Research Higher Degrees Policies and Procedures

SECTION 12: Responsibilities of the Candidate, Supervisor, Academic Organisational Unit and University

• Appendix A: Responsibilities of the Research Higher Degree Candidate
• Appendix B: Responsibilities of the Supervisor
• Appendix C: Responsibilities of the Academic Organisational Unit
• Appendix D: Responsibilities of the University
• Appendix E: Rules for Higher Degree Theses
• Appendix F: Conciliation and Arbitration Procedures relating to Supervised
• Appendix G: Higher Doctorates - Policies and Procedures

SECTION 13: Required Program of Structured Activities

13	13.1	A candidate commencing a research higher degree will satisfactorily complete within the first twelve months of candidature a required program of structured activities as specified in the AOU in which the candidate is enrolled.
	13.2	Under certain circumstances, the faculty may waive the requirement for successful completion of the required program of structured activities. The reasons for the waiving of the requirement shall be detailed in the University prescribed form for higher degree annual review
	13.3	The required program will be divided into two components - a core component and a specialist component. The core component will consist of a formal faculty based induction session which will introduce University-wide and faculty specific general information including all the general aspects relating to research higher degree candidature and information on the development of a successful research proposal.
	13.4	A specialist component may be prescribed for a candidate to provide additional preparation for research and may include any specialist or AOU specific components of the core component. The specialist component will be developed by the principal supervisor and the AOU in conjunction with the appropriate area to address specialist needs or enhance the prospect of successful candidature. Such a specialist program may include computer training, statistical data analysis and techniques, language skills acquisition, or writing skills training.
	13.5	The faculty will make special provision for part-time or external or cotutelle candidates for the completion of the required program of structured activities.

SECTION 14: Status, Duration and Extension of Candidature

14	14.1	A candidate may enrol on a full-time or a part-time basis.
	14.2	For the PhD or MD degrees the minimum and maximum duration of candidature for a full-time candidate commencing their candidature from 1 January 2001 will be two years and four years respectively, and for a part-time candidate commencing their candidature from 1 January 2001 will be three years and eight years respectively. For candidates who commenced their candidature prior to 1 January 2001, the maximum duration of candidature will be four and one half years (full-time) and nine years (part-time).
	14.3	Candidates for the MD degree will note that the thesis may not be submitted until:
		(a) at least five years have elapsed since the candidate qualified for the degrees of Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery or an equivalent degree; and
		(b) the candidate has spent at least five years following graduation substantially engaged in the practice and study of medicine or in scientific work relevant to medicine.
	14.4	The minimum and maximum duration of the candidature for a research masters degree shall be one year and two years respectively for a full-time candidate, and two years and four years respectively for a part-time candidate.
	14.5	The following extensions to candidature may be approved by the faculty upon the recommendation of the supervisor and AOU Head:
		Masters degrees: twelve months full-time (or twenty-four months part-time)
		Doctoral degrees: six months full-time (or twelve months part-time).
		Further extensions of up to six months may be approved by the faculty (on the recommendation of the supervisor and AOU Head) in exceptional circumstances and under specific conditions determined by the faculty.
	14.6	Where a candidate has exceeded their RTS entitlement under the Commonwealth Research Training Scheme an extension of candidature may be subject to the payment of fees as determined by the University in accordance with the Policy on Continuity of Study.

