii) by a request to the Chair signed by at least one one- third of the members of the Board and submitted at least ten working days in advance of the proposed date of the meeting. 

• 4.2.3 The normal duration of meetings will be not more than two hours. 

4.3 Agenda 

• 4.3.1 The agenda is divided into three sections:  A Adoption of the agenda, minutes of the previous meeting and matters arising from these minutes B Policy and strategy issues C Individual student issues 

• 4.3.2 Any member may request to have an item placed on the agenda for a meeting of the Board. Notification must be made to the Secretary in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year.

4.4 Minutes 

The Secretary will keep minutes of every meeting of the Board and will circulate these in draft form to all members in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year. 

4.5 Documents 

• 4.5.1 All documents for circulation to the members of the Board must be submitted to the Secretary in accordance with the schedule of notification/submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year. Documents (or draft agenda items or questions) given to the Chair will be considered to have been given to the Secretary. The Secretary will cause documents for a meeting to be circulated in accordance with the schedule of notification/ submission/circulation of items made available to relevant staff members before the beginning of each academic year. 

• 4.5.2 A document may be tabled at a meeting provided it relates to one of the agenda items for the meeting and provided two-thirds of the members present agree to its being tabled. Documents will normally be made available in electronic and hard copy format, with the exception of student-specific forms which will be made available in hard copy only. 

4.6 Quorum and attendance 

• 4.6.1 A meeting will not commence until at least one third of the members are present. If a quorum is not forthcoming, the Chair will set an alternative date for the meeting. 

• 4.6.2 The Chair may invite non-members of the Board to attend for specific items of the agenda. 

4.7 Mode of address 

Speakers will always address the Chair. While a member is speaking, other members will be silent. 

4.8 Motions 

• 4.8.1 A motion is a proposal which is put forward. A resolution is the acceptance of a motion by a meeting. 

• 4.8.2 For a motion to be put to a meeting, it requires a proposer and a seconder. A motion from the Chair does not require a seconder. 

• 4.8.3 For an amendment to a motion to be put, it requires a proposer and a seconder. An amendment will be put to a vote before the original motion. 

• 4.8.4 If an amendment is not carried, the Chair will put the motion in its original form to a vote. If an amendment is carried, the Chair will put the amended motion to the meeting. Before a motion or an amendment is put to a vote, the Secretary will read out the text to be voted on. 

4.9 Voting 

• 4.9.1 Where a motion has been put to the meeting, the Chair will ask the Board whether or not it assents, and the decision will normally be by acclamation. Where there appears to be a division, the Chair will call for a vote; such a vote may also be requested by any member. The results of voting will be counted and recorded by the Secretary. 

• 4.9.2 It is open to any member to propose a motion demanding a secret ballot and this motion, if seconded, can be dealt with in the usual way.

• 4.9.3 The number of votes for and against a motion, and the number of abstentions, will be recorded in the minutes. 

• 4.9.4  If the votes for and against a proposal are equal, the Chair has an additional, casting, vote as Chair. 

4.10 Points of order and closure 

• 4.10.1 A member may, at any time and without notice, interrupt debate by raising a ‘point of order’. The Chair will decide whether the point of order is admissible, and his/her ruling will be final. 

• 4.10.2 A motion for closure, if seconded in the usual way, must be put to the vote at once, without being discussed. 

4.11 Emergency items 

• 4.11.1 Any member may seek to add an item to the agenda as an emergency item. An emergency item can only be one which could not have been foreseen on the basis of the schedule of notification/submission of items made available to relevant staff members at the beginning of each academic year and which must be resolved before the next scheduled meeting. A vote must be held on every proposal for an emergency item to be inscribed, and for it to be inscribed it must get the assenting votes of at least two-thirds of the members present and voting. Members may vote only for or against the inscription of an emergency item; members abstaining will not be considered, for the purposes of the vote, to be ‘present and voting’. 

• 4.11.2 Occasionally, it may be appropriate to deal electronically with an urgent item which needs to be resolved before the next scheduled meeting. If permission is granted, the Secretary will cause the documentation relating to the item to be circulated and will request responses by a specified date and time.  After the deadline has passed, the Secretary will inform the Board of the outcome of the discussion. The outcome will be noted in the minutes of the next scheduled meeting. 

4.12 Delegated authority/Chair’s Action 

The Chair shall have delegated authority to act between scheduled meetings on: 

• Matters relating to the implementation of decisions which have already been approved at previous meetings
• Items which in the view of the Chair are too urgent and important for consideration to be deferred until the next scheduled meeting, especially where any lack of timely action could damage the interest of the student or the university.  The outcomes of such actions shall be reported by the Chair to the next meeting. 

4.13 Other business 

The rubric ‘other business’ on each agenda will be used only (a) to inform the meeting of agenda items which are proposed for the next following meeting or (b) to convey briefly other items of information of a factual nature.

4.14 Interpretation 

Where a dispute arises as to the interpretation of these orders, the decision of the Chair is final.

Academic  Regulations  for  Postgraduate  Degrees  by  Research  and  Thesis  relate  to  the research degree offerings of Dublin City University (DCU). They are designed to safeguard both the academic standards of the University and the interests of individual students. 

These regulations apply to two types of doctoral awards offered by the University – Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) and Professional Doctorate. Issues relating to Higher Doctorates (DSc, DEng, DLitt, LLD) are dealt with in a separate document, Provisions and Regulations: Higher Doctorates.  In addition to making doctoral awards, the University makes awards at Master’s level on the basis of research, and these are also subject to these regulations. 

These regulations are guided by the University’s Marks and Standards; the Quality and Qualifications Ireland ‘Ireland’s Framework of Good Practice for Research Degree Programmes’,  (2019);  and the National Framework for Doctoral Education (2015). 

The regulations apply to all research students registered in DCU, irrespective of the institution in which they commenced their studies. Reference is made in the document where an exception applies for students first registered with St Patrick’s College, Drumcondra (SPD) or Mater Dei Institute of Education (MDI). 

These regulations are subject to change.  In any given academic session, a student is subject to the regulations that are in place at the beginning of that academic session.   

1.1 Doctoral Awards 

The doctoral degree is one of the highest academic qualifications awarded by the University and is at Level 10 on the National Framework of Qualifications. It is awarded, without classification,  to  successful  candidates  on  the  strength  of  a  body  of  original  work  of scholarship prepared and presented in accordance with internationally-accepted academic standards. All candidates for doctoral degrees will be examined in the same manner through external  and  internal  examination  of  the  submitted  thesis,  followed  by  a  viva  voce examination.    

1.1.1 Doctor of Philosophy  

The PhD may vary in format of submission, as outlined below. However, the same academic standards apply in all cases. The degree of PhD is awarded in recognition of research which has made a significant and coherent contribution to knowledge.  The degree of PhD is awarded, without classification, on the basis of successful completion and examination of the research thesis. The thesis has a nominal value of 270 ECTS credits.   

The core component of a PhD programme is the advancement of knowledge through original research. At the same time, the PhD is designed to meet the needs of an employment market that is wider than academia. In that context, the PhD involves a high-quality research experience, training and output consistent with international norms and best practice. 

To support the original research activity, the following elements are advised: 

• a formalised integrated programme of education, training, and personal and professional development activities which is planned and often thematically focused;
• the development of discipline-specific knowledge, research skills and generic/ transferable skills; and
• declared outcomes and graduate attributes in line with national and international best practice.  

The University is committed to providing its research students with the best possible research experience. In that context, it is very supportive of research students engaged in PhD research who wish to take additional courses to enhance their generic and disciplinary research skills. Students can take ECTS credits by means of discipline specific modules, generic research and transferable skills, as agreed in their Personal Development Plan (PDP). Students who opt to take such modules must have the permission of their supervisors. The successful completion of such modules will be recorded on the student’s transcript. All module descriptors relating to modules not already accredited as part of an award programme are subject to prior approval by the Graduate Research Studies Board. Results of modules will be approved by the GTE (Graduate Training Elements) Award Board. 

Candidates who wish to pursue a structured PhD programme will undertake disciplinespecific modules, research skills courses, and generic and transferable skills courses, as agreed in their Personal Development Plan (PDP) and/or partnership agreement, to the value of at least 20 ECTS credits, no more than 90 ECTS credits, but typically in the range 30-60 ECTS credits. Normally, 10 ECTS credits will relate to research skills, transferable and generic skills modules.    

Model based on Collaboration with Enterprise 

The University recognises the value of PhD-level research which emerges from or is conducted within the context of a company, healthcare setting, voluntary sector organisation, public body or other such organisation. Such collaborative research facilitates the professional development of the PhD student through the integration of academia with other sectors and contributes to the creation of new knowledge relevant to the needs of society, the economy and policy-forming bodies, through original research. The educational outcomes must, in all cases, correspond to the intellectual challenge of a PhD, so the project must be carefully planned and negotiated to ensure that this potential exists.  

The degree of PhD is awarded, without classification, on the basis of a thesis submitted for examination. The thesis has a nominal value of 270 ECTS credits.

At the time of initial registration, it is  the  supervisor’s  responsibility  to  ensure  that  an agreement between the external organisation and University is put in place which covers such issues as: funding, intellectual property ownership, time which the research student will spend on campus or in the external organisation and the role of the external organisation in the supervision of the student. It is also important that DCU’s expectations regarding research awards are made clear to the collaborating enterprise. 

Students registered under this model can only take a maximum of 30 additional ECTS credits by means of discipline-specific modules, generic research and transferable skills, and active contribution to the University. Students who opt to take such modules must have the permission of their supervisors. The successful completion of such modules will be recorded on the student’s transcript. All module descriptors are subject to approval by the Graduate Research Studies Board. Results of modules will be approved by the GTE Award Board. 

1.1.2 Formats of PhD Submission: Monograph, Publication, Artefact and Creative/ Performance Practice  

As well  as  the monograph format,  the  University  offers  the  opportunity  for candidates to submit their research for the award of PhD in the format of published work, of artefacts such as music compositions, and through creative  or performance practice.   In the case of formats other than a monograph, the submission of an accompanying set of chapters which must satisfy the appointed examiners is also required. Requirements for each format are given in section 9 of these regulations.  

1.1.3 Professional Doctorate  

The Professional Doctorate is awarded in a number of disciplines, without classification, on the basis of a research thesis and other work. The Professional Doctoral Programme is usually a part-time research-based programme. The core aim of the Professional Doctorate is to make significant contributions to knowledge of professional practice through research. In that context, the Professional Doctorate aims to foster professional development through research as well as meeting the requirements of rigour and originality expected of a doctorate. 

A Professional Doctorate normally involves the production of a number of significant pieces of written work followed by a thesis. The total ECTS credits will be in the range 240-270. The thesis should constitute no fewer than half the total credits. 

For components other than the thesis, the regulations relating to assessment and progression are as outlined in Marks and Standards.  The University currently awards the following Professional Doctorates:

• EdD - Doctor of Education
• DBA - Doctor of Business Administration 
• DPsych - Doctor of Psychotherapy 
• DMusPerf - Doctor of Music in Performance
• DProfElite - Doctor of Elite Performance Sport)  

​​​​​​​1.2 Master’s Degree by Research 

The Master’s degree by Research, (Level 9 on the National Framework of Qualifications) is awarded, without classification, on the basis of a thesis submitted for examination. It nominally has a value of 180 ECTS credits. Master’s students may register for a maximum of 20 ECTS credits of discipline-specific modules, research skills courses or generic skills courses. The Master’s degree can be undertaken in the context of collaboration with enterprise. In these cases, it is the supervisor’s responsibility at the time of initial registration to ensure that an agreement between the external organisation and the University is put in place which covers such issues such as: funding, intellectual property ownership, time which the research student will spend on campus or in the organisation and the role of the organisation in the supervision of the student. 

