(1) Charles Darwin University (‘the University’, ‘CDU’) is committed to providing an environment that enables and supports transformative education through higher degrees by research (HDR) and drives world-class research in areas critical to the sustainable and prosperous development of Northern Australia and the wider region. (2) This procedure describes the principles and delegations that underpin the submission and examination of HDR theses at the University. (3) The procedure applies to all HDR courses, HDR candidates, and University staff responsible for supporting HDR candidates and courses. (4) This procedure does not apply to any coursework included in HDR courses, which is covered by the Higher Education Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure. (5) Individuals can examine a thesis of a research candidate only if: (6) Principal supervisors should review the Conflicts of Interest Policy and Conflicts of Interest Procedure to assess whether examiners might be biased by a conflict of interest. (7) At least three months prior to the submission, the student must submit an Intention to Submit form to the Office of Research & Innovation copied to the Principal Supervisor. (8) Students are not permitted to nominate or know the examiners of their thesis. However, a student has a right to inform their supervisor of any persons they DO NOT want to examine their thesis. On the Intention to Submit form they may list examiners, disciplines or groups that they do not wish to examine their thesis. This may include an individual, political alignment or research methodology for example that may not be empathetic with their research. (9) Once signed and submitted a notification will be sent to the supervisor to initiate the nomination of examiners process. (10) The Principal Supervisor will contact possible examiners and invite them to examine the thesis. (11) Although the Principal Supervisor is responsible for selecting examiners, they should not choose an examiner who the candidate believes is not suitable. (12) No later than one month after receiving notification of the Intention to Submit, the Principal Supervisor must submit the Recommendation of Examiners Form found at HDR Forms and Codes to the Faculty or Institute in which the candidate is enrolled (the (13) If the (14) Once the Faculty is satisfied that the nominated examiners are suitable, it will endorse the examiners. (15) Until the thesis is passed, the identity of examiners should remain confidential to both candidates and the other examiner/s. (16) At least one examiner should live outside Australia if the candidate is submitting a PhD thesis unless the Dean of Graduate Studies is convinced that only Australian academics would be appropriate to examine this thesis. (17) The Dean of Graduate Studies will have final approval of the examiners. If the Dean of Graduate Studies has any concerns that the nominated examiners may affect the quality or integrity of the examination, they may direct the Supervisor and Faculty to nominate alternative or additional examiners. (18) The thesis should conform to the following format and length: (19) The format of the thesis will be determined by the platforms deployed in the artefact and the requirements of the exegesis to confirm an original contribution to knowledge. (20) The thesis and/or other approved work must contain the results of the candidate's study and research. (21) Candidates may choose to use a range of media platforms to further their research project. (22) Candidates should include in their thesis: (23) Candidates including any of their published works in their thesis should specify where this material has been previously published, including precise citation details and co-authorship information with regard to research design, data collection and analysis and substantive writing and editing. Candidates submitting an artefact and exegesis thesis must demonstrate how the two components of the research have configured a significant original contribution to knowledge. (24) Supervisors, professional editors, and other individuals can offer feedback to improve and to edit theses, providing the level of advice conforms to the Australian Standards for Editing Practice. (25) Candidates must acknowledge all editorial advice in the “Acknowledgements” section of their thesis. (26) Research candidates submit their thesis to Research and Innovation in PDF format unless otherwise required by the nature of the thesis. The thesis must be accompanied by the Theses Submission Declaration & Approval found at HDR Forms and Codes signed by both the candidate and the Principal Supervisor. This form testifies that: (27) The Submission Declaration form may be revised following submission. For example, candidates may be instructed to accompany this form with a report that attests to the originality of this work, or they may be instructed to confirm that the research complies with specific regulations and guidelines. (28) If the candidate wishes to submit the thesis but the Principal Supervisor does not believe the thesis is ready for submitting, the Dean of Graduate Studies will consult with the candidate, supervisors, and other relevant individuals and make a recommendation to the Research Committee. The committee will then determine whether the submission should proceed. (29) If an examiner requests a physical copy of the thesis, Research and Innovation will ask the candidate to print a soft-bound copy. (30) Examiners of standard theses will: (31) If the contents of this thesis may impact social, national or industrial security