Conversion from Masters Candidature to Confirmed PhD Candidature

Conversion from Masters Candidature to 

Confirmed PhD Candidature 

Guidelines & Panel Report 

Research Services 

Purpose 

The purpose of these Guidelines is to assist students and their supervisors to meet the 

requirements established by the Academic Board for candidature to be converted from Masters to 

confirmed PhD candidature. 

Regulatory Requirements 

Regulation 5.1 – The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, section 6 addresses the broad requirements 

for conversion from Masters to PhD candidature. Section 6(4) stipulates that the candidate must 

‘… prove that he or she has completed research which is assessed by the Board as demonstrating 

the capacity to undertake research at PhD level, has developed a viable PhD program, made 

satisfactory progress, and is able to complete PhD degree requirements within the period 

allowed…’ Data collection should not normally be commenced before confirmation. It is recognised 

that Masters students will sometimes have commenced data collection before a decision is made 

to apply for conversion to PhD study. However, there should be no assumption that any data 

collected in this manner will be agreed by a confirmation panel to be admissible as part of the 

approved research program. Early advice about data collection should be sought by a candidate 

who anticipates conversion from the Associate Dean (Research). 

Notification of Application for Conversion from Masters to Confirmed PhD 

Candidature 

Only students currently enrolled in a Masters Degree by Research can make an application for 

Conversion of Candidature. The Principal Supervisor will be responsible, as appropriate, for 

alerting the candidate to the requirements for conversion of candidature and assisting the student 

with their preparation. 

On the advice of the Principal Supervisor and the candidate the Associate Dean (Research) will 

notify Research Services of an application for conversion at least three weeks before the 

scheduled presentation. 

The School will be responsible for the organising and conducting of the Conversion of Candidature 

processes. Students and their Principal Supervisors are notified automatically by Research 

Services, through the Research Master computer program, at the six-month (FTE) stage as a 

reminder of the confirmation date.’ 

Conversion Processes 

A candidate will be required to: 

Prepare and make available to a Confirmation Panel at least two weeks prior to the oral 

presentation, a written proposal which addresses the requirements specified in Annex A. 

Make an oral presentation of no more than 25 minutes in duration to a Confirmation Panel (and 

any additional audience) addressing the requirements specified in Annex A. 

Answer questions from members of the Confirmation Panel (or other members of the audience) 

on any matters arising from either the written report or the presentation. 

Warning – Uncontrolled when printed! The current version of this document is kept on the UB website. 

Maintained by: Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research) 

Approved by: RHDSC:508 

Review Date: 2013 

Original Version: 2008 

Current Version: 08/08/2011 

Page 1 of 9





Preparation for Confirmation of Candidature 

In preparation for Confirmation of Candidature, students are encouraged to: 

Work closely with their supervisor(s) to ensure that their written and oral presentations are 

progressing in a timely way and that the confirmation requirements are being adequately 

addressed; 

Attend other confirmation of candidature presentations; 

 

 

Participate in Graduate Centre sessions relating to confirmation of candidature; and 

Avail themselves of opportunities to make presentations in other forums. E.g. School seminars, 

conferences, rehearsal with supervisor(s) etc. 

Please note that data collection before confirmation is not permitted. 

In preparation for Confirmation of Candidature the Principal Supervisor is 

responsible for: 

Ensuring that the candidate is made aware of the requirements for Confirmation of Candidature 

as specified in Regulation 5.1 and these Guidelines; 

Assisting the candidate with the preparation of their written and oral presentations; and 

Alerting candidates to, and encouraging them to participate in, opportunities for developing 

their presentation skills. E.g. seminars, conferences etc. 

Confirmation Panel 

A Confirmation Panel will deliberate and recommend to the Research Higher Degrees Sub- 

Committee on confirmation of candidature in accordance with the directions contained in Annex B. 

The Panel will consist of: 

Dean of the School in which the candidate is enrolled* 

The Associate Dean (Research)* (Chair)# 

The Principal Supervisor and, where applicable, the Director of Provisional Principal 

Supervisors** 

A member of the RHDSC or an Associate Dean (Research) from another Higher Education 

School 

An academic staff member of the School nominated by the Dean of the School 

Linkage industry partner if appropriate and required. 