Examination will take place through internal and external examination of the submitted thesis. A viva voce examination is not mandatory but can be requested by the examiners. 

The following awards may be made:  

• LLM  Master of Laws
• MA  Master of Arts
• MBS  Master of Business Studies
• MEng  Master of Engineering
• MEd  Master of Education 
• MPhil  Master of Philosophy
• MSc  Master of Science  

1.2.1 Formats of Submission for Master’s Degree by Research: Monograph, Artefact and Creative/ Performance Practice   ​​​​​​​

As well as the monograph format, the University offers the opportunity for candidates to submit their research for the award of MA by Research in the format of artefacts such as music compositions, and through creative or performance practice. In the case of formats other than a single thesis, the submission of accompanying documents which must satisfy the appointed examiners is also required. Requirements for each format are given in Section 9 of these regulations.

2.1 Academic  Council  has  overall  responsibility  in  all  matters  related  to  graduate research degrees. The University’s Graduate Research Studies Board is responsible for all policies and procedures relating to graduate research and reports to Academic Council on these. 

2.2 The University is prepared to consider proposals for programmes of graduate research work concerned with fundamental research or other areas of scholarship or with any aspects of industrial, commercial, enterprise, clinical, artistic or professional activity. 

2.3 Students registered for graduate research degree programmes are entitled to the same rights and privileges as all other registered students and are subject to the same Student Code of Conduct and Discipline. Students must comply with the University's regulations governing graduate research degrees and are obliged to adhere to the University’s Code of Good Research Practice, its research ethics guidelines, the DCU Code of Practice on Authorship and the DCU Academic Integrity and Plagiarism Policy. 

2.4 A student may normally be registered at any time for one degree only, and work to be submitted for an award cannot be submitted elsewhere for a degree or other similar award. Any  exceptional  application  for  dual  registration  must  be  made  to  the Graduate Research Studies Board. 

2.5 Students on the Doctor of Education are registered with the Faculty. All other research students must register with a single School, notwithstanding the fact that he/she may conduct the research across a number of Schools or in one or more University Research Centre.  

2.6 In the case of interdisciplinary research projects, the School assuming responsibility for the project must be the School with which the student is registered. 

2.7 The University encourages collaboration in programmes of research between the University and other educational, industrial, commercial, professional or research institutions. Such arrangements are governed by the University Policy on Research Supervision and Awards in Collaboration with Other Institutions. 

2.8 All official communications and administrative procedures relating to graduate research applications, offers of places, registration, continued registration, annual progress reports, examination procedures and results shall be conducted through and by the Registry.

3.1 Prior to submitting an application, a candidate must consult with the appropriate School on the proposed programme of study and must ascertain whether or not the School would be prepared to recommend his/her application to the University 

3.2 To  register  for  a  graduate  research  programme,   a  candidate  must  normally have obtained a primary degree classification (Level 8) equivalent to a second class honours degree, grade two, in an appropriate discipline, from an approved university or an approved equivalent degree-awarding body, or have an approved equivalent professional qualification in an area cognate to the proposed research topic. Such candidates are considered for entry only on the research Master’s register initially. 

3.3 Candidates with a taught Master’s degree (Level 9) in an appropriate discipline with first- or second-class honours, and candidates with a primary degree in an appropriate discipline  with  first-  or  second-class  honours,  grade  one,  may  apply  and  be considered for entry to the PhD-track register with a view to proceeding towards a PhD. Such candidates will undergo a confirmation procedure, as outlined in section 8, before being admitted to the PhD register. Candidates with a taught Master’s degree (Level 9) in an appropriate discipline with first- or second-class honours, and candidates with a primary degree in an appropriate discipline  with  first-  or  second-class  honours,  grade  one,  may  apply  and  be considered for entry to the Professional Doctorate register.  

3.4 Students on the Master’s register may apply for transfer to the PhD register under the same conditions, and using the same procedure, as PhD-track candidates requesting confirmation on the PhD register. 

3.5 Candidates holding an appropriate Master's degree obtained by research may apply for direct entry to the PhD register to conduct research in a cognate area. 

3.6 In exceptional circumstances only, candidates for a Master’s or Professional Doctorate degree who do not meet the stipulated entry requirements based on their cognate degree but who can demonstrate exceptional ability or aptitude for academic research may apply to pursue studies for a research degree. They may base their application on recognition of their accredited or experiential prior learning, in line with University policies in this regard. 

The admission of candidates not holding a prior degree qualification cognate to the area of research being undertaken shall be strictly limited and applicable in exceptional cases only. Such applications must be fully supported and endorsed by the School in which the research will be carried out and supervised. The onus will be on the School and the supervisor to give clear reasons for their recommendation in such a case, and the Graduate Research Studies Board will make the final decision on admission.   

3.7  Students holding academic qualifications from outside the State will be assessed using the NARIC guidelines and the European Framework of Qualifications.

4.1 Candidates must apply through the Student Application Portal.  Only candidates who have contacted the School with which they wish to be registered, and have got a recommendation from the School to apply, will be able to proceed to the completion of the Student Application Portal application. All such candidates need to have the support of a potential supervisor.

4.2 Successful candidates will be required to register with the University and pay the appropriate fees and seek their Scholarship Contract Letter where applicable from their School.  

4.3 The registration date for Autumn registration is published in the Academic Calendar. The Spring registration date is 2nd March, for Year 1 students only. Students who register on or after this date must re-register for Year 1 in the following September. Students should check these dates regularly in case of changes. 

4.4 All students are required to re-register on an annual basis. Such registration is subject to payment of the appropriate fees and satisfactory progress certified by the supervisory panel (described in 7.1) and endorsed by the Head of School or nominee. 

4.5 In normal circumstances, research students registered at DCU will reside within Ireland. 

4.6 Supervisors, on behalf of registered students, or new applicants not covered by a joint supervision or award agreement but wishing to reside and undertake research outside Ireland for a period of six months or more (based on the Residing Abroad Principles), must inform the Graduate Research Studies Board, and for those wishing to reside and undertake research outside Ireland for the full period of registration, must be approved by the Graduate Research Studies Board, where in either case details are provided as to the rationale for registration abroad rather than locally to DCU, and arrangements for supervisor oversight of the field, experimental or other work. Such arrangements are also subject to the requirements detailed in section 7.15. 

4.7 Where doctoral or Master’s research is to be conducted in formal collaboration with another higher education institution, or undertaken in the context of the enterprise model, the DCU Policy on Research Supervision and Awards in Collaboration with Other  Institutions  applies.  The  context  should  be  made  clear  at  the  time  of  the student's application to DCU so that an agreement on joint supervision or joint award can be drawn up with the partner institution or company prior to registration. Significant advance planning is usually required.

5.1 Students register on either a full-time or a part-time basis. 

5.2 The  minimum  typical  and  maximum  registration  periods  for  Doctoral and  Research Master’s degrees are as follows:

5.3 If a student wishes to submit a thesis before the minimum period stipulated, he/she must seek  permission  from  the  Graduate  Research  Studies  Board  to  be allowed to do so. Such permission will be granted in exceptional cases only. 

5.4 If a student does not submit a hardbound thesis to registry within the maximum period stipulated, he/she must  seek  permission  from  the  Graduate  Research  Studies  Board  to  be allowed to continue his/her studies. Such extensions will be granted in exceptional cases only.

6.1 It is preferable for students to conduct their research without interruption in so far as possible. Occasionally, a student may have reason to be absent from the University. If this is for a period of less than three months, no change to registration is required, and regular fee liability applies.  

6.2 In some circumstances, for example in the case of illness, or financial or family circumstances, it is possible to apply for a formal temporary cessation of registration until the difficulties have been resolved. Deferrals should normally be granted in keeping with DCU Marks and Standards, and only in such exceptional circumstances. Deferrals must be approved by the Supervisor and the relevant Head of School and will usually be for a half, or full academic year. 

6.3 Students wishing to defer must notify the Registry, in advance of the deferral, in writing by completing and submitting an Application for Deferral. Retrospective deferrals are not allowed, except in exceptional cases where a student was adversely affected by illness or other factors, which he/she was unable or, for valid reasons, unwilling to divulge, and is limited to half year deferral. 

6.4 During any temporary cessation of registration, the student’s participation in the research programme is suspended and the student will not be entitled to supervision or to use the University facilities, including the Library. 

6.5 The minimum period of registration is extended by a period corresponding to the deferred period. Consistent with DCU Marks and Standards, the maximum period of registration is not extended. 

6.6 Tuition fees are adjusted to account for the deferred period. 

6.7 When a student is externally funded, he/she should discuss the situation with the Supervisor(s) in the first instance, and the sponsoring agency should be consulted if a temporary cessation of study is necessary. Students and supervisors should be aware of any possible implications which this temporary cessation may have on the funding and of any additional requirements stipulated by the funding body. Students who defer do not receive a stipend during this period, as stipends are paid only during active registration. The Graduate Studies Office should be notified prior to the student seeking a deferral from the University. 

6.8 Research  students  withdrawing  from  the  University  must  notify  the  Registry,  either through the Student Apps Page or via the relevant link on the Registry webpage.

7.1.  Each graduate research student will have a supervisory panel. The principal aim of the supervisory panel is to participate in formal decision-making with respect to the student’s progress, and provide advice, additional support and pastoral care, and escalate, as appropriate, should problems arise.  This requirement for a supervisory panel does not apply  to candidates registered prior to  2011/2012 and those who initially registered as SPD or MDI students prior to March 2016.

• 7.1.1.  The panel will comprise all of the Supervisor(s) plus one additional independent member of academic staff.

• 7.1.2.  The panel must include at least one academic supervisor from the academic School in which the student is registered.

• 7.1.3.  While a Supervisor will be an expert in the field of study, there is no requirement that all members of the supervisory panel have this expertise, but they should have some experience of research degree supervision in a similar or related discipline.

• 7.1.4.  For DCU academics new to being a principal supervisor (not having supervised postgraduate research students to completion), the supervisory panel for their first two research students must include a member experienced in supervision who will be in a position to take an advisory role. Inclusion of such a panel member can be deemed necessary by the Head of School for reasons other than a principal supervisor’s relative inexperience. The panel member may be a member of academic staff in another School, if there are not enough panel members qualified to be advisors available in a School.

• 7.1.5.  Heads of School should endeavour to ensure that a supervisory panel has no more than four members in total.

• 7.1.6.  The Independent Panel Member should be appointed by the Head of School and notified to Registry within three months of the student’s initial registration. The principal supervisor should notify the student of the appointment and outline the functions of the role. Reference to the Guidelines on the Appointment and Remit of an Independent Panel Member.

7.2.  Supervision remains the sole prerogative of the Supervisor(s) who has/have full responsibility for the overall management and supervision of the student’s work and progress. 

7.3.  Appointment of too many supervisors for one candidate is to be avoided, and each supervisor should have a defined and clear role in the work. Assisting students in a laboratory for instance does not, of itself, constitute supervising.

7.4.  Each graduate research student will have a suitably qualified principal supervisor whose responsibility will be to supervise the student on a regular and frequent basis. 

• 7.4.1.  In certain cases, where there is a significant requirement that more than one area of expertise be covered, there may be more than one principal supervisor. The supervisors in this instance are referred to as joint principal supervisors and have equal rights and undertake equal responsibilities. 

• 7.4.2. A principal supervisor is normally employed on a permanent contract with the university or one which extends beyond the normal expected registration period of the candidate. If these conditions are not met, then a supervisory plan must be put in place which satisfies the Head of School. 

7.5.  In  certain  cases,  there  may  be  secondary  supervisor(s)  as  well  as  principal supervisor(s). A secondary supervisor is appointed when specific expert academic input is required on aspects of the project, or when supervision is being provided by a person who is not a member of DCU staff. 

• 7.5.1. Unless  subject  to  a  joint  award  agreement,  where  a  supervisor  is  not  a member of University staff, such a person or persons will be deemed to be secondary supervisors and a University staff member will be the principal supervisor. This includes adjunct faculty. All relevant forms must incorporate the names of all supervisors. The University will, however, accept the signature of the DCU supervisor(s) as signalling assent on the part of both or all supervisors. 

7.6.  For students undertaking Professional Doctorates, appointment of supervisors and the establishment of the supervisory panel may be postponed until the student embarks on the substantive research work. 

7.7.  It  is  the  responsibility  of  the  relevant  Head  of  School  to  ensure that appropriate supervision remains in place in situations where a supervisor or independent panel member leaves the University. 

• 7.7.1.  Where a principal supervisor retires or resigns from the University during the programme of study of one or more students, then the supervisor is encouraged to continue supervising the students in their new capacity, but as a secondary supervisor. It is the responsibility of the Head of School to appoint a new principal supervisor in cases where it is necessary under the requirements in 7.1 and to notify Registry using the appropriate form. 

• 7.7.2.  Where a supervisor is absent (e.g. on sabbatical leave) for part of the duration of the student’s research, it will be the School’s responsibility to determine whether or not a replacement supervisor is needed for the period in question. 

• 7.7.3.  It is the responsibility of the supervisor(s) to ensure a smooth and timely transition where a change of supervisor takes place. 

• 7.7.4.  Changes in supervisory and/or panel member arrangements must normally be made on the basis of agreement between the supervisor(s), the student, the proposed supervisor(s) and the Head of School or nominee and must be submitted to the Faculty Research Committee for approval and, once approved there, notified to Registry.   

7.8. Supervisors will be appropriately qualified. 

• 7.8.1.  Academic staff who undertake the supervision of PhD students or Professional Doctorate students are themselves required to hold a doctoral qualification or a full professorship or professorship and have relevant experience in an area cognate to the proposed area of research, usually reflected by publications relating to the general area of research being undertaken by the candidate. 

• 7.8.2.  A person who does not hold a doctoral qualification or a full professorship or professorship may, however, act as joint principal supervisor or secondary supervisor to a doctoral candidate provided that the other supervisor holds such an award or title. Such supervisors 12  should have research experience consistent with the level of study. 

• 7.8.3.  Academic staff undertaking the supervision of research Master’s students are themselves required to hold at least a Master’s qualification in an area cognate to the proposed area of research. A person who does not hold a Master’s qualification may, however, act as joint principal supervisor or secondary supervisor provided that the other supervisor holds such an award or title. Such supervisors should have research experience consistent with the level of study. 

7.9.  A member of academic staff must decline appointment as a supervisor if they expect not to be able to discharge the responsibilities of supervision in full, or withdraw (ref 7.7.4) if circumstances change and they are no longer able to so. 

7.10.  Members  of  academic  staff  should  normally  act  as  supervisor  (principal  or secondary) to a maximum of ten research students at any one time. All cases in which the figure exceeds ten should be referred to the Head of School (or the Executive Dean of Faculty where the Head of School is the supervisor) for a decision as  to  whether  or  not  it  is  appropriate  that  the  proposed  supervisor  accept  an applicant. Where more than one School is involved in the process, the relevant Head of School is the Head of the School of which the proposed supervisor is a member.

7.11.  All first-time supervisors must attend training on supervision during, or prior to, the first year of supervising, and all research supervisors are encouraged to attend supervisory training as part of their professional development. 

7.12.  Schools are required to have guidelines on the ranges of frequency and durations of contact between research supervisors and students that are regarded as reasonable in the relevant discipline.  

7.13.  The responsibilities of the supervisor(s) include the following:

• to advise the student on the selection of the research topic and the nature and quality of the programme of research to be undertaken;
• to ensure that the student acquires training in the methodology of research and scholarship and in the skills necessary  for  sustained  independent  effort  by advising on their training needs analysis and their Personal Development Plan (PDP), and by giving permission for registration for graduate training elements where appropriate;
• to provide contact and guidance through regular and systematic meetings; to request regular written submissions as appropriate and to provide constructive evaluation and criticism in reasonable time;
• to ensure that the student is made aware of any inadequacies of progress or standard relative to that expected and, where necessary, to advise on withdrawal from the programme;
• to liaise with the external supervisor of the co-operating establishment, where relevant;
• to meet with the student and other supervisory panel members formally at least once a year to discuss progress; - to advise on the methodology and form of presentation of the thesis and its 13  subsequent examination, and advise on correction and revisions following examination;
• to complete an annual progress report with the student and advise the Registry if the student is eligible to progress. These reports should include details of the frequency of contact maintained with the candidate and an appraisal of the progress of the work to date; and
• to acknowledge a student's contribution in any presentation, publication or meeting which involves the student's research work. 

7.14. The responsibilities of the student include the following: 

• to comply with relevant DCU regulations;
• to conduct the research within the ethical standards of the discipline(s) and in accordance with the standards detailed by the University and any appropriate external agencies;
• to undertake a periodic training needs analysis and maintain a Personal Development Plan (PDP);
• to engage positively with opportunities for professional development; and
• to acknowledge the supervisor’s role in their research including in any presentation, publication or meeting to which the supervisor has made a contribution. 

7.15.  Where a research candidate is resident outside Ireland for 6 months or more over the period of registration, and the registration is not subject to a cosupervision or joint award agreement with an external institution, the Graduate Research Studies Board should be informed as per regulation 4.5.  Where a research candidate is resident outside Ireland for the full period of registration, and the registration is not subject to a co-supervision or joint award agreement with an external institution, approval from the Graduate Research Studies Board is required, as per regulation 4.5.   The  following  principles  for  remote  supervision  should  be adhered to:  

• 7.15.1. An agreement which incorporates the relevant DCU regulations is written and signed by the DCU supervisor(s), the student and the Head of School, or Executive Dean of Faculty (in cases where the Head of School is a supervisor). 

• 7.15.2. The  DCU  supervisor(s)  must  have  access  to  any  relevant  data  and/or detailed information on facilities/field sites being used in the candidate’s research in order to facilitate evaluation of the methodologies being used and the rigour and integrity of analysis. 

• 7.15.3. The DCU supervisor and student need to maintain regular contact to ensure the successful supervision of the student and either the DCU supervisor or the student may request a face-to-face meeting if they deem it necessary. As per 7.13 the DCU supervisor must meet with the student and other supervisory panel members formally at least once a year to discuss progress. 

• 7.15.4. A mechanism for communication needs to be established and monitored carefully by the Head of School in which the student is  registered. It should be ensured that all appropriate technological means are employed to facilitate the supervision process.  

7.16 Research students and supervisors have access to procedures of the University such as those under the Policy to Promote Respect and Dignity by Preventing Harassment or Bullying in DCU, the DCU Code of Conduct and Discipline, the Policy on Responding to Allegations of Research Misconduct and the Student Grievance Procedure and are subject to DCU’s Guidelines on Best Practice in Research Ethics and the DCU Academic Integrity and Plagiarism Policy. This list is not exhaustive and may change. All relevant University policies, in force at any given time, apply. Significant difficulties which arise within a supervisor/student relationship are dealt with in this context. 

In the first instance, a student, supervisor(s) or other panel member should seek a resolution to the issues at School level. This process will normally involve the student, supervisor(s), panel members and Head of School. The Head of School may wish to seek advice on policy or procedure (without prejudicing any possible subsequent formal procedures) and/or consult with other colleagues on context and background. The resolution to the issues will be captured in writing and circulated to the student and panel members by the Head of School, to ensure clarity for both student and supervisor(s). 

If any party does not accept the resolution, or a resolution is not possible within a reasonable timeframe (3-6 weeks), consideration should be given by all parties as to how the issues fall under specific University Policies.

8.1 Annual Progression 

8.1.1  Continued registration for a higher degree is dependent on the submission of a satisfactory annual progress report.  A student’s progress is formally evaluated on an annual basis through the completion of an Annual Progress Report as made available by Registry. 

8.1.2 Annual Progress Review will be carried out at School level, with the relevant report completed by the principal supervisor(s), approved by the supervisory panel and endorsed by the Head of School or nominee. A copy of the report should be submitted to the Registry each year on or before the date published in the Academic Calendar. The student should retain a copy of the final electronic form. 

8.1.3 In the case of a negative recommendation, the University will take the view that the student is unlikely to achieve the degree for which he/she is registered and he/she will not be permitted to continue as a registered graduate research student. 

8.1.4 A student has the right to appeal a negative recommendation made by the supervisory panel. The process for appealing is detailed in section 13.   

8.1.5   For students undertaking Professional Doctorates, the requirement for an Annual Progress Report may be postponed until the student embarks on the substantive research work. Decisions on annual progression in the interim are managed in a way which is appropriate to the specific programme structure. The basis of progression decisions, when they relate to module completion, will be made known to candidates and, as a general principle, students should get useful feedback on progress every year.   

8.2 Assessment for confirmation on, or transfer to, the PhD Register 

8.2.1  Students initially admitted on a PhD-track registration will have to undergo a confirmation procedure generally no earlier than 12 months and no later than 21 months research after initial registration for full-time students and at an appropriate corresponding time for part-time students. This is a distinct and separate exercise to Annual Progress Review. 

Applications from such candidates for confirmation on the PhD register must be supported by the Principal Supervisor and will be subject to both an evaluation of a written submission and  a satisfactory  performance  in  an  oral  examination  conducted  by the Principal Supervisor and an Internal Examiner (selection based on 10.1), approved by the Head of School. It is not allowable that the independent panel member or a colleague who does not themselves have a doctorate act as the internal examiner for confirmation or transfer. 

8.2.2 The application form requesting confirmation on the PhD register should be signed by the examiner(s) and Head of School or appropriate nominee (such as the Director of Research or Research Convenor within the School). It should include both a  report on  the  oral examination  and  a  general progress report on  the  student’s research  performance  (as  evidenced  by  a  substantial  body  of  work  such  as  a significant written report). In determining whether or not such confirmation should take place, the Graduate Research Studies Board will require evidence that the student’s progress to date has been satisfactory and that the programme of research envisaged provides a satisfactory basis for work at PhD standard. If the outcome of the confirmation procedure is unsuccessful the student may, if appropriate, be invited to complete such research as will allow him/her to graduate with a Master’s degree. In   exceptional   circumstances,   students   may   also   be   advised   to   re-apply   for confirmation on the PhD register within a period of six months; this may be the case if the examiners believe that there is real potential but that it is not possible to make a positive recommendation at the time when confirmation is originally requested. 

8.2.3 Procedures for applying to transfer to the PhD register from the Master’s register mirror those of the confirmation process. Applications to transfer from PhD or 16  PhD- track to the Master’s register should be made directly to Registry, supported by the student, supervisory panel and Head of School.

8.2.4 Transfer between professional doctorate and PhD registration is not common and, for the benefit of both awards, approval by the Graduate Research Studies Board is subject to examination of the rationale and criteria underpinning any such recommendation, reference to a framework for transfer (where relevant) as well as satisfactory progress and an appropriate basis for further research as outlined in 8.2.2. 

8.2.5 A student has the right to appeal an unsuccessful confirmation or transfer result. The process for appealing is detailed in section 13.    

8.3 Notice of Intention to Submit for Examination 

Through the principal supervisor(s), a student must provide three months’ notice to the Registry of his/her intention to submit for examination. The supervisor and Head of School must recommend (on the appropriate form) the name of appropriate External and Internal Examiners, for appointment by the Graduate Research Studies Board. The Head of School must appoint (on the appropriate form) the Independent Chairperson, for noting by the Graduate Research Studies Board. Candidates should confirm the format of their submission at this stage, and indicate whether a specific non-disclosure agreement is required.  