SECTION 15: Variations to Conditions of Candidature

15	15.1	Applications relating to any of the circumstances listed below will be made in writing by the candidate to the Faculty General Manager and must be accompanied by a recommendation from the supervisor. Applications will be considered in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Statute and Rules governing the degree. In case of disagreement or conflict between the candidate and the supervisor, the faculty will determine the appropriate course of action. The Faculty General Manager will notify the candidate in writing of the outcome of the application and any implications for the other conditions of candidature, including the liability for fees.
		(i)	Absences from the normal place of study for a period of more than nine weeks per year - Absences of less than nine weeks may be approved by the supervisor. In addition, scholarship holders must contact the Higher Degree Administration and Scholarships Office.
		(ii)	Intermission of candidature for reasons of illness or any other reasons preventing the candidate from carrying out the work for the degree Students who commenced their candidature prior to 1 January 2001 may apply for periods of intermission for up to 12 months at a time. Such students may apply for more than one period of intermission during the candidature. Students who commenced their candidature from 1 January 2001 may apply for periods of intermission from their candidature for up to a total of twelve months. Such students may apply for additional periods of intermission if there are exceptional circumstances which warrant further periods of intermission. In addition, scholarship holders seeking intermission must contact the Higher Degree Administration and Scholarships Office.
		(iii)	Transfer of status between full-time and part-time - Scholarship holders should be enrolled on a full-time basis. The Scholarships Committee may approve a request to study part-time if a student can provide sufficient evidence that there are exceptional circumstances which preclude full-time study.
		(iv)	Transfer of status from internal to external - In considering an application for transfer of status from internal to external, the faculty will ensure that the conditions specified in Clause 6.13 (viii) have been met.
		(v)	Significant amendment to research topic - Where an amendment to the research topic requires a change in supervision refer to Clause 15.3 of this policy.
		(vi)	Extension of period of candidature - Refer to Clause 14 of this policy. In addition, scholarship holders requiring an extension must contact the Higher Degree Administration and Scholarships Office.
		(vii)	Reduction of minimum total period of candidature - Applications for a reduction in the minimum total period of candidature will be made on the grounds of previous research experience and/or evidence of exceptional progress during candidature. Applications must be supported by written reports from the candidate's supervisor and the AOU Head and should not normally be made until the thesis is estimated to be within six months of completion.
		(viii)	Writing-up away from the University - Candidates other than external candidates will write and submit their thesis before leaving the University. However, a candidate may apply for 'writing-up away' status if the supervisor certifies that all experimental work has been completed, that the candidate no longer requires access to the University's resources (other than consultation with the supervisors), and the candidate has completed a satisfactory first draft of the thesis. The termination date of candidature will remain unchanged (unless the candidate has also applied to transfer status between full-time and part-time). If the candidate is unable to submit the thesis by that date he or she must apply for an extension as specified in Clause 15.1(vi) in this policy.
	15.2	Transfer from Masters to PhD candidature or from PhD to Masters candidature
		15.2.1	Applications relating to transfer of candidature will be made in writing by the candidate to the Faculty General Manager and must be accompanied by a recommendation from the supervisor and the AOU Head.
		15.2.2	The faculty shall consider the application and recommendation in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Statute and Rules governing the degree and, in the case of transfers from masters to PhD candidature, with any other requirements specified by the faculty or in University policies.
		15.2.3	An application to transfer from masters to PhD candidature supported by the supervisor and the AOU Head will make a sufficiently strong case for the upgrading of the candidature. In considering an application the faculty will require assurance that:
			(i)		the candidate has demonstrated a capacity to undertake work at the more advanced level, in the form of either:
					- draft chapters; or
					- evidence, in the form of written reports, of progress in fieldwork, research or data analysis; or
					- written seminar or conference papers, dealing with the substance of the thesis, that have been presented formally;
			(ii)		the nature of the proposed research topic is substantial enough to warrant the expansion of the research framework; and
			(iii)		the definition of the project is such that the candidate has a reasonable prospect of completing a doctoral thesis that will make a significant contribution to knowledge.
			A case for upgrading which simply asserts that the area is large enough to warrant an expanded scale of activity will not be considered. It will be necessary to demonstrate that the analytical framework has been considered and is appropriate.
		15.2.4	The Faculty General Manager will notify the applicant of the outcome of an application. Where the transfer has been approved the notification shall contain all the details specified in Clause 9.1 in this policy.
		15.2.5	Where the candidate is a scholarship holder, the Faculty General Manager will notify the Higher Degree Administration and Scholarships Office of the outcome of the application.
		15.2.6	Scholarship holders requiring an extension should consult the Higher Degree Administration and Scholarships Office.
	15.3	Temporary or Permanent Change of Supervisor
		15.3.1	In the event that a candidate's supervisor should be absent from the University for more than three months, the AOU Head will recommend the appointment of a temporary replacement supervisor.
		15.3.2	The AOU Head will, after consultation with the student, recommend the appointment of a permanent replacement supervisor in the event of:
			(a)		the supervisor leaving the University; or
			(b)		the nature of the candidate's research project changing to the extent that it would be more profitably supervised by a staff member other than the principal supervisor; or
			(c)		irreconcilable differences between the candidate and the supervisor requiring a change in supervision arrangements.
		15.3.3	The recommendation of the AOU Head will be considered by the faculty. The temporary or permanent replacement supervisor will be appointed by the faculty, and the Faculty General Manager will notify the candidate in writing of the change.

SECTION 16: Withdrawal from Candidature

16	16.1	A candidate who wishes to withdraw from candidature will discuss this with his or her supervisors and the AOU Head who should satisfy themselves that every attempt has been made to resolve any difficulties in the study environment which may have prompted the candidate to consider withdrawing from candidature.
	16.2	A candidate who decides to withdraw will notify the Executive Dean of the Faculty of this in writing, giving the reasons for and the effective date of the withdrawal. The Faculty General Manager will acknowledge the notification, confirm the date on which the withdrawal is effective and take any action necessary to suspend any scholarship.
	16.3	The withdrawal, including the following information, will be reported to the faculty for noting:
		- candidate's name and gender;
		- commencement date of candidature;
		- status of candidature;
		- the AOU and faculty;
		- supervisors;
		- effective date of withdrawal; and
		- reasons for withdrawal.
	16.4	A candidate who has withdrawn and who subsequently wishes to re-enrol will apply to the faculty for re-admission. The faculty will determine whether the candidate will be re-admitted and whether the period of candidature will be adjusted to take account of the previous candidature.