External expert. The external expert is either in attendance or provides written comments to 

the panel prior to the seminar 

The Associate Supervisor(s) who will have speaking, but not deliberative, rights. 

* If the Dean of the School or the AD(R) is the Principal Supervisor, the Dean of the School will 

nominate an alternative member. 

# Unless the Principal Supervisor, in which case the Dean of the School will be Chair. 

** While the Principal Supervisor might be expected to clarify certain issues arising from the 

written and oral presentations, they are not to be advocates for the candidate. 







Page 2 of 9





Panel Recommendation 

The Confirmation Panel will recommend to the Research Higher Degrees Sub-Committee that 

candidature should be ‘confirmed’, confirmed subject to conditions or ‘not confirmed’. In instances 

when the recommendation is ‘not confirmed’, the Panel will provide a written report outlining the 

reasons for its decision. If the Panel is of the view that the candidate should be given a further 

opportunity to apply for confirmation of candidature, its report will include details of what tasks will 

need to be completed (for example, revisions to written presentation and a further oral 

presentation, or revisions to the written presentation only) with associated timelines. Only in 

exceptional circumstances will more than two attempts to gain confirmation of candidature be 

permitted. 

Feedback to Candidate 

Feedback will be provided to the candidate by the Principal Supervisor and the AD(R) (or the Dean 

of the School if the AD(R) is the Principal Supervisor) as soon as is practicable after the 

candidate’s oral presentation. The feedback should, as far as possible, be constructive and 

encouraging and contain the following two elements. 

(1) The Confirmation Panel’s recommendation to the RHDSC (i.e. candidature confirmed, 

candidature confirmed subject to conditions or candidature not confirmed); and 

(2) Any feedback on the substance of the candidate’s research. In cases where conditions are 

set, including a recommendation to re-present for confirmation, the feedback will include 

details of what needs to be addressed, what will be the timing and nature of the next step in 

the confirmation process. 

A copy of the completed Appendix B will be provided to the student. 

Responsibilities of Research Services 

Students and their Principal Supervisors are notified automatically by Research Services, through 

the Research Master Computer program. At the six month (FTE) stage as a reminder of the 

confirmation date. 

Research Services will: 

Notify the appropriate AD(R) and the candidate of the candidate’s time limit for confirmation of 

candidature eight weeks prior. 

Notify research postgraduate students and academic staff of forthcoming confirmation 

presentations; 

Receive recommendations from the Confirmation Panel and forward them to the RHDSC for 

consideration; 

Formally notify candidates of the outcome of RHDSC decisions on confirmation; and 

Upgrade student records to reflect RHDSC decisions. 







Page 3 of 9





Annex A 

Written Proposal Guidelines 

Proposals should be written within the guidelines below and should be between 5,000 and 10,000 

words. Words in excess of 10,000 will not be considered. 

Students are encouraged to run their proposal through a plagiarism detection program such as 

‘Turnitin’ before submission, to assist in establishing academic integrity. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Title of thesis 

Brief overview of the research project 

The research question or questions 

Brief overview of relevant literature 

Contribution to the literature provided by the project 

Justification of the significance of the research and how it will contribute to knowledge 

Research approach and method (s) to be used 

Justification of the research approach and methods 

For creative works, computer software etc demonstration of the links among the practical 

works and the exegesis. 

Ethical issues raised by the project and details of progress through ethics approval if 

appropriate 

Timetable for completion of the project 

Proposed Project Budget and Funding Source (If applicable) 

If the proposal contains confidential material the candidate and his/her supervisors should seek 

advice from the Associate Dean (Research) or Research Services. 

Note: ‘Research’ is taken to include scholarship and creative works as appropriate to the discipline, 

as well as empirical research. 







Page 4 of 9





Annex A 

Oral Presentation Guidelines 

The oral presentation will be for no more than 25 minutes and should: 

 

 

 

 

 

Be clearly and succinctly presented so as to be understandable to those not necessarily expert 

in the specific discipline. 

Indicate a clear engagement with, and understanding of, the research topic 

Engage the audience (This is not likely to be achieved by a straight reading from a prepared 

script) 

Make use of technology, as appropriate, to assist with the achievement of the previous three 

points 

Be cross referenced to the written proposal with a view to elaborating on and clarifying 

important aspects of the research, in particular: 

the research question and associated objectives/questions/hypotheses 

 

 

 

 

how the research will address gaps in the literature and make a substantial contribution to 

knowledge 

why the chosen research approach and methodology/methodologies is most appropriate 

the theoretical basis of the research where appropriate 

the systematic line of enquiry and investigation being developed in cases where the 

research component of the program will consist of a series of research reports and an 

exegesis 

The presentation will be followed by a period (of approximately 15-20 minutes) of questioning. It is 

important that answers are concise and directed at the question. 

Checklist 

Written proposal completed as per guidelines 

Written proposal is between 5000 and 10,000 words. Word Count……………… 

Seminar details and a copy of this checklist to be forwarded to RAGSO 

Completed 

It is confirmed that all necessary documentation has been provided 

/ / 

Print Name in Full Candidate Signature Date 

/ / 

Print Name in Full Supervisor Signature Date 

All final documentation (electronic and hard copies and this page with the completed checklist) 

must be provided to the Associate Dean (Research) at least two weeks prior to the date of the 

seminar. 







Page 5 of 9





Appendix B 

The Confirmation Panel’s task is to determine if the candidate ‘has developed a viable PhD 

research program, made satisfactory progress, and is able to complete degree requirements within 

the period allowed’ (Regulation 5.1 Doctor of Philosophy, section 6). 

The following statements are presented to assist the Panel with their deliberations: 

(Please circle the appropriate response) 

(1) The candidate is working with a significant/important research issue. 

Strongly agree Agree Unsure Disagree Strongly disagree 

Comments 

(2) The candidate has developed a clear and focused research question, and sub questions 

where appropriate 


Comments 

(3) The candidate has displayed a critical and detailed knowledge and understanding of the 

relevant literature, and theoretical constructs where appropriate 


Comments 

(4) The candidate has demonstrated that the research will make a substantial contribution to 

knowledge. 


Comments 







Page 6 of 9





(5) Where applicable, the candidate has demonstrated the systematic line of enquiry being 

developed with the practical work(s) and has indicated how those works will link to the 

exegesis 


Comments 

(6) The candidate has chosen a suitable research approach and methods, and justified the 

choice convincingly. 


Comments 

(7) The candidate has shown awareness of ethical issues and addressed them appropriately. 


Comments 

(8) The candidate has provided a clear and realistic timeline for the project. 


Comments 

(9) The standard of the oral presentation is appropriate for the degree of the Doctor of 

Philosophy. 


Comments 







Page 7 of 9





(10) The standard of the written proposal is appropriate for the degree of the Doctor of 

Philosophy, including appropriate use of referencing systems as applicable to the discipline. 


Comments 

(11) Progress on any advanced study units scheduled for completion at the time of confirmation 

of candidature is satisfactory. 


Comments 

(12) The Panel is confident that the candidate will complete in the minimum period. 


Comments 

Panel Report: (An additional written report may be attached if required) 







Page 8 of 9





Having considered the above questions and taken an overall view the Confirmation Panel 

recommends to the RHDSC that: 

Candidature be confirmed 

Candidature be confirmed subject to conditions 

The Chair of the panel will be responsible for the completion of this process. The date for 

completion of all improvement is to be not more than 3 months (FTE) from the date of the 

report. Sign-off of successful completion of all improvements is to be undertaken by the 

Chair of the Panel. Alternately the candidate may be required to re-present to the whole 

panel within the three month period. 

Date for re-submission of additional information: 

Candidature not be confirmed 

The panel recommends that the student be invited to ‘Show Cause’ on why candidature 

should not be terminated. 

 

Chair of Panel: 

/ / 

Print Name in Full Signature Date 

Head of School: 

/ / 

Print Name in Full Signature Date 

Principal Supervisor: 

/ / 

Print Name in Full Supervisor Signature Date 

NOTE: 

(1) A copy of this report must be provided to the student within one week of the oral presentation 

(2) This completed form and a copy of the written proposal must be returned to Research 

Services within one week of the oral presentation. 







Page 9 of 9

Conversion from Masters Candidature to Confirmed PhD Candidature

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?