In cases of disagreement between a student and a supervisor as to the appropriateness of submitting the thesis for examination, the matter is to be referred to the Head of School for resolution. In exceptional circumstances, such as an allegation of research misconduct, or alleged breach of a legally binding contract, the university may decide to postpone or deny the facility of an examination. 

The completed thesis must be submitted to the Registry, which will send it to the approved examiners. In no circumstances should it be sent to the examiners by either the supervisor or the student.  

8.4 Assessment Processes for Candidates for a Research Degree 

8.4.1 Candidates for a doctoral degree will be assessed on the basis of a written thesis and a viva voce examination. In the case of Master's candidates, the usual expectation is that there will be no viva voce examination. However, an examiner may recommend that a viva voce examination be held. 

8.4.2 Each candidate for a higher degree by research will be examined by at least one Internal Examiner and at least one External Examiner. 

8.4.3 The viva voce examination conducted in private, shall be held at Dublin City University unless prior approval has been obtained from the Graduate Research Studies Board to hold it elsewhere. The viva voce examination may not proceed without all the examiners being present. In the event of an examiner’s or the candidate’s unexpected absence, the examination must be postponed to another date. Where absolutely necessary, consideration may be given to using the University's videoconferencing facilities for the viva voce examination. The standard procedures for conducting a viva voce using videoconferencing must be followed. 

8.4.4 The proceedings of the viva voce examination shall be supervised by an Independent Chairperson appointed by the Head of School or nominee in consultation with the supervisor.  

8.4.5 A candidate for a doctoral degree will be required to show ability to engage in original investigation or scholarship, to test ideas whether his/her own or those of others, and to understand the background and fundamental basis of the work undertaken. 

8.4.6 A candidate for a Master's degree will be required to demonstrate competence in the investigation or critical study of the chosen topic and lucidity in the presentation of the results. 

8.4.7 In cases where a viva voce is being held, both External and Internal Examiners should send preliminary written reports to the Independent Chairperson of the examination committee prior to the viva voce examination. Once these are all available, the Chairperson shall arrange for copies of preliminary reports from each examiner to be exchanged among all examiners in advance of the viva voce examination, so that they are aware of one another’s views. 

8.4.8 In cases where no viva voce is being held, the examination report forms are completed by both examiners and the Internal Examiner submits them to Registry. The internal examiner is responsible for communicating the outcome to the appropriate parties. 

8.4.9 Following  the  viva  voce  the  Internal  and  External  Examiners  shall  furnish  the Independent Chairperson with a  joint written report (on the appropriate form) on the outcome of the candidate's examination for the higher degree for which he/she is registered. This form should be completed on the day of the viva voce and be submitted to Registry by the Independent Chairperson. The Chairperson should also make a formal report to the Head of School on the quality of the examination process and on any recommendations made by the examiners in order to allow the School to get appropriate feedback on the process with a view to maintaining the overall quality of future activities.  

8.5 Faculty Awards Boards for Research Degrees 

8.5.1 The Registry will make the necessary arrangements to convene a meeting of the relevant Faculty Awards Board for Research degrees to consider the examination reports of students who have been examined. 

8.5.2 Following  the  meetings  of  Faculty  Awards  Boards for Research Degrees,  the  Registry  will  submit  to Academic Council, for its approval, a composite listing of candidates recommended for awards. A reference will also be included summarising all other outcomes and the number of candidates involved.  

8.6 Approval of awards by Academic Council 

8.6.1 All  examination  results  and  recommendations  are  subject  to  final  approval  and confirmation by Academic Council. However, communication will be issued by Registry to any unsuccessful candidates for higher degrees in advance of Academic Council following the meeting of Faculty Awards Boards for Research Degrees. 

8.6.2 Following the meeting of Academic Council, successful candidates for higher degrees shall be issued with a postgraduate research transcript by Registry. This will include details of their research thesis, supervisors and any graduate training elements completed in DCU.  

8.6.3  Re-submission by an unsuccessful candidate may take place only with the approval of Academic Council on the recommendation of, and under the conditions proposed by, the Examiners and with the concurrence of the Faculty Awards Board for Research Degrees (FABRD). As noted in Section 8.6.1, communication will be issued by Registry to any unsuccessful candidates for higher degrees following the meeting of FABRD. This will provide the student with the required time to consider the appeals process, if they feel it is applicable to them (Section 13). 

All theses submitted must conform strictly to the regulations and requirements detailed below. All formats of doctoral theses are examined under the same conditions and through the same processes of independent examiners and a viva voce examination.   

9.1 Formats of Research Thesis 

Irrespective of the format chosen for the submission of research leading to a doctoral (or masters by research) award, the standard by which the work is evaluated remains the same.  A thesis must: 

• consist of the candidate’s own account of his/her research; 
• demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the field of study;
• include critical analysis of related work;
• in the case of a PhD thesis, constitute a significant contribution to existing academic knowledge;
• in the case of a professional doctoral thesis, constitute a significant contribution to existing professional knowledge and practice; 
• be based on work which has been conducted while the candidate has been registered as a research student at DCU; and
• where ethical approval was required, either the University Research Ethics Committee or Faculty Research Ethics Committee approval letter must be included in the thesis appendices.   

9.1.1     PhD Thesis (Monograph): 

The PhD thesis presents the research undertaken by the candidate as an integrated whole. It should include: 

1. an introduction;
2. critical analysis of existing research;
3. in-depth discussions of the methodological approach taken by the candidate;
4. presentation and critical analysis, of the findings of the research undertaken by the candidate; and
5. a substantive conclusion which indicates scope for further research arising out of the candidate’s research. 

The maximum word length, including bibliography and notes, is 90,000. Any appendices remain outside the word limit. 

A variety of media may be used to support/inform research work – e.g. CDs, websites, photographs and emerging technologies. 

The order in which components b. to d. are presented, and the nature of any additional written work, will vary from discipline to discipline. 

Candidates who have pursued a PhD integrated with GTEs also follow this format in relation to their thesis. All candidates are encouraged to publish material in advance of presentation of the thesis, and reference should be made to any such publication in the thesis.  

9.1.2     PhD by Publication: 

Students should, ideally, indicate their intention to submit using publications at the time of application for transfer/confirmation on the PhD register but, at the latest, at the time of indicating their intention to submit for examination.  The PhD thesis by publication should consist of:    

1. a set of published papers and/or papers accepted for publication; and
2. an accompanying set of chapters no less than 10,000 words in length which sets the papers in the context of existing literature, gives a detailed overview of the theme(s) common to all papers included in the thesis, argues the coherence of these publications, and justifies the methodology adopted. This overarching critical document should evaluate the contribution that the research in the submitted publications makes to the advancement of knowledge in the research area. 

The maximum word length of the thesis, including the accompanying set of chapters, selected papers, references and notes is 90,000. Any appendices remain outside the word limit. 

Only peer-reviewed book chapters or papers (published journal papers, or papers accepted for publication) in reputable peer-reviewed outputs for the discipline(s) in question can be considered for inclusion when a thesis is submitted for examination. A minimum of three papers is required, however the number of papers may be higher and vary across disciplines, vary in length of individual papers and vary in terms of the extent of the candidate’s contribution thereto. 

Where jointly-authored publications are included in the submission, the candidate is required to submit a Declaration of Authorship form for each co-authored paper, submitted as part of the thesis for examination. The candidate should declare the extent to which the publication is his/her work and what his/her specific contributions were,  and  this  should  normally  be  certified  by  the  supervisory  panel  and  all  authors concerned, but at least independently verified in all cases. This Declaration of Authorship should be bound with the other submitted materials at the examination submission stage. 

Novel contribution should normally be apparent in at least three of the papers in which the candidate is main or key contributor. Other papers with smaller or more specific contributions can also be included in the thesis, where this makes sense in terms of its overall coherence. All papers and the accompanying chapters should be presented and bound (together) in accordance with the regulations in section 9.4 and the guidelines provided.   

9.1.3   PhD by Artefact 

This format is restricted to candidates undertaking research in disciplines where output in forms other than a monograph (such as a music composition, critical edition, film, multimedia production, arts based works etc.) are accepted internationally as evidence of scholarly achievement at the level of the research award.  Specific discipline-based additional admission requirements, linked to skills-based competency, may apply to candidates for research projects intended to be presented in this format.  

The format requires:  

• A substantial artefact, or portfolio of artefacts.

 and 

• An accompanying commentary of no less than 20,000 words in length. This overarching critical document should detail the research questions addressed through the medium of the artefact(s), sets the artefact(s) in the context of existing literature, give a detailed overview of the theme(s) common to all elements included, argue the coherence of the submission and justify the methodology adopted. It should evaluate the contribution that the research presented in the submitted artefact makes to the advancement of knowledge in the research area.    

9.1.4     PhD through Creative and/or Performance Practice 

This format is restricted to candidates submitting research in disciplines where it is a recognised norm internationally. Specific additional admission requirements, linked to skills-based competency, will apply to candidates for research projects intended to be presented in this format.  

The format requires:  

• A portfolio of creative or performance-based elements of substantial nature. 

and 

• An accompanying commentary of no less than 30,000 words in length. This overarching critical document should detail the research questions addressed through the medium of the creative work / performance in the context of existing practice, give a detailed overview of the theme(s) common to all elements included, argue the coherence of the submission, and justify the methodology adopted. It should evaluate the contribution that the research presented in the creative work/performance makes to the advancement of knowledge in the field.  

9.1.5     Professional Doctoral Thesis: 

The professional doctoral thesis may follow either of the structures described in 9.1.1 and 9.1.2.  Alternatively, the Professional Doctoral thesis may take the following format: 

• a. a research report; and 
• b. a clinical portfolio or a reflective practice portfolio.

In this case, the research report should constitute no less than 50% of the contribution of the final thesis. 

The maximum word length of the thesis, including the accompanying set of chapters, selected papers, references and notes is 90,000. Any appendices remain outside the word limit.   

9.1.6 Research Master’s Thesis: 

The research Master’s thesis in a monograph format should include: 

1. an introduction; 
2. critical analysis of existing research; 
3. in-depth discussions of the methodological approach taken by the candidate; 
4. presentation, and critical analysis, of the findings of the research undertaken by the candidate; and 
5. a substantive conclusion which indicates scope for further research arising out of the candidate’s research. 

The maximum word length, including bibliography and notes, is 45,000. Any appendices remain outside the word limit. 

A variety of media may be used to support/inform research work – e.g. CDs, websites, photographs and emerging technologies. 

The order in which components b. to d. are presented, and the nature of any additional written work, will vary from discipline to discipline.  

9.1.7  Master of Arts by Artefact 

This format is restricted to candidates undertaking research in disciplines where output in forms other than a monograph (such as a music composition, critical edition, film, multimedia production, arts based works etc.) are accepted internationally as evidence of scholarly achievement at the level of the research award. Specific discipline-based additional admission requirements, linked to skills-based competency, may apply to candidates for research projects intended to be presented in this format.  

The format requires:  

• An appropriately substantive artefact or portfolio of artefacts  

and 

• An accompanying commentary of no less than 15,000 words in length. This overarching critical document should detail the research questions addressed through the medium of the artefact(s), sets the artefact(s) in the context of existing literature, give a detailed overview of the theme(s) common to all elements included, argue the coherence of the submission and justify the methodology adopted. It should evaluate the contribution that the research presented in the submitted artefact makes to the advancement of knowledge in the research area.  

9.1.8  Master of Arts through Creative and/or Performance Practice 

This format is restricted to candidates submitting research in disciplines where it is a recognised norm internationally. Specific additional admission requirements, linked to skills-based competency,  

The format requires:        

• One substantial or a number of less substantial creative or performance-based elements  

and 

• An accompanying commentary of no less than 15,000 words in length. This overarching critical document should detail the research questions addressed through the medium of the creative work / performance in the context of existing practice, give a detailed overview of the theme(s) common to all elements included, argue the coherence of the submission, and justify the methodology adopted. It should evaluate the contribution that the research presented in the creative work/performance makes to the advancement of knowledge in the field.  

9.2 Thesis Submission Procedure 

9.2.1 The student may be required to provide the Registry with one soft-bound printed copy of the thesis for each examiner. The binding is deemed to be temporary, pending completion of the examination process. The student must also provide one electronic PDF copy of the thesis for examination. This should be submitted to Registry in a single PDF file entitled with student number and date of submission, which should be saved on a memory key. The PDF should have the wording “pre-examination copy” and the submission date included as a watermark, or as a footer, on each page of the document.  A supervisor or students should, in no instance, send the thesis directly to an examiner, either in soft-bound printed or electronic format. 

9.2.2 On  completion  of  the  examination  process,  two  hard-bound  copies  of  the  thesis should be submitted to the Registry. 

9.2.3 Also, on completion of the examination process, one additional copy of the thesis shall be submitted in electronic format. It shall be subject to the regulations as to format, except where those apply specifically to physical properties of the print copies, for example, regulations under 9.4 covering binding. In all other respects, the electronic copy shall contain exactly the same content as, and be an exact surrogate of, the print copy.  The electronic copy shall be uploaded to a secure web space by a principal supervisor. All accompanying material, e.g. appendices or files in digital/electronic format, that is submitted with the bound copy of the thesis must also be uploaded to the secure web space. The candidate will be required to sign a declaration form confirming  that  an  e-version  of  the approved  thesis  has  been  submitted  to  the Library. The completed form must be submitted to Registry with the two hard-bound print copies of the thesis. 

9.3 Thesis Ownership and Access 

9.3.1 Copies  of  the  thesis  submitted  for  examination  will  remain  the  property  of  the University. The University will place one print copy and one electronic copy of the thesis in the Library for free consultation. The Library retains the right, subject to paragraph 9.3.2 below, to include the summary or abstract in any list of theses published by the University or any publication to which the University may decide to contribute a list of theses. 

9.3.2 Candidates are required to sign a declaration form (Thesis Access Consent Form) at the time of submission of the thesis for examination, permitting access to their thesis. When, following completion of the examination process, the student is ready to submit the final hard-bound copy of the thesis and questions of the confidentiality of the contents arise, candidates may request and  obtain  temporary  restriction  of  access  up  to  a  maximum  of  four  years  for sufficient  cogent  reasons,  using  the  appropriate  form.  An application for the restriction of access must be approved and countersigned by a research student's supervisor. The time period of restriction will commence based on the time of publication by the library. This time normally commences following the conferral of the candidates award. A retrospective application for restriction may not be requested once the thesis has been published. 

9.3.3 Copyright in the thesis is a matter for agreement between the candidate and the University. All issues relating to intellectual property will be subject to the University’s Intellectual Property Policy and related procedures and contractual obligations. 

9.3.4 Subject to the provisions of the University's Intellectual Property Policy with respect to Copyright every candidate irrevocably grants to DCU and its respective successors and assigns, a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty free, perpetual licence to reproduce, distribute, modify, store, copy, publicly perform and publicly display, with the right to sub- licence through multiple tiers of sublicences, and the right to assign such rights in and to the thesis including, without limitation the right to use in any way whatsoever the thesis.  DCU may copy, publish, make available, distribute, license, or otherwise use the thesis in any manner worldwide via any medium including without limitation the internet, intranets, extranets, mobile phones, GSM/3G phones, WAP phones, databases, print, interactive television, digital media services, electronic media services, platforms, or any networks (including without limitation telecommunications, wireless, radio, television, cable, satellite, terrestrial networks) currently in existence or which may be developed in the future.    

9.4 Thesis Design and Layout 

9.4.1 The language of the thesis shall normally be either English or Irish. Where it is proposed that the thesis will be in another language, the Principal Supervisor must seek the approval of the Graduate Research Studies Board - providing details of the rationale – ideally at initial registration or prior to the student’s first annual progress review.  

9.4.2 A thesis should not be excessively long. The maximum limit for a doctoral thesis is 90,000 words of text, including bibliography and notes and, for a Master's thesis, is 45,000 words of text, including bibliography and notes. In the case of scientific and technological theses, the amount of text may be less. Because of this variation from subject to subject, the advice of the supervisor should be sought at an early stage in the preparation of the thesis. For professional doctorates, the acceptable word length should fall between the parameters of a Master’s thesis and a doctoral thesis, and is a matter for discussion between the supervisor and the student. 

9.4.3 The use of external professional individuals or organisations for proof-reading or copy-editing of theses on a paid basis is not permitted. 

9.4.4 The thesis shall: 

• (a) Be bound within boards of sufficient rigidity to support the work when it is standing upon a shelf. The colour of the boards shall be University blue (Pantone Ref: 289); 
• (b) Have the following information on the front (board) cover:
  • (i) the title of the thesis in at least 24pt (8 mm) type;
  • (ii) the name of the candidate;
  • (iii) the award for which the thesis is submitted e.g. MA, MBS, LLM, MSc, MEng, MPhil, EdD, DProfElite, DPsych, DBA, DMusPerf, PhD; and
  • (iv) the year of submission, i.e. the calendar year in which the Faculty Awards Board approves the award.
  • (v) Where the format of the thesis includes a creative or performance piece, the assessed practice must be recorded in an appropriate digital format as a permanent record and be appended to the thesis. 

The subject area must not be stated; the reference should be to, for example, ‘PhD’, not ‘PhD in xxxx’. 

• (c) Have the following information on the spine (board) cover:

The same information (excluding the title of the thesis) shall be printed in the same order in at least 24 pt (8 mm) type along the spine of the cover in such a way as to be easily legible when the thesis is lying flat with its front cover uppermost. All lettering on the cover and the spine shall be gold in colour and clear of any graphic design.

• (d) The thesis must contain a title page with the following information:
  • (i) the full title of the thesis, and subtitle, if any, the name of the candidate and his/her qualifications;
  • (ii) the award for which the work is submitted;
  • (iii) the name of the University, the supervisor(s) and of the School with which the candidate is registered;
  • (iv)  the name and affiliation of external supervisors (if any);
  • (v) the month and year of submission (relevant to softbound thesis submission at examination stage and then updated for final hardbound thesis submission); and
  • (vi)  the total number of volumes and the number of the particular volume, if there is more than one volume. 

• (e) Declaration Page:

The thesis must have a page, bound into the thesis immediately following the title page, containing the following declaration, signed by the candidate: 

I hereby certify that this material, which I now submit for assessment on the programme of study leading to the award of ........................... (insert title of degree for which registered) is entirely my own work, and that I have exercised reasonable care to ensure that the work is original, and does not to the best of my knowledge breach any law of copyright, and has not been taken from the work of others save and to the extent that such work has been cited and acknowledged within the text of my work. 

Signed:                          (Candidate) ID No.:                        Date:                 

OR 

Dearbhaím leis seo gurb é mo shaothar féin amháin an t-ábhar seo atá á leagan isteach agam i gcomhair measúnaithe ar an gclár staidéir le haghaidh na dámhachtana .............. (cuir isteach teideal na céime ar a bhfuil tú cláraithe), agus go bhfuil gach cúram réasúnach glactha agam a dheimhniú, ar feadh m’eolais, gur saothar bunaidh é seo nach sáraíonn aon dlí cóipchirt, agus nár baineadh as saothar aon duine eile é ach amháin agus a mhéid go luaitear agus go n-aithnítear an saothar sin laistigh de théacs mo shaothairse. 

Sínithe:                     (Iarrthóir) Uimhir Aitheantais:              Dáta:              _                

• (f) Thesis Formatting 
  • (i) The content must be printed, typewritten or otherwise reproduced on good-quality (100gsm minimum) white A4-sized paper (210mm x 297mm), with a minimum font size of 11, doubly or one-and-a-half spaced, with a binding edge margin of not less than 35mm and all other margins not less than 20mm.
  • (ii) Double-sided printing is recommended for the body of the thesis, but the title page, abstract, declaration and pages including any figures likely to show through the paper should be single-sided.
  • (iii) Pages must be numbered consecutively throughout the text, including those pages incorporating photographs or diagrams which are included as whole pages, and papers submitted in the PhD by Publication format.
  • (iv) Where the thesis consists of more than one volume, the pagination should indicate the Arabic number of the volume as well as the page number referring to the volume. Both volumes should include the title page, declaration and table of contents. Table of contents should reference the complete work in both volumes. 
  • (v) Page numbers should be located centrally at the bottom of the page and about 10 mm above the edge of the page.  

• (g) Thesis Layout including Table of Contents, Lists, Abstract, Photos/Diagrams, Footnotes
  • (i) It should include a table of contents listing chapters, sections, and appendices. This should be printed or typed in single spacing and include right-justified page numbers. Lists of abbreviations, tables, and figures should immediately follow the table of contents, prior to the abstract. Any abbreviations, other than those in normal use must be included in this explanatory list.
  • (ii) Appendices should be named alphabetically, and each appendix paginated consecutively but separately from the main text and from the others.
  • (iii)The thesis should include an abstract of not more than 300 words. The abstract should be printed or typed in single spacing and should indicate the author and the title of the thesis in the form of a heading.
  • (iv) Photographs and/or diagrams must be of high quality and appropriately indexed, each accompanied by an explanatory legend. They should also be centrally justified as much as possible and only positioned otherwise if essential to the work. 
  • (v) Where footnotes and indented quotations are used, these may be in single spacing.

The purpose of this section is not only to enunciate procedures for the appointment of examiners but also to set out what students can reasonably expect from the University regarding the examination of their work. The Graduate Research Studies Board is responsible for approving the appointment of both Internal and External Examiners. 

Each candidate for a higher degree by research will be examined by at least one Internal Examiner and at least one External Examiner. 

In line with the University’s policy and stated commitment to best practice in equality issues, Heads of School must ensure, in so far as possible, a gender mix in the appointment of examiners to the examining team for research awards. Where necessary, gender mix may be attained for the viva voce examination in the appointment of the Independent Chairperson.  

10.1 Selection and Nomination of Internal Examiners 

The regulations and guidelines informing the appointment of Internal Examiners shall be, to all intents and purposes and, in as far as is possible, the same as the regulations and guidelines for appointment of External Examiners as set out below. However, unlike the External Examiner, it will be sufficient for the Internal Examiner to have a broad rather than specific familiarity with the area of research.  

The Internal Examiner should normally be a member of academic staff, emeritus professor, retired DCU academic, senior researcher, or adjunct faculty member of the University and either hold a doctoral qualification or be of the grade of Professor or Full Professor. The Internal Examiner must be independent  of  the  research,  the  student  and  the  other  examiner(s)  and  not  be conflicted in any way in terms of his/her relationship to the supervisor. While it is not expected that the Internal Examiner will necessarily be completely professionally independent of the supervisor, e.g. in terms of other current or former collaborations unrelated to the work under examination, it is expected that the Internal Examiner's relationship to the supervisor will be such that no conflicts due to personal relationships or constraints due to professional or other dependencies which could be deemed to impair the examiner's independence in reaching a decision on the examined work. Cases where the supervisor is line manager of a staff member on short term contract, or within their probationary period, would, for example, preclude their appointment as an examiner for a given student.

The Internal Examiner may not be a member of the candidate’s supervisory panel, but should be experienced in supervising research students (such as having supervised 3 candidates from early stage through the confirmation/transfer stage and/or has completed all elements of professional development for examiners (course and where applicable exam shadowing with reflection). Newly appointed staff who are being nominated as Internal Examiners will normally be expected to complete all elements of professional development for examiners (course and where applicable exam shadowing) as set out above. All nominations of Internal Examiners are submitted for approval to the Graduate Research Studies Board.  

In the case of nominees for the role of Internal Examiner who are retired, evidence of relevant research activity within the previous four years will normally be expected. 

10.2 Selection and Nomination of External Examiners 

10.2.1    For research awards, External Examiners are appointed for specific candidates. External Examiners for research students should not be appointed more than twice in a four-year period. Appointments may be made irrespective of External Examiners’ duties with regard to taught programmes. No distinction should be made, for the purposes of appointing External Examiners, between Master’s and doctoral students. 

10.2.2    In no circumstances should the student be involved in any aspect of the selection of the External Examiner.

10.2.3    If the candidate is a member of staff of the University, two External Examiners are appointed to add an additional layer of independent assurance to the process. Where the candidate holds, or within a period of five years prior to the notification of intention to submit has held, a part-time or short-term contract with the University, the Head of School (or Executive Dean of Faculty where the Head of School is the supervisor) will be requested to determine whether or not he/she falls into the category of candidate for whom two External Examiners are required. 

10.2.4    In no circumstances may a staff member from DCU act as an External Examiner to a linked college, or vice versa, nor may a staff member of a linked college act as an External Examiner in another linked college. A staff member from Dundalk Institute of Technology may not be appointed as an external examiner for a DCU registered research student nor vice versa. 

10.2.5    No individual external to the university who has acted as supervisor to a student, or has been involved with the progress of the candidate's research, may act as External Examiner for the student following the submission of the thesis. 

10.2.6  Reciprocal examining arrangements between the University and other colleges/institutions in the same subject area should be avoided, as should disproportionate dependence on any specific School or Department in a given institution. Typically, a year should elapse between appointments involving the same Schools/Departments. 

10.2.7    The External Examiner(s) should be contacted informally by the supervisor to ascertain availability and willingness to undertake the role within the timescale envisaged. 

10.2.8   All nominations of External Examiners are submitted for approval to the Graduate Research Studies Board by means of the notification of intention to submit thesis for examination form, which includes an outline curriculum vitae for completion. Approved appointments are valid for a period of 12 months. 

10.2.9    External Examiners should normally have the following qualities and competencies:

• recognised expertise in the area which is the subject matter of the thesis being examined;
• experience in supervising research students to completion at the level of the award being sought and in the examination process of such students at the level of the award being sought; and
• formal academic qualification and/or professional qualification which is recognised within the particular discipline as forming a suitable background to allow the individual to act in the role of External Examiner. 

In the case of nominees for the role of External Examiner who are retired, evidence of relevant research activity within the previous four years will normally be expected. 

10.2.10  It is imperative, for quality assurance purposes, that the External Examiner is independent of the University, of the supervisor, of its Internal Examiners and of the candidate presenting him/herself for examination. Therefore the DCU Conflict of Interest Policy and Guidelines should be adhered to in relation to any appointment.

In particular, it must be ensured that all External Examiners should: 

• not have been in the employ of the University (in any capacity) in the five years prior to appointment;
• not  have  been  a  student  of  the  University  in  the  five  years  prior  to appointment;
• not be a beneficiary of any bursary or remuneration from the University (other than from the post of External Examiner, membership of an Accreditation Board, quality review panel or recruitment/promotions panel;
• not have advised the student on the work underpinning the preparation of his/her thesis;
• not have published with any of the supervisors in the previous five years;
• have no close personal relationship with the candidate, supervisor(s) or other examiner(s) such that, in the opinion of the Head of School, there is a risk that the Conflict of Interest Policy and Guidelines might be breached; and
• have no professional relationship with the candidate, supervisor(s) or other examiner(s) such that, in the opinion of the Head of School, there is a risk that the Conflict of Interest Policy and Guidelines might be breached.   

10.3 Appointment and Examination Procedures 

10.3.1    Candidates for research degrees are required to notify their supervisor initially of their intention to submit a thesis for examination, or, where relevant in the case of a creative or performance practice piece, of their intention to deliver a live performance for examination, using the appropriate form. They must give at least three months’ notice and provide a typed 300-word abstract of their work. 

10.3.2    On receipt of this notice of intention to submit a thesis, the supervisor is required to consult with the relevant Head(s) of School on the selection and nomination of appropriate Internal and External Examiners. The Head of School is responsible for ensuring the nomination is in line with the regulations, and appoints an Independent Chairperson. The supervisor is responsible for making initial contact with the proposed External Examiner. 

10.3.3    Following completion of the process of consultation referred to above, the supervisor is required to submit the completed form to the Registry within two weeks of initial receipt from the candidate. Completed forms will be submitted to the next scheduled meeting of the Graduate Research Studies Board. 

10.3.4    Following approval by the Graduate Research Studies Board of the appointment of the Examiners nominated and noting the Independent Chairperson, the Registry will issue a formal written invitation to the person(s) nominated to act as External Examiner(s) and, in addition, will provide a copy of the abstract of the work to be examined. 

10.3.5    Candidates are required to submit soft-bound copies of the thesis to the Registry as outlined in 9.2.1 above. The agreement of their principal or joint principal supervisors, or Head of School, to submit the thesis should be obtained prior to such submission (see 8.3 above). 

10.3.6    Following receipt of these copies, the Registry will immediately forward a copy to each Examiner together with the web link to the relevant Examiners’ Report Form and the Academic Regulations. Examiners are normally expected to carry out their duties within two months of receipt of the thesis to avoid hardship to the candidate. The Registry and the candidate's supervisor(s) should be notified immediately if there is any difficulty in adhering to this time requirement. 

10.3.7    In the case of a thesis submitted for the award of a PhD or Professional Doctorate, the viva voce examination will be supervised by an Independent Chairperson appointed by the Head of School in consultation with the candidate’s supervisor. It will be the duty of the supervisor to liaise with the Examiners and Independent Chairperson regarding arrangements for the viva voce examination. Such arrangements should be finalised as soon as possible after receipt of the thesis by the Examiners and notified in writing to the candidate. The supervisor will also notify the examiners of the contact details of the Independent Chairperson and advise them that all further communication about the examination should go directly, and only, to the Chairperson. The candidate will be advised of the composition of the Board for the viva voce examination. However, the candidate is precluded from making any contact with the External Examiner prior to the viva voce examination. 

10.3.8    In the case of a thesis submitted for the award of a Master’s degree, a viva voce is not normally required but may be requested by the examiners, 

10.3.9    Examiners' Reports and Recommendations will be referred to the next meeting of the relevant Faculty Awards Board for Research degrees (see Section 12 for details).

11.1 Internal and External Examiners 

11.1.1 Each candidate for a higher degree by research will be examined by at least one Internal Examiner and at least one External Examiner (see Section 10 regarding appointment regulations and procedures). 

11.1.2 The thesis will be referred by the Registry to the Examiners, who cannot accept it directly from the candidate or the supervisor. 

11.1.3 Examiners are normally expected to carry out their duties within two months of receipt of the thesis. Examiners’ draft written reports on the thesis should be made available to the Independent Chairperson of the viva at least one week prior to the viva voce examination. Such draft reports can be modified by the examiners on the day of the examination in light of insight afforded by the examination.  

11.2 Examination of the Thesis 

11.2.1 Examiners should assess a Master's thesis in the light of the following criteria: 

• the thesis should show evidence of independent thought and work by the candidate;
• the investigation or critical study should be scholarly;
• the candidate should understand the significance of the work; and
• the thesis and abstract should be presented in grammatically-correct English or Irish or, exceptionally, in another language, and should be readable and succinct. 

11.2.2 Examiners should assess a doctoral thesis in the light of the following criteria:

• the thesis should contain original, independent work that is rigorous, weighty and significant;
• the thesis should represent a significant contribution to knowledge of the subject through the discovery of new facts and/or the exercise of independent critical powers;
• the thesis should demonstrate the candidate's ability to undertake further research;
• the thesis and abstract should be presented in grammatically correct English or Irish or, exceptionally, in another language, and should be readable and succinct;
• if the candidate's research is part of a collaborative group project, the thesis should  indicate  clearly  the  candidate's  contribution  and  the  extent  of  the collaboration; and
• in the viva voce examination, the candidate should demonstrate that the thesis presented is his/her own work, and that he/she has an adequate understanding of the research topic and of the broader field of knowledge to which the research belongs. 

11.3 Viva Voce Examination 

11.3.1   The viva voce proceedings shall be managed by an Independent Chairperson who is appointed by the relevant Head of School in consultation with the candidate's supervisor. A Chairperson should be experienced in doctoral supervision and/or have attended formal training provided by the University. The Chairperson is expected to steer the examination process through to a conclusion. In very exceptional cases where the examination outcome is not straightforward, the Chairperson’s involvement may extend to engagement with the Head of School, Associate Dean for Research, Faculty Award Board for Research Degrees, Graduate Research Studies Board or the Dean of Graduate Studies. The Chairperson does not have to be from the School in which the student is registered. 

11.3.2    Candidates must not contact their examiners and vice versa, while in examination; any communication should be through the supervisor(s) to the Independent Chairperson. 

11.3.3   The viva voce examination conducted in private, should be held at Dublin City University (any academic campus) unless prior approval has been obtained from the Graduate Research Studies Board to hold it elsewhere. 

11.3.4  External and Internal Examiners may meet in advance of a viva voce examination, if any of the examiners desires, without a candidate's academic supervisor and/or the Independent Chairperson of the examination being present. 

11.3.5    The viva voce examination shall be carried out jointly by the External and Internal Examiners in a private session. Audio/video recording of the viva voce examination will not be permitted. The candidate's supervisor may be present at the viva voce examination. However, the candidate must be given the option of stating to the Independent Chairperson, not later than ten days prior to the examination, that he/she would prefer the supervisor not to be present. If this is indicated, then the supervisor should not be present. The supervisor, where present, is not permitted to participate in the examination. He/she should provide clarification of any matters only if and when requested by the examiners or the Independent Chairperson. The supervisor does not participate in the final decision and should leave the meeting while the deliberations leading to this decision are taking place, unless asked by the Chairperson to remain.   

11.4 Examiners’ Reports and Recommendations 

11.4.1    Following the viva voce examination, the examiners should complete the form relating to the examination of the thesis. Reports should incorporate a commentary on the work presented for examination as well as detailing any  corrections to be made. Where the Examiners recommend a revision and resubmission of the thesis, they should provide the candidate with a clear written statement of the changes required, and should also include this with their reports. 

11.4.2    If an examiner wishes to change the written report on the thesis after the viva voce, then this should be done at the end of the examination or, at the latest, within one week of the examination (in the latter case, the report should be sent to the Independent Chairperson). 

11.4.3    The Chairperson is responsible for sending the examination report to the Registry (as outlined in 11.5.11), and for sending the final examination report to the Student and the Principal Supervisor. 

11.4.4    In the case of a Master's candidate where, normally, no viva voce examination is required, the Internal Examiner is responsible for providing details of any corrections to the Student and Principal Supervisor and for sending the completed reports to the Registry, and informing the student and Principal Supervisor of the recommendation. The Internal Examiner is responsible for sending the final examination report to the Student and the Principal Supervisor. 

11.4.5    Examiners should give clear grounds for their recommendation, particularly if it is not clear-cut and favourable, and indicate a timeframe for corrections or revisions. The final outcome of the examination process should be reported as one of the following recommendations: 

1. that the degree sought be awarded;
2. that the degree sought be conditionally awarded subject to clearly specified textual emendations;
3. that the degree sought be conditionally awarded subject to clearly specified revisions to content;
4. that no degree be awarded, but that the candidate be allowed to submit a revised thesis, normally within a year;
5. that, where a doctoral award is sought, a Master's degree be awarded instead
6. that no degree be awarded as the candidate is unlikely to reach the standard for a research award; or
7. that, where a Master's  degree  was  sought,  the  candidate  be  advised  and permitted to withdraw the thesis for revision and resubmission at a later date for the award of a doctorate, subject to the following conditions: The candidate, prior to such resubmission for the doctoral award, must have been a registered full-time graduate research student for at least twenty-four months (or pro rata for a part-time registered postgraduate student). The re-submitted thesis shall be examined in accordance with the regulations for examination of theses presented for a doctoral award and, in an exception to regulation 11.4.7, by a different 35  External Examiner, to be appointed by Graduate Research Studies Board. 

11.4.6    Where a thesis has to be corrected or revised, the revisions should be carried out to the satisfaction of the Internal Examiner and/or the External Examiner(s), as agreed by the examiners. If multiple revisions are required and these revisions are not deemed to have met the recommendations outlined during the examination, then, the Internal Examiner and External Examiner(s) can submit alternative recommendations (as per 11.4.5 (iv-vi)). As the supervisor does not participate in the examination process, he/she should not sign off on revised theses. Such signing off is the sole responsibility of the examiners. 

11.4.7    Where no award but a resubmission is recommended, normally the same examiners assess the new thesis and a full examination (including viva voce for doctoral candidates) is undertaken again. In such cases, the period for revision of the thesis and/or presentation for re-examination shall normally be not more than one year from the date when the student is informed of the recommendation. This is the date of the viva voce or, where no viva voce is held (such as in the case of a research master’s), the date when the Internal Examiner communicates the recommendation to the student. 

11.4.8    Where a Master’s degree is to be awarded instead of the doctorate sought, a reformatted thesis must be provided, revised to the satisfaction of the Internal Examiner and/or the External Examiner(s) as may be determined by the examiners.  

11.4.9    Following incorporation of revisions, the thesis should be reviewed only to establish the extent to which the Examiners’ recommendations have been met.  There should be no further review of the thesis on other grounds. Examiners should approve corrections within six weeks of getting the revised thesis.   

11.5 Remit of the Independent Chairperson 

11.5.1   The Chairperson’s role is to manage the viva voce examination, ensuring that the candidate is treated fairly, to provide guidance on the University’s academic regulations and practices and to communicate the outcome of the examination to the student following the viva voce examination. Where applicable, details of any corrections provided by the examiners, will be communicated by the Chairperson to the Student and Principal Supervisor following the viva voce examination. The Chairperson will make sure that all the required documentation  is  completed  and  will communicate  the  outcome  to  the  appropriate parties. 

11.5.2    The  Chairperson  should  be  drawn  from  a  pool  of  academic  staff  with experience   of   doctoral   supervision and/or have attended formal training provided by the University.   He/she   shall   be   unconnected   with   the programme of research carried out by the candidate under examination. It is 36  not allowable that the independent panel member act as the Chairperson. 

11.5.3   The Chairperson shall not have any input into, or participate in any way in, the assessment of the candidate; the assessment of the candidate remains the sole responsibility of the examiners. 

11.5.4   The Chairperson, prior to the viva voce examination and in consultation with the examiners, will determine the order of questions and the overall format of the examination. 

11.5.5   A candidate may be asked by the Chairperson to introduce his/her research briefly and summarise the main findings. 

11.5.6   The length of the viva voce examination may vary in accordance with different disciplinary practices, and it will also depend on the examiners’ requirements. As a guideline, it should normally be in the range one-and-a-half hours to three hours. 

11.5.7    At the end of the viva voce examination, the candidate and the supervisor, if present, will be asked to leave the room while the examiners deliberate on the outcome (unless the supervisor is asked by the Chairperson to remain). They will normally be requested to return after the decision has been made in order to be informed of it by the examiners. 

11.5.8 With reference to these regulations, and in consultation with the examiners, the Chairperson will clarify the timeframes for submission of corrections, if any, and sign-off by the relevant examiner(s). 

11.5.9  The  Independent  Chairperson  ensures  that  a  corrected  or  revised  thesis  is  sent  to  the appropriate examiner(s) for review and final sign-off. 

11.5.10   In cases where no award but a resubmission is recommended, the Chairperson informs the examiners, supervisor(s) and candidate of regulations 11.4.5 and 11.4.7 regarding examination of a resubmitted thesis. 

11.5.11  The Chairperson is responsible for ensuring that the examination form, which includes the examiners’ reports on the thesis and on the viva voce examination, is correctly filled out. Following the Viva Voce a copy of the examination report must be forwarded to Registry for the purpose of updating records and safekeeping. Following validation of corrections by the relevant Examiners, the corresponding section of the examination report must be forwarded to Registry by the Independent Chairperson. If a resubmission, or no award, is being recommended, then a revised thesis is not expected at this time, and the forms are to be returned to Registry without delay, following the viva voce. The Chairperson is responsible for sending the final complete examination report to the Registry, the Student and the Principal Supervisor.     

11.6 Procedure after Examination 

11.6.1   The Registry will refer the examiners' reports to the appropriate Faculty Awards Board for Research Degrees for consideration at its next meeting. Thereafter, a consolidated  report  listing  the  names  of  candidates  recommended  for  a  higher degree is presented to Academic Council for approval. A reference will also be included summarising all other outcomes and the number of candidates involved. 

11.6.2    All examination results and recommendations are subject to final approval and confirmation by Academic Council. Following the meeting of Academic Council, successful candidates for higher degrees shall be issued with a postgraduate research transcript by the Registry.  This will include details of their research thesis, supervisors and any graduate training elements completed in DCU. As noted in Section 8.6.1, communication will be issued by Registry to any unsuccessful candidates for higher degrees following the meeting of FABRD. This will provide the student with the required time to consider the appeals process, if they feel it is applicable to them (Section 13).  

11.6.3   A candidate cannot appeal the outcome of the examination on the basis of the examiners’ judgment. A candidate does, however, have the right to appeal the outcome on the grounds of process and procedure, as detailed in section 13. 

11.6.4 In the event that, subsequent to an award being made, plagiarism or academic fraud related to a research award thesis is proven, Academic Council may rescind the approval of a research award.

12.1 Establishment of Faculty Awards Boards for Research Degrees 

12.1.1   In each Faculty, there shall be constituted a Board for Research degrees chaired by the Dean of the Faculty or his/her nominee (who will normally be the Associate Dean for Research). 

12.1.2   The membership of each Board shall be drawn from the academic staff of the Faculty together with relevant academic staff of other Faculties who have been involved in cross-disciplinary research projects. Supervisors of candidates who have been examined, and Internal Examiners of same, must attend. In exceptional cases, where a supervisor or Internal Examiner cannot attend, a suitable nominee who has been briefed on the examination must attend. 

12.2 Scheduling of Faculty Awards Boards for Research Degrees 

12.2.1  There will be two officially-scheduled meetings per calendar year of each of the Faculty Awards Boards for Research Degrees, one in Spring and one in Autumn. The exact dates will be indicated in the Academic Calendar.  

12.2.2  The convening of a meeting of the Faculty Awards Board for Research Degrees shall be notified to academic staff by the Registry following consultation with the relevant Dean/Associate Dean. 

12.3 Remit of Faculty Awards Board for Research Degrees 

12.3.1 The remit of the FABRD is to:

• Consider and approve (or otherwise where necessary) examiners' reports and their recommendations in respect of candidates presenting for Research Master's and Doctoral Degrees. 

12.3.2   Processing of examiners’ reports and their recommendations: 

• The Board will be required to ensure that the examination process for each candidate has been carried out in accordance with these Academic Regulations.
• The Board will be required to draw the attention of the Graduate Research Studies Board to individual comments by examiners if such comments are deemed to provide useful feedback to the University.
• The Board will be required to specifically consider issues arising from a negative recommendation by an examiner, and recommend an appropriate course of action to the Graduate Research Studies Board and Academic Council for their consideration. The subsequent decision of Academic Council in respect of a recommendation submitted by the relevant Faculty Awards Board for Research Degrees will be communicated in writing by the Registry to the research student concerned. 

12.4 Documentation for Meetings 

12.4.1   Examiners’  reports  on  candidates  for  research  degrees  will  be  provided  by  the Registry and will be available to the Chair for consultation before the meeting. A copy of each thesis examined will be available at the Board.    

Appeals can be submitted in respect of negative recommendations regarding progression, decisions not to confirm or transfer a student to the PhD register, and the outcome of an examination. Transfer/confirmation recommendations are approved at GRSB and the opportunity to appeal follows notification of the decision of the GRSB Board. Examination recommendations are approved at the relevant FABRD meeting and the opportunity to appeal follows notification of the decision of the relevant FABRD Boards or the notification of the negative recommendation to the candidate. In respect of a negative progression recommendation, the date of decision is taken as the date when the completed review form is submitted to Registry. 

13.1 Appeals submission 

13.1.1 Appeals must be submitted, using the appropriate form and with supporting written documentation, to the Secretary of the Graduate Research Studies Board. 

13.1.2 Appeals must be submitted by the next deadline for consideration by a meeting of the Standing Committee, following notification of approval of the relevant decision. Dates are published in the Academic Calendar, and late appeals are not considered.   

13.2 The GRSB Appeals Standing Committee 

13.2.1 GRSB will establish a Standing Committee to consider appeals. The term of the Standing Committee is 3 years, but replacement members can be appointed by the GRSB, should that be required within this timeframe. 

13.2.2  The Standing Committee is normally chaired by the Chair of GRSB. The Secretary of GRSB acts as Secretary to the Standing Committee, and attends in a non-voting capacity. 

13.2.3 Membership of the Standing Committee is no fewer than 4, but can be up to 8, and includes a mix of genders and Faculties and a student representative. Up to 3 members of the Standing Committee may be drawn from outside GRSB, from a pool of Emeritus professors, and other colleagues very experienced in research student supervision and examination. 

13.2.4  No member of the Standing Committee can consider a case where he/she has a conflict of interest or prior significant involvement. The Dean of Graduate Studies can appoint a temporary member if the total membership falls below 4, or gender or Faculty mix is not achieved because of such circumstances. Where the Dean of Graduate Studies has a conflict of interest or prior involvement in a particular case, the Standing Committee is chaired by an independent Associate Dean for Research. 

13.2.5 Decisions of the Standing Committee are subject to approval by the Graduate Research Studies Board, are then final and binding, and are submitted for noting at Academic Council.  

13.3 Grounds for Appeal 

13.3.1 A student must make explicit the grounds upon which he/she is appealing against a decision of a supervisory panel or examiners.   

13.3.2 An appeal may not be based on disagreement with the academic judgement of the examiners or supervisory panel.  

13.3.3 An appeal is considered only on the basis of one of the following: 

• an alleged failure to adhere to the regulations of the University or an argument as to insufficiency of regulations which had a bearing on the case; 
• documented circumstances affecting the student’s performance which the examiners/supervisory panel were not aware of which the student was unable or, for valid reasons, unwilling to divulge before a decision was reached and which would have made a real and substantial difference to the decision being appealed. Extenuating circumstances are unforeseen circumstances (e.g. illness, bereavement), outside the control of the student, that temporarily prevented the student from pursuing their research or from performing at the level that might reasonably have been expected of them; 
• a case that sufficient weight was not given to documented extenuating circumstances notified prior to the decision being reached; or
• evidence of a material administrative error or a material irregularity in how the examination/review was assessed which has made a real and substantial difference to the supervisory panel’s or examiner’s decision.

13.3.4 Appeals may not be submitted on the basis of allegations of inadequacies in supervision; complaints of that nature, not resolved (as per regulation 7.16) during the period of study and before the submission of the thesis/confirmation/ transfer report or annual review will not be taken as grounds for appeal. 

13.4 Outcome of an Appeal  

Successful appeals will not result in a new academic decision, as the Standing Committee does not re-examine student work. However, candidates in respect of whom an appeal is upheld may be awarded further opportunities to have work considered, or some other remedy applied as appropriate. 

13.5 Graduate Training Elements Appeals 

Appeals arising from a decision of the GTE Award Board should be submitted to the Examination Appeals Board in accordance with the University’s Examination Appeals procedures.  A student may appeal against a decision of the GTE Award Board on the following grounds only:

1. The examinations were not conducted in accordance with the current regulations as approved by Academic Council. 
2. There was a material administrative error or a material irregularity in assessment procedures which have made a real and substantial difference to his/her result.

A)  The University may award the following Higher Doctorates in accordance with the regulations:  

• (i) Doctor of Letters (DLitt)
• (ii) Doctor of Laws (LLD)                         
• (iii) Doctor of Science (DSc) 
• (iv) Doctor of Engineering (DEng)   

B)   Higher doctorates – the highest qualification awarded by the University – are awarded by the University in recognition of published work and/or other material of high distinction resulting from research, which makes a substantial, sustained and original contribution to investigation, knowledge and/or scholarship, and has established the candidate’s authoritative standing in his or her subject. They are awarded to scholars who have, over a sustained period, published a substantial body of ground-breaking and influential work in a field of specialisation and who have achieved outstanding distinction internationally in that field. The work published will usually consist of articles in leading international peer reviewed scholarly journals and/or books published by leading academic publishers and distributed internationally.   

1 Eligibility

Candidates for Higher Doctorates must be:

• graduates of the University, of at least twelve years standing from award of the degree of Master, or ten years from the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy;    or 
• if not graduates of the University, have been a member of the academic, research or academic related staff of the University for a period of at least eight years.  

2 Criteria

Each of the following should be satisfied: 

2.1 That the candidate must have published a substantial body of work, of the highest order of scholarship in the field in question, over a sustained period of time. 

2.2 That the published work must have added new knowledge of significance to the field in question. 

2.3 That the work is of international importance and that based on the published work, the scholar can be considered to have gained, or to merit, international distinction as an authority in the field. 

3 Application and Evaluation Process 

3.1 Applicants may wish to informally discuss their possible candidacy with the Executive Dean of the relevant Faculty (or nominee), the Dean of Graduate Studies or Head of School in their field of study. Any advice given at this stage will be given in good faith, but represents no commitment on behalf of the university as to the possible outcome of a prima facie application. 

3.2 Applicants are required to submit to the Executive Dean of the relevant Faculty via the Registry an application to obtain preliminary approval from the University to apply for a Higher Doctorate and to pay the appropriate fee. The purpose of this phase is to evaluate the prima facie case for the award.  

The submission shall be introduced by a statement which shall be in the region of 3,000 words and should detail the candidate’s research record, outlining clearly the research interests and achievements through reference to selected publications. There should be clear evidence that the selected publications are of international quality and have made an original, substantial and authoritative contribution to knowledge in the candidate’s field of study (e.g., discipline appropriate, authoritative impact metrics may be cited).  

A current Curriculum Vitae, including a full publication list must be submitted.  

A list of the candidate’s five most important publications and an explanation of why they represent the candidate’s most significant contribution to the field must also be submitted.  

Where the published work appears under the name of more than one author, the candidate must indicate as precisely as possible the extent of his/her contribution. As far as is reasonable and feasible, a candidate is required to obtain from co-authors confirmation in relation to the extent of his/her contribution to specific publications. The Lead Author of the paper should be clearly identified. The University reserves the right to consult any of the co-authors or collaborators concerning the statement. 

Candidates may submit additional material to support the case for prima facie eligibility.  

3.3 Each application for a higher doctorate shall be considered by a Review Group: a sub-committee of the relevant Faculty Research Award Board (FRAB). Chaired by the Dean, the other Review Group members shall be at professorial grade or Emeritus Professors, and number at least two. The members of the FRAB shall be appointed by the Dean in consultation with the Head of School in which the candidate’s field of study lies and the Chair of the FRAB.    

3.4 Guidelines for the Prima Facie Stage 

The reviewers for the prima facie stage will be charged to consider the list of published work presented by the applicant and to form a judgment as to whether prima facie the candidate should be considered eligible to enter for examination for the award of Higher Doctorate on published work. In forming a judgment, the reviewers will take account of the general criteria for the award of the degrees on published work. In addition, examiners will take account of the following: 

• (i) the period of time over which the candidate has published;
• (ii) the volume and quality of work published over the period;
• (iii) the academic standing of the applicant as evidenced by the curriculum vitae.  In the case of applications where the preponderance of the work consists of articles in scholarly journals, reviewers will consider: 
• (iv) the international standing and quality of the journals in which the articles have appeared;
• (v) the proportion of sole author and principal author articles the coherence of the body of research;
• (vi) the impact of the research as evidenced by the number of citations. (Applicants are encouraged to include evidence of this where appropriate). 

In evaluating book publications, the reviewers will be principally concerned with the nature and content of the book and its intrinsic quality in terms of academic scholarship. Other relevant considerations are the quality of the publication, in terms of academic publishing and the critical reception of the work. Applicants are therefore encouraged to include reviews of their book publications.  

3.5 The Review Group shall submit a report to Registry within three months of the application being received within the Faculty, stating whether there is a prima facie case for the Higher Doctorate being awarded. 

3.6 Should an application not be approved, the candidate will be notified, and may not apply for a Higher Doctorate at Dublin City University for a further three years. 

3.7 If the application is approved by the Review Group, the candidate will be advised that he/she may proceed to phase 2 of the process and will be invited to submit his/her work together with the prescribed fee. Candidates must submit their published work for examination within 12 months of notification of approval 

3.8 Candidates should confirm to Registry that they are going to pursue phase 2 of an application at least three months in advance of submitting for examination.        

4. Nomination of Assessors 

4.1 Once an application has been approved by the Review Group, the Dean of Faculty, in consultation with relevant colleagues, should nominate internal and external assessors. 

4.2 Normally one internal and two external assessors shall be nominated by the Dean of Faculty. In exceptional cases, where difficulty in securing agreement from assessors to act in this capacity is anticipated, up to two alternate assessors can be nominated. Gender balance should be taken into account in the appointment of assessors. The identity of the assessors shall not be revealed to the candidate. 

4.3 The nominated assessors must be approved by Graduate Research Studies Board in consultation with the Vice-President for Academic Affairs/Registrar. Should the minimum requirement of assessors not be approved, the Dean of Faculty must nominate a further assessor. 

5. Submission of Thesis 

5.1 The candidate shall submit three soft bound copies of their thesis for examination, as per thesis format guidelines. 

5.2 If approved, the candidate will submit one full hard bound thesis for the library archive, and one e-thesis as describes in the thesis format guidelines.

6. Assessment

6.1 The Higher Doctorate shall be awarded only to candidates who, in the opinion of the assessors, have demonstrated:

• (i) a contribution of originality and merit to their field of study; and 
• (ii) a sustained, consistent and substantial contribution to the advancement of knowledge over a number of years; and 
• (iii) authoritative standing in their field of study; 

6.2 Having considered the work, the assessors shall submit individual reports to the Dean of Faculty, copied to the Dean of Graduate Studies, with a recommendation that either:   

• (i) the appropriate Higher Doctorate be awarded

   or  

• (ii) that a Higher Doctorate not be awarded 

6.3 Where the assessors’ recommendations are in agreement, the Dean shall forward the report to the Registry to present the recommendation for approval at the next Faculty Awards Board for Research Degrees.  The recommendation will then be formally approved by Academic Council along with other research awards. 

6.4 Where the assessors’ recommendations differ, and only in cases where at least two of the assessors are in favour of awarding the Higher Doctorate, an appropriately qualified adjudicator, who may not be a member of staff of the University, shall be appointed by the Vice President for Academic Affairs/Registrar to review the submission. The identity of the adjudicator shall not be revealed to the candidate. The adjudicator shall be given access to the submission and the assessors’ reports and shall make a final recommendation. 

6.5 Where the assessors or adjudicator recommend that the Higher Doctorate not be awarded, the candidate shall be sent the assessors’ reports and those of the adjudicator (if applicable). 

6.6 Where assessors or adjudicator recommend that the Higher Doctorate not be awarded candidates may reapply after three years.

 7. Appeal 

7.1 Where assessors or adjudicators recommend that the Higher Doctorate not be awarded, a candidate shall have the normal right of appeal as set out in the University’s Regulations for Research Degrees wherein the candidate shall have the rights and responsibilities of a registered student on a research programme in making an appeal. Such appeals can relate only to grounds of process or procedure. 

8. Archive 

8.1 The University shall retain in the Library one hard bound copy of the full work submitted in support of a successful application.  A version (as outlined in 9.2, Thesis Format) will be made available as an e-thesis.  

9. Thesis Format 

9.1 Full Soft/Hard Bound Copy 

The submission shall be either soft or hard bound as outlined in the regulations depending on the phase of the process. The number of copies required is outlined in the regulations also depending on the phase of the process. 

The submission shall comprise the following items presented in the order given:

1.  Title page 
2. Contents list 
3. Synopsis 
4. Declaration 
5. Copyright statement 
6. Statement 
7. Copies of each of the publications in its published form.  

The hard bound copy should be bound within boards of sufficient rigidity to support the work when it is standing upon a shelf. The colour of the boards shall be University blue (Pantone Ref: 289). 

Have the following information on the front cover:

• the title of the thesis in at least 24pt (8 mm) type 
• the initials and name of the candidate  - the award for which the thesis is submitted e.g. DLitt, DSc etc.   
• the year of award, i.e. the calendar year in which the Faculty Awards Board approves the award.

The same information (excluding the title of the thesis) shall be printed in the same order in at least 24 pt (8 mm) type along the spine of the cover in such a way as to be easily legible when the thesis is lying flat with its front cover uppermost. 

All lettering on the cover and the spine shall be gold in colour and clear of any graphic design. 

Be printed, typewritten or otherwise reproduced on one side only of good-quality white A4-sized paper (210mm x 297mm). 

Contain a title page with the following information: 

• the full title of thesis, and subtitle, if any, and name and qualifications, if any, of the candidate
• the award for which the work is submitted 
• the name of the University and of the Faculty with which the candidate is registered
• the year of award, i.e. the calendar year in which the Faculty Awards Board approves the award.
• the total number of volumes and the number of the particular volume, if there is more than one volume. 

For all sections, with the exception of the publications, a minimum font size of 11 should be used, doubly or one-and-a-half spaced, with a left hand margin at the binding edge of not less than 40mm and all other margins not less than 20mm

Where footnotes and indented quotations are used, these may be in single  spacing. 

Have any abbreviations, other than those in normal use, accompanied by an   explanatory guide.

The contents list should list and reference all publications in numerical order.

Each publication should be separated by a coloured (blue) page.  The reference number and publication details should be printed on the separation page. 

Where the thesis consists of more than one volume, volume numbers should be indicated with Arabic numbers (e.g. (i), (ii) etc.)

Have a page, bound into the thesis immediately following the title page, containing the following declaration, signed by the candidate:  

I hereby certify that this material, which I now submit for assessment on the programme of study leading to the award of ........................... (insert title of degree for which registered) is my own work, and that I have exercised reasonable care to ensure that the work is original, and does not to the best of my knowledge breach any law of copyright, and has not been taken from the work of others save and to the extent that such work has been cited and acknowledged within the text of my work. I confirm that none of the published works contained within have previously been submitted for any other award.

Signed: ____________ (Candidate) ID No.: ___________ Date: _______        

9.2 E Copy 

The e copy of the thesis shall be a copy of the full version, excluding copies of the published works, but including a full list citing these, incorporating the digital object identifier (DOI) where possible.