SECTION 17: Progress, Annual Review and Reports

17	17.1	It is the responsibility of the supervisors to monitor the performance of the candidate relative to the standard for the degree, and to ensure that inadequate progress or work below the standard generally expected is brought to the candidate's attention. Regular contact between the candidate and supervisors as outlined in the responsibilities of the candidate and supervisor should facilitate the early identification of problems and the provision of timely academic counselling.
	17.2	Where a supervisor perceives that it may become necessary to recommend that a candidature be terminated because of unsatisfactory progress, the supervisor must give the candidate a preliminary warning in writing to that effect, stating the reasons why the candidate's progress is considered to be unsatisfactory. The supervisor should inform the candidate's other supervisor(s) of the preliminary warning. Supervisors will be available to consult with candidates about ways of alleviating candidates' unsatisfactory progress.
	17.3	There will be an annual review of higher degree candidates to formally monitor progress. The review will involve:
		- the completion of the University prescribed form for higher degree annual review by the candidate and supervisors; and
		- the AOU Head (or nominee) interviewing the candidate and the supervisor separately and completing the University prescribed form for higher degree annual review.
	17.4	Written reports from the candidate and the supervisors are an important and formal means by which any problems concerning the candidature can be identified. The reports must be frank appraisals of progress by both the supervisors and the candidate. The reports provide the means by which the University assesses whether the candidature is progressing satisfactorily, and whether the candidature should continue.
	17.5	In addition to the completion of the University prescribed form for higher degree annual review, the candidate will submit written evidence of the progress of his or her work. This submission may take a variety of forms, as appropriate to the particular nature and duration of the candidature, and might include any of the following:
		- a literature review;
		- discussion of research methods, ideas investigated and / or work undertaken in the past year;
		- a draft outline of the structure of the thesis;
		- a written seminar paper;
		- a draft chapter.
	17.6	The submission of such written work is designed to promote more realistic assessments of progress and encourage candidates to continue writing throughout their candidature.
	17.7	Furthermore, to enhance the development of candidates' skills, each AOU will organise seminars, work-in-progress sessions, workshops etc, whereby candidates are able to make regular oral presentations to staff and their peers on the progress of their research work.

SECTION 18: Unsatisfactory Progress

18	18.1	A faculty will, upon receipt of the annual report and may at any other time, review the progress of a candidate and taking account of recommendations from the supervisor and the AOU may:
		(i)	if progress is satisfactory, allow the candidate to continue as a candidate for the degree; or
		(ii)	if progress is unsatisfactory, allow the candidate to continue as a candidate subject to such conditions as the faculty may impose; or
		(iii)	if progress is unsatisfactory and the student is a PhD candidate, ask the candidate to show cause why his or her candidature should not be transferred to an appropriate masters degree candidature or terminated; or
		(iv)	if progress is unsatisfactory and the student is a masters candidate, ask the candidate to show cause why his or her candidature should not be terminated.
	18.2	Should a faculty determine to ask a candidate to show cause why his or her candidature should not be terminated or transferred, the following procedures will apply:
		(i)	The Faculty General Manager will write to the candidate, by certified mail, asking him or her to show cause why his or her candidature should not be terminated or transferred. This letter will contain a statement of the procedures for the termination of candidature and a description of why the student's progress has been found to be unsatisfactory. The letter will also explicitly notify the candidate that if he or she does not reply within the specified period the candidature will be terminated or transferred.
		(ii)	A student who has received such a letter may request an interview with the Secretary or Chairperson of the relevant Faculty Higher Degrees Committee or Examinations Board of the faculty in order to discuss his or her response to the letter. An interview will be granted upon the student's request.
		(iii)	The faculty will consider the case of any student whose progress has been identified as unsatisfactory, taking into account any response from the student, and shall determine which course of action outlined in Clause 18.3 of this policy is appropriate. The candidate will be invited to attend a meeting of the relevant faculty committee at which his or her case is to be considered or, in the case of a student who is not a resident of South Australia, to send a representative. If attending in person, the candidate may be accompanied by a representative of Flinders Campus Community Services. A candidate will not be permitted to have legal representation at the meeting (but this does not prevent a legally qualified candidate or representative from attending the meeting provided that the person with legal qualifications is not acting in a professional legal capacity). The candidate and/or representative must be present throughout discussion of the case and allowed to participate in the discussion. The candidate and/or representative must be absent when the case is decided.
		(iv)	If a student required to show cause fails to respond to the request, the faculty will either transfer the candidature or recommend to the Academic Senate that the candidature be terminated.
		(v)	A candidate will be informed of the faculty's decision or recommendation immediately, by certified mail.
	18.3	The following courses of action will be taken by the faculty after the review of a student's progress in accordance with the procedures in Clause 18.2 in this policy:
		(i)	take no further action; or
		(ii)	permit the student to continue as a candidate subject to such conditions as the faculty may impose; or
		(iii)	transfer candidature from PhD to an appropriate masters degree candidature; or
		(iv)	recommend to the Academic Senate that the student's candidature be terminated.
	18.4	The faculty must immediately inform the student of its determination, and the reasons for the determination and the procedures for appeal, by certified mail. Where the faculty has determined to recommend termination of candidature (as per Clause 18.3(iv) in this policy), the faculty will provide the student with the opportunity to appeal that determination before the recommendation is submitted to the Academic Senate for approval.
	18.5	A student who wishes to appeal against the decision of a faculty (in relation to Clauses 18.3 (iii) and 18.3 (iv) of this policy) will, in the first instance and without delay, discuss the matter with the Faculty General Manager or the Secretary or Chairperson of the relevant Faculty Higher Degree Committee or Examinations Board of the faculty. Should the student still be dissatisfied with the response he or she may appeal to the Student Appeals Committee. An appeal may be lodged only on the following grounds:
		(i)	that the appropriate policy was not adhered to or correct procedures were not followed in considering the matter; or
		(ii)	the decision was made without due regard to facts, evidence or circumstances; or
		(iii)	the penalty, where applicable, was too harsh.
	18.6	A candidate wishing to appeal to the Student Appeals Committee must lodge the appeal with the Director, Academic and Student Services within 20 working days of the date of the notification of the determination. The appeal must:
		- be accompanied by the original show cause submission, any correspondence which the student has received from the University in relation to the request to show cause, and the outcome of deliberations;
		- include details of the grounds for the appeal, including evidence in support of the student's case (together with supporting documentation);
		- include any additional information which the candidate considers relevant;
		- specify what outcome is being sought.
	18.7	On receipt of the appeal the Director, Academic and Student Services (or nominee) will:
		- within 10 working days acknowledge receipt in writing, check the documentation to ensure that it is complete and that a case has been outlined and if not, seek the missing information;
		- refer the appeal to the Student Appeals Committee which will proceed in accordance with the Policy on the Student Appeals Committee.
	18.8	The Student Appeals Committee will consider the matter and inform the appropriate Faculty Board of its decision.
		The Faculty Board will then determine:
		- in relation to Clause 18.3(ii) of this policy, what conditions will be imposed in relation to the candidature;
		- in relation to Clause 18.3(iii) of this policy, whether to transfer the candidature to an appropriate master's degree;
		- in relation to Clause 18.3(iv) of this policy, whether to submit its recommendation to the Academic Senate that the student's candidature be terminated.
		The candidate will be informed immediately of the Faculty Board's determination, and the reasons for the determination, by certified mail.
	18.9	In the case of Clause 18.3(iv) of this policy, the Academic Senate will, after consideration of the recommendation of the Faculty Board, and after making such enquires as it thinks fit, decide whether the student's candidature will be terminated. The student will be informed immediately of the Academic Senate's decision, by certified mail.
	18.10	If the student is not satisfied with the outcome, the student may lodge a complaint or appeal with a relevant external agency.