or contains information that is commercially or culturally sensitive, examiners may need to sign a non-disclosure agreement before they receive the thesis. (32) In some circumstances, the (33) In these circumstances, the Research and Innovation unit will submit the thesis to an alternative examiner. The (34) After the examiners submit their reports, they will be reviewed by the Dean of Graduate Studies to ensure that any homophobia, racism, ageism, transphobia or abuse is redacted from the reports. (35) The HDR Examination Coordinator will use Table 1 – results recommendations, and the following guidelines to evaluate the examiner reports and determine an examination outcome: (36) The examination outcome should indicate whether the thesis needs to be revised and whether the University or examiners should evaluate this revision, and, if necessary, stipulate which part of the thesis should be revised. The recommendation must include a time limit if any revisions are required to be made by the student. (37) The HDR Examination Coordinator will send the examination outcome along with de-identified examiner reports to the following, simultaneously, as soon as possible after receiving the reports used to determine the outcome: (38) The University will pay examiners an honorarium once they submit their report. This honorarium must be paid directly to the examiner, or, if the examiner chooses, paid to discharge an ancillary cost of the HDR program, consistent with the Commonwealth Scholarships Guidelines (Research) 2017. (39) If the Dean of Graduate Studies recommends the thesis should be revised but not resubmitted to the examiners, the candidate should be instructed to complete this revision within three months. The Dean of Graduate Studies may approve extensions to this deadline. (40) The candidate must accompany the revised thesis with a document that addresses the concerns the examiners raised and justifies the revisions. (41) The revised thesis will be deemed as passed once the supervisor, (42) The Dean of Graduate Studies may recommend the thesis should be revised and resubmitted to one or both examiners to assess the thesis again. The candidate should be instructed to complete this revision within six months, although the Dean of Graduate Studies can approve extensions. (43) The candidate must accompany the revised thesis with a document that addresses the concerns the examiners raised and justifies the revisions. The revised thesis is then subjected to the standard examination procedure. (44) If candidates do not submit the revisions on time, they may be invited to show cause as to why they should be permitted to submit their revision after this date. If the Dean of Graduate Studies recommends that a PhD candidate should not be awarded the degree, the Dean of Graduate Studies should consult with relevant individuals, such as the (45) After the degree has been conferred, the candidate must submit a final electronic copy of the thesis to the Research and Innovation unit. Candidates are not permitted to change the thesis that was deemed as passed unless they become aware of errors that could mislead readers substantially and receive approval from the Dean of Graduate Studies to correct these errors. (46) The thesis will be accessible from a university repository unless the circumstances are exceptional. The thesis may remain confidential during a specific period (usually no more than 24 months) if, for example, the thesis is subject to conflicting agreements with other relevant bodies, such as a sponsor, or if the contents of this thesis could affect social, national or industrial security or contains commercially or culturally sensitive information, as judged by the (47) When candidates submit a thesis by creative output, they should also, whenever possible, submit a durable record of this creative output, such as video footage of an exhibition. (48) Non-compliance with Governance Documents is considered a breach of the Code of Conduct – Staff or the Code of Conduct – Students, as applicable, and is treated seriously by the University. Reports of concerns about non-compliance will be managed in accordance with the applicable disciplinary procedures outlined in the Charles Darwin University and Union Enterprise Agreement 2022 and the Code of Conduct – Students. (49) Complaints may be raised in accordance with the Code of Conduct – Staff and Code of Conduct - Students. (50) All staff members have an individual responsibility to raise any suspicion, allegation or report of fraud or corruption in accordance with the Fraud and Corruption Control Policy and Whistleblower Reporting (Improper Conduct) Procedure.Higher Degree by Research - Preparation, Submission and Examinations Procedure
Section 1 - Preamble
Section 2 - Purpose
Section 3 - Scope
Section 4 - Procedure
Criteria to Determine the Suitability of Examiners
Intention to submit and nomination of examiners
Presentation of Theses
Editing of Theses
Submission of Theses
Role of Examiners
Table 1 – results recommendations
1
The degree to be awarded without further alteration to the thesis.
2
The degree to be awarded after the minor concerns of the examiners are corrected to the satisfaction of the University.
3
The degree to be awarded — but only after the substantive concerns of the examiners are corrected to the satisfaction of the University.
4
The candidate must complete further work and resubmit the thesis for examination.
5
The degree should not be awarded.
Alternative Examiners
Evaluation of the Examiner’s Reports
Response to Recommendations
Display of Thesis
Section 5 - