Criteria for the Award of a Research Degree

Regulation 6.4 outlines the criteria for a Master’s degree by Research, including the expected abilities and qualities of the holders of the qualification.

Regulation 6.5 outlines the criteria for a Doctoral degree, including the expected abilities and qualities of the holders of the qualification.

Research Degree Submission Models

The Study Regulations for Research Degree Programmes regulation 6.2 and 6.3 (and guidelines provided by Student Administration and Systems) outlines the research degree submission models available at Queen's and the relevant presentation and formatting requirements for each Research Degree Programme.

A description of each research degree submission is provided below:

A Monograph Thesis submission is a unified document of several chapters, typically comprising introduction, methodology, research findings, and discussion. The student is the sole author of the full thesis. 

A Thesis with Publications submission is a cohesive document which integrates one or more research papers into the thesis structure. Students may include material which has been published or is in a format suitable for publication which was produced during registration on a research degree programme at the University. The publications can have multiple authors although it is expected that the student will normally be first author or have played a significant role in developing and writing the research.  This new submission option was launched in September 2024 and is available to all postgraduate research students at Queen’s. For more information, visit the Thesis with Publications Submission webpage.

A Creative Practice Portfolio submission will include original creative work, for example music, writing or design, presented in an appropriate form and accompanied by a critical analysis. The analysis will define research objectives, address theoretical contexts, and reflect on methodologies and creative processes.

A PhD by Published Works submission is a portfolio of original work containing several peer-reviewed publications related to a unified research theme or field, produced prior to registration at the University. 

Final Assessment Procedures

The final assessment of a Research Degree Programme comprises both the submission and an oral examination (viva voce or 'viva').  For Professional Doctorates and Integrated PhDs, the assessment will also have included the assessment of taught elements at earlier stages of the Research Degree Programme.

Regulation 6.6 outlines the procedure for the submission or a re-submission.

The Postgraduate Research Student Assessment Support Hub outlines the various progression milestones that students will complete as part of their study, leading to the final assessment (viva). The guidance provides summary information on these assessments to help students know what to expect, what is expected and where to access support if needed.

Appointment of Examiners

Regulation 6.7 outlines the criteria used in appointing examiners.  Examiners have an obligation of confidentiality regarding the submission and the examination.  Schools have a responsibility to ensure no conflict of interest exists between the student and the examiners which could be perceived to influence their judgement. Examiners who, following appointment, become aware of a potential conflict of interest should inform the School immediately. Two external examiners should be used in any instance where a student has held an employment contract with Queen’s during the course of their research degree, or in any other case where personal interest might be involved.  Individuals eligible for appointment as an internal examiner under regulation 6.7.5 may also act as a member of a differentiation or APR panel. 

Schools appoint the internal examiner and the independent convenor and nominate the external examiner(s), for approval by the Chair of the Education Committee (Quality and Standards) (or nominee).  The external examiner nomination process is managed via QSIS.

The nominated external examiner should meet the criteria for appointment as outlined in regulation 6.7.4. If the nominee does not meet the criteria, an alternative examiner should be sought. However, in exceptional circumstances, a concession to the regulations can be requested for an external examiner appointment. A brief statement of the research experience which qualifies the nominee to be the external examiner should be provided in the QSIS Nomination of Examiners form. This should include details of their previous experience of examining research degree students.  Additional text or an academic CV to support the request can also be emailed to qar@qub.ac.uk.

Nominations for External Examiners for Research Degree Programme students are processed by the Quality Assurance and Regulations Team on a fortnightly basis. Please submit nominations well in advance of the student's submission date, to allow for the necessary quality assurance checks, approval of nominations and issue of appointment letters and Panel documentation. QSIS nomination of examiner forms are required for students being examined on any Research Degree Programme e.g. PhD, MD, Professional Doctorate, Integrated PhD or MPhil.

A formal appointment letter is sent to the external examiner, by email, along with links to appropriate regulations and guidance.  The letter will also indicate a neutral point of contact within the School to whom the external examiner can raise any concerns prior to the completion of the Independent Report.  This ensures that the internal and external examiners have not been in contact before they have completed an independent assessment of the submission, and so assures the quality of the examination process.

If, following approval by the Chair of the Education Committee (Quality and Standards) (or nominee), an external examiner needs to be replaced, a new nomination must be processed on QSIS. The student should be informed that the external examiner has changed, as the original examiner is unavailable. Where this is the case for a resubmission, the new external examiner should be provided with the Joint Examiner Report from the original examination. The internal examiner should meet with the new external examiner in advance of them receiving the resubmission, to provide the context of the previous examination and the changes required for the resubmission.  As a new examination will take place, both examiners must be satisfied that the resubmission is of doctoral standard to make the award.

Roles and Responsibilities

The Head of School designates a member of staff to make the arrangements for the oral examination, in consultation with the student and the examiners.  This should not be the internal examiner, in order to assure the quality of the examination process.

Only one supervisor may attend the oral examination, with the agreement of the student, and may speak only with the examiners’ agreement.  The supervisor’s main role is to comment on any practical or administrative difficulties in the pursuit of the research raised by the student.

External Examiner

The external examiner is a specialist in the subject area of the submission and will take the lead in the examination.  

Internal Examiner

The internal examiner is a full examiner, and is expected to have sufficient knowledge and understanding of the topic to provide a judgement on the quality of the submission and to play a full part in the examination.

In any instance where an internal examiner is not appointed (see regulation 6.7.2), the Head of School appoints an independent member of the internal staff to co-ordinate the examination process.

Independent Convenor

A University Director of Research (or nominee from the University of equivalent experience, i.e. senior lecturer or above) is appointed as an independent convenor of the oral examination panel.  The independent convenor is in attendance to monitor the conduct of the examination, ensuring that the University's Study Regulations for Research Degree Programmes are adhered to.  They also provide a report and collate all the necessary paperwork after the viva has taken place.

The following guidelines outline the role of the independent convenor:

1. The convenor is responsible for ensuring that the oral is conducted in a fair manner, and must be present for the duration of the examination.  However, the convenor is not one of the examiners and will not participate in the examination of the student, nor is there a requirement to read the submission.
2. The convenor introduces those present at the oral examination, and ensures that all parties understand the procedures to be followed, and the expectations of each member.  The convenor offers assistance and facilitation where necessary.
3. The convenor is responsible for ensuring that the oral is of a reasonable duration.  Where the oral is longer than two hours, it is recommended that the student be offered a short intermission.  Where difficulties arise, the convenor will decide whether an adjournment is required.
4. The convenor intervenes if there is a danger of unfairness, bias or unprofessional behaviour.
5. Towards the end of the oral examination, the convenor asks the supervisor to withdraw so that there is an opportunity to say anything that the student would prefer to say without the presence of the supervisor.
6. At the end of the oral examination, the convenor asks the student to withdraw while the examiners deliberate.
7. If the examiners wish to advise the student of their decision, the convenor ensures that the student knows that this decision is provisional only.  The student must await a formal communication from Student Administration and Systems.
8. The convenor is required to submit a report on the standard template provided by Student Administration and Systems covering the procedural conduct of the examination.
9. The convenor should collate the paperwork (examiners reports and their own report) after the viva, for the School Office to present to the Chair of the School Postgraduate Research Committee (SPRC), or Head of School nominee, for signature.

The Preparatory Period Prior to the Oral Examination

In order to provide an opportunity for students to become familiar with the typical examination conditions, requirements and expectations of the oral examination, all postgraduate research students should be invited to experience a mock viva approximately two weeks before the student’s scheduled oral examination.  It is recommended that the principal supervisor meets with the student for approximately one hour to role-play the viva experience, taking on the role of the external examiner, and questioning the student about the submission and associated research areas, and then providing feedback to the student at the end of the session. The Graduate School provides additional information and student resources regarding preparing for the oral examination.

Guidelines for students on the submission process are provided by Student Administration and Systems, which is responsible for sending the submission to the examiners, along with the template examination reports.

Academic Offences

The research and the written submission must be the student’s own work.  An examiner who, in reading a submission, discovers evidence of plagiarism, fabrication of results or other research misconduct, should report the matter immediately to the Head of School.  Any allegation of plagiarism or duplication will be dealt with under the Procedures for Dealing with Academic Offences. Any other allegation of research misconduct will be dealt with under the Regulations Governing the Allegation and Investigation of Misconduct in Research.  The examination will not continue until this process is complete and may not continue at all if a substantive misconduct in research case is established.

Internal and External Examiner Preparation

Each examiner is required to complete an Independent Report on the submission before the oral examination, without consulting the other examiner.  Each examiner indicates in this preliminary report whether the submission provisionally satisfies the requirements for the research degree and makes an appropriate provisional decision subject to the outcome of the oral examination.

The internal examiner contacts the external examiner(s) a few days before the oral (once the Independent Reports have been completed) to discuss how the examination is to be handled.  This enables them to identify the major issues which will be raised in the examination and to decide whether the student needs to submit any additional material (e.g. raw data).  The internal examiner informs the supervisor at once if additional material is needed.  In any instance where an internal examiner is not appointed, the Head of School appoints an independent member of the internal staff to co-ordinate the examination process.

Examiners meet briefly before the oral examination starts, to exchange and discuss the Independent Reports.

The student may not communicate with the examiners about the submission before the examination.

The oral examination must take place without undue delay, normally within three months from the date the submission is sent to the examiners. If the appointed examiner(s) needs to be replaced due to circumstances beyond the School’s control, a new QSIS nomination of examiners form will need to be submitted for the replacement examiner(s). Once notified by the School, the Quality Assurance and Regulations Team will review the nomination(s) and if necessary, liaise with the appropriate Faculty Dean and Student Registry colleagues. Sufficient time should be allowed for the new examiner(s) to read the research degree submission and prepare the independent report in advance of the rescheduled examination.

For more information on QSIS processes for Schools, see QSIS Services for Staff.