SECTION 19: Submission of Thesis

19	19.1	In order to avoid delays in the examination process, at least three months before a candidate is due to submit a thesis for examination, the candidate's supervisor will notify the Faculty General Manager of the candidate's intention to submit and will recommend the appointment of examiners in accordance with Clause 20 of this policy. The supervisor will also provide a summary of the thesis (of a maximum of 500 words) which has been written by the candidate. This summary will provide the faculty with background information when the appointment of examiners is being considered and will also be sent with the invitation to examiners. The faculty may at its discretion, seek advice from the AOU Head or other relevant experts concerning the selection of examiners.
	19.2	A candidate may submit a thesis for examination even if this is against the advice of the supervisor but only after an attempt has been made to resolve the matter through discussion with the supervisor and a faculty Contact Officer, or with the Head of AOU (or nominee when this is the same person) and a faculty Contact Officer.
	19.3	Where a candidate believes that the supervisor will not support the submission of the thesis because there has been a breakdown in the relationship between the candidate and supervisor, the candidate should contact the Head of the Academic Organisational Unit to initiate a process to overcome any possible prejudice in the examination of the thesis.
	19.4	A person whose candidature has lapsed and who wishes to submit a thesis may only do so with the permission of the Executive Dean of the Faculty.
	19.5	Four copies of the thesis prepared in accordance with the Rules for Higher Degree Theses (see Appendix E to this policy) shall normally be lodged with the Faculty General Manager. A candidate may submit three copies only, provided that they are aware that, in the event of unforeseen problems (eg loss of thesis in mail, examiner unable to act), this may cause delays in the examination process.
	19.6	A form of temporary binding may be used for the submission of theses to examiners. Examiners will be informed that the presentation of theses in soft bound form is University procedure and the degree will not be awarded until permanently bound copies are submitted to the faculty.
	19.7	Where a faculty recommends word limits for the length of a thesis, this information shall be published in the faculty handbook.
	19.8	A candidate must sign a declaration that the thesis does not contain any material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the text or footnotes. There can be no exception to this rule. Material produced jointly by a candidate and his/ her supervisors or others can be included in the narrative of the thesis only if it is the original work of the candidate. If it involves the original work of the joint authors other than the candidate, it must be fully acknowledged in exactly the same way that the work of any other authors is referenced.
	19.9	Unless studying under a cotutelle arrangement, candidates enrolled in AOUs other than foreign language disciplines are not permitted to submit their theses in a language other than English.
	19.10	In the case of candidates enrolled in foreign language AOUs, permission to submit the thesis in a language other than English will be considered by the relevant faculty. Each case will be considered on its merits and the following points taken into account:
		(a) the competence of the supervisors in the language proposed;
		(b) the availability of a sufficient range of qualified examiners competent in the language; and
		(c) evidence of an appropriate link between the subject of the thesis and the language in which it is proposed to submit the thesis.
	19.11	Where a candidate is given permission to submit a thesis in a language other than English, the candidate will be required to include in the thesis an abstract of the thesis in English.

SECTION 20: Appointment of Examiners

20	20.1	A candidate should not be examined only on the basis of his or her understanding of a body of existing knowledge. He or she is examined by individuals who must judge his or her approach to research, construction of hypotheses, argument and analysis. If the degree is awarded, the candidate will become the peer of the examiners. The selection of examiners is therefore of critical importance.
	20.2	The following general principles will apply in the selection of examiners:
		(i)	steps should be taken to ensure that examiners are free from bias, either against the candidate or the supervisor;
		(ii)	examiners will normally be still active in research/scholarship thus ensuring that their knowledge of the field is current;
		(iii)	they will have empathy with the theoretical framework used by the candidate;
		(iv)	they will be made familiar with the requirements of the institution, and the essential parts of the Statute and Rules governing the particular degree;
		(v)	in order to preserve the integrity and independence of the examination process, the identity of examiners will not be revealed to candidates until the examination process has been completed and then not if an examiner has expressed a desire to remain anonymous. However, before examiners are appointed, students will be given the opportunity to object to any potential examiners. Any such objections will be taken into account in the process of selection of examiners. At the end of the examination process the candidate will receive full copies of the examiners' reports (annotated if necessary to preserve the anonymity of an examiner if this has been requested).
	20.3	There will be two examiners for a research masters, MD or PhD degree thesis, both of whom shall be external to the University. A supervisor will not act as an examiner. In exceptional circumstances, the University Research Higher Degrees Committee may agree to the appointment of a third examiner. Examination arrangements for cotutelle degrees are specified in the cotutelle proposal.
	20.4	Nominations of possible examiners for a thesis will be made to the faculty after the supervisor has consulted the candidate on any objections the candidate may have to potential examiners. The supervisor will also remind the candidate of the University's policy concerning the confidentiality of examiners and that any attempts by the candidate to contact potential examiners could undermine the integrity of the examination process. The supervisor will submit the following information on examiners to the Faculty General Manager at the same time as the supervisor gives three months notice of the submission of the thesis (refer to Clause 19.1 of this policy):
		- the nominations of two possible examiners, their credentials and addresses;
		- the nomination of two reserve examiners, their credentials and addresses in the event that a preferred nominee is unable to act as examiner;
		- information on any objections expressed by the candidate to potential examiners.
	20.5	The appointment of any examiner will be approved by the faculty. In the case of a cotutelle candidature, examiners must be approved by both institutions.
	20.6	Once examiners have been approved by the faculty, the Faculty General Manager will write to them inviting them to act as examiners and will provide them with:
		- the name of the candidate, the degree for which the thesis is being submitted, the AOU and faculty in which the work has been undertaken, the title and summary of the thesis, and the names of supervisors;
		- information about the requirement of the degree in question including copies of the relevant Statute and Council Rules and any faculty documents concerning requirements;
		- information on the University's policy on the differences between the requirements of a masters and a PhD or MD degree (refer to Clause 3 of this policy);
		- for cotutelle candidates, information about the examination arrangements and other relevant aspects of the cotutelle candidature;
		- information on the University's policy concerning confidentiality of examiners and the release of examiners' reports to candidates;
		- information on the procedures to be followed in the event of significant divergence between examiners' reports (refer to Clause 22.4 in this policy);
		- the University prescribed form for the standard examiner's report form;
		- if relevant, information on any Commercial-in-Confidence work incorporated into the thesis (refer to Clause 10 of this policy);
		- deadlines for response to the invitation to act as an examiner (four to six weeks taking into account the examiner's location) and a two month deadline from receipt of the thesis for submission of the examiner report for the masters or doctoral degrees; and
		- information on the honorarium payable for the examination of higher degree theses.
	20.7	If an examiner is unable to accept an invitation or fails to respond to an invitation within four to six weeks (despite being sent reminder notifications), an invitation will be sent to a person approved as a reserve examiner.

SECTION 21: Examination Process

21	21.1	Upon the submission of a thesis by a candidate, the Faculty General Manager will forward copies to examiners who have accepted invitations to examine the thesis.
	21.2	If a report has not been received from an examiner within six weeks, the Faculty General Manager will write to the examiner reminding him or her of the due date for submission of the examiner's report.
	21.3	If an examiner fails to provide a report by the due date, the examiner will be requested in writing to indicate when the report will be received. In exceptional circumstances or in the event that an examiner fails to report within four months for doctoral degrees or three months for masters degrees, and has not notified the University as to why the examination of the thesis has been delayed, the faculty will appoint a third examiner and then make a decision on the outcome of the examination in accordance with Clause 22 in this policy. The second examiner will receive written notification that a report is no longer required, because a replacement examiner has been appointed.
	21.4	An examiner of a thesis will submit a written report on the thesis by way of the University prescribed form for examiners and will make one of the following recommendations:
		- that the degree should be awarded;
		- that the degree should be awarded subject to the completion of amendments to the thesis (specified by the examiner) to be carried out to the satisfaction of the supervisor and the AOU Head;
		- that the degree should not be awarded but the candidate should be permitted to revise and resubmit the thesis or take a further examination or both. A thesis may be resubmitted for examination only once;
		- that in the case of a candidate who has submitted a thesis for the degree of PhD an appropriate masters degree should be awarded;
		- the candidate should not be allowed to present for the degree again.
	21.5	From the time of the submission of the thesis a candidate must not initiate contact with his or her examiners on any matter concerning the thesis.
	21.6	From the time of the appointment of examiners no direct contact between an examiner and a supervisor may occur in relation to any material under examination. Should an examiner require clarification of any aspect of the material under examination, any enquiries will be directed to the Faculty General Manager who will refer it to the candidate, the supervisor or on the advice of the candidate or supervisor to another suitably qualified person for consideration.
	21.7	Consultation between examiners will not be permitted prior to submission of the initial report.

SECTION 22: Consideration of Examiners' Reports

22	After receiving the reports of both examiners of a thesis, the faculty will determine the outcome of the examination in accordance with the following procedures. For cotutelle candidatures, variatiions to these procedures, or additional procedures, may apply, as detailed in the cotutelle proposal.
	22.1	When both examiners have recommended the award of the degree, and this is not subject to amendments to the thesis, the Faculty Board will recommend the award of the degree to Academic Senate.
	22.2	When both examiners have recommended the award of the degree subject to the completion of amendments to the thesis, or when one examiner has recommended the award of the degree and the other examiner has recommended the award of the degree subject to the completion of amendments to the thesis, the Faculty Board will ensure the appropriate amendments are made and then recommend the award of the degree to Academic Senate. Note: Amendments may range from the correction of spelling or typographical errors and small changes to the text, to changes to the structure and substance of some chapters of the thesis which can be completed to the satisfaction of the supervisor and the Head of Academic Organisational Unit (or nominee, where this is the same person) without being returned to the examiner.
	22.3	When both examiners are unanimous in making one of the other recommendations listed in Clause 21.4 in this policy, the supervisor and candidate will be provided with copies of the examiners' reports and asked to comment. In this process the examiners' identities shall not be revealed to the candidate. The examiners' reports and the candidate's and the supervisor's comments will be referred to the faculty which will make a decision on the outcome of the examination.
	22.4	In all other cases of examiners not being unanimous in making any one recommendation, the following procedures will apply:
		(i)	The supervisor and the candidate will be provided with copies of the examiners' reports and asked to comment. In this process the examiners' identities will not be revealed to the candidate.
		(ii)	Where one examiner recommends the degree should be awarded or that the degree should be awarded subject to amendments to the thesis and the other examiner recommends that the degree should not be awarded but the candidate should be permitted to revise and resubmit the thesis, examiners will be invited to consult with each other in an attempt to reach an agreement and provided with the opportunity to offer a revised opinion. In the event of examiners offering a revised opinion, they will be asked to provide a written statement which identifies the reasons for the new opinion.
		(iii)	In all other cases where the examiners are not unanimous in making one recommendation, and in cases where examiners who have been invited to consult have declined or have failed to reach an agreement, the faculty will appoint an external arbitrator in consultation with the supervisor and the Head of the Academic Organisational Unit. The arbitrator will be sent the thesis, all examiners' reports and the supervisor's and candidate's comments. The arbitrator will be invited to make a report and recommendation on the outcome of the examination in light of the divergent examiner's reports and his or her assessment of the thesis. The faculty will make a decision on the outcome of the examination.
	22.5	Should an examination process become protracted, the candidate will be kept regularly informed in writing on the progress of the examination process by the Faculty General Manager.
	22.6	In the event that there is documented evidence of a flaw in the examination process, such as prejudice or bias on the part of one or more examiners, the faculty will seek the endorsement of the Chair of the University Research Higher Degrees Committee for its proposed course of action. Examples of possible action include the appointment of a third examiner or the appointment of new examiners.

SECTION 23: Consideration of Examiners' Reports - Allegation of Plagiarism

23	In the event that an allegation of academic dishonesty has been made during the examination process, the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee should follow Clause 4.3 of Academic Integrity. The faculty will then determine the outcome of the examination in accordance with the following procedures.
	23.1	In the event that the allegation of academic dishonesty is substantiated and the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee has determined that the student should be permitted to revise and resubmit the thesis or take a further examination or both, the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee will appoint two new examiners to examine the (revised) thesis.
	23.2	In the event that the allegation of academic dishonesty is not substantiated but the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee is unable to determine the outcome of examination due to substantial divergence between the examiners' recommendations, the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee will appoint two new examiners to examine the (revised) thesis.
	23.3	Following the appointment of new examiners, the outcome of examination will be determined in accordance with procedures specified in Clause 22 above.
	23.4	In the event that an allegation of academic dishonesty is not substantiated, and there is not substantial divergence between the examiners' recommendations, the outcome of examination will be determined in accordance with procedures specified in Clause 22 above.

SECTION 24: Recommendation of Award of PhD for a Thesis submitted for Masters degree

24	24.1	On rare occasions an examiner of a degree submitted for the award of master may consider the work to be of such merit that the examiner unsolicitedly recommends the degree of PhD be awarded instead. On receipt of such a recommendation, the Faculty General Manager will write to the other examiner, informing him or her of the recommendation and asking if he or she would concur with this recommendation.
	24.2	After receiving both examiners' reports, determination of the outcome of the examination should generally proceed in accordance with the relevant procedures outlined in Clause 22 in this policy.

SECTION 25: Outcome of the Examination

25	Once the outcome of the examination has been determined the following procedures will apply:
	25.1	Award of degree without thesis amendments - The Faculty Board is responsible for recommending to the Academic Senate that the degree be awarded. Once satisfactory examiners' reports have been received, a candidate will be required to submit two permanently bound copies of the thesis to the Faculty General Manager. On receipt of these bound copies, the recommendation on the award of the degree will be forwarded to the Faculty Board for approval and thence to Academic Senate. The Academic Senate will then certify that the candidate has qualified for the award of the degree, and the Faculty Academic Officer will notify the candidate of the award, degree conferral procedures, and provide the candidate with a copy of the examiners' reports. The Faculty General Manager will notify the examiners of the award after the Academic Senate has approved the award of the degree.
	25.2	Award of degree subject to thesis amendments - The Faculty General Manager will notify the candidate of the requirement to make amendments and provide the candidate with a copy of the examiners' reports. Upon receipt of notification from the supervisor and the AOU Head that amendments have been made to their satisfaction, the Faculty Board will recommend to the Academic Senate that the degree be awarded. The Academic Senate will certify that the candidate has qualified for the award of the degree. The Faculty Academic Officer will notify the candidate of the award, degree conferral procedures and of the requirement that two copies of the thesis in permanent bindings must be lodged with the Faculty General Manager. The Faculty General Manager will notify the examiners of the award.
	25.3	Award of PhD, Non-Award of Masters - In certain instances examiners may consider that although a candidate has submitted a thesis for a masters degree, the award of a PhD degree is warranted. In such cases the Faculty Board will recommend to Academic Senate that the PhD degree be awarded. The Academic Senate will certify that the candidate has qualified for the award of the degree. The Faculty Academic Officer will notify the candidate of the award, degree conferral procedures, of the requirement that two copies of the thesis in permanent bindings must be lodged with the Faculty General Manager, and provide the candidate with a copy of the examiners' reports. The Faculty General Manager will notify the examiners of the award. Where the award of the degree is made subject to thesis amendments the procedures outlined in Clause 25.2 in this policy will apply.
	25.4	Revise and Resubmit the Thesis for Examination or take a Further Examination or Both
		25.4.1		If a decision is made that the candidate should be permitted to revise and resubmit the thesis for examination, the following steps will be taken:
				- after consultation with the supervisor and candidate a deadline for the resubmission of the thesis will be set taking into account the scale of the revision required and whether the candidate is able to undertake the work on a full-time or part-time basis. If a candidate is unable to meet this deadline, he or she will apply to the faculty for an extension;
				- it shall be determined whether there is any reason why the resubmitted thesis should not be examined by the examiners of the original thesis. Normally the same examiners (or arbitrator when the resubmission is the outcome of procedures outlined in Clause 22.4(ii) in this policy) should examine the resubmitted thesis but there may be circumstances in which this is not possible or desirable.
		25.4.2		The Faculty General Manager will notify the candidate of the faculty's decision and the conditions associated with it. The Faculty General Manager will also notify the examiners of the faculty's decision. (Refer to Clauses 19.2 and 19.3 in this policy if applicable.)
		25.4.3		A student who wishes to revise and resubmit the thesis is required to re-enrol in the University.
		25.4.4		When the thesis is resubmitted, the procedures for its examination will be in accordance with Clauses 22-25 of this policy. A thesis may be resubmitted for examination only once.
	25.5	Award of Masters Degree - If the faculty determines that a masters degree should be awarded to a PhD candidate, it should be specified which masters degree is appropriate. The Faculty Board will recommend that Academic Senate certify that the candidate has qualified for the award of that degree. The Academic Senate will certify that the candidate has qualified for the award of the relevant masters degree. The Faculty Academic Officer will notify the candidate of the award and of degree conferral procedures and of the requirement that two copies of the thesis in permanent binding must be lodged with the Faculty General Manager. The Faculty General Manager will notify the examiners of the award. (Refer to Clauses 19.2 and 19.3 of this policy if applicable.)
	25.6	Non Award of Degree - If the faculty determines that the degree should not be awarded and the candidate should not be allowed to present for the degree again, the Faculty Board will make a recommendation to Academic Senate to that effect. The Academic Senate will certify that the degree will not be awarded and the Faculty General Manager will notify the candidate and the examiners accordingly. (Refer to Clauses 19.2 and 19.3 of this policy if applicable.)
	25.7	Recommendations to the Academic Senate - In making a recommendation to Academic Senate on the definitive outcome of the examination process the Faculty Board will make the recommendation under one of the following categories:
		- Award degree - nil or some amendments having been required;
		- Award degree - revision and resubmission having been required;
		- Non-award;
		- Non-award - revision and resubmission having been required;
		- Non-award of PhD, award masters; or
		- Non-award of PhD, award masters - revision and resubmission having been required.
		- (On rare occasions it may be decided that the award of a PhD is appropriate even though the student had originally submitted for a masters degree. A recommendation to this effect will also be acceptable.)
		Recommendations by category to Academic Senate must include the following details:
		- Name and student number of the candidate;
		- AOU and faculty;
		- Degree;
		- Title of thesis;
		- Names of supervisors;
		- Date of candidature;
		- Date of submission of thesis for examination;
		- Recommendation of the faculty; and
		- Date of faculty approval.

SECTION 26: Return of Thesis after Examination - Examiners will be asked by the faculty to return copies of the thesis to the University at the completion of the examination process.

SECTION 27: Lodging of Theses in the Library

SECTION 28: Conciliation and Arbitration Procedures Relating to Supervised Higher Degree Research

28	28.1	The procedures for the conciliation and arbitration of problems about supervised higher degree research (refer to Appendix F to this policy) concern any matters which are covered by the Research Higher Degree Policies and Procedures. The conciliation and arbitration procedures will also apply to faculty policies, procedures and practices which relate directly to the application of the Research Higher Degree Policies and Procedures.
	28.2	The conciliation and arbitration procedures should be used by a student when he or she has reason to believe that a policy or procedure has not been followed properly or has been applied in a manner which constitutes unfair discrimination, and this has been detrimental to his or her candidature.

SECTION 29: Higher Doctorates: Policies and Procedures - The procedures for submission and examination of work and for the award of a higher doctorate is prescribed in Appendix G to this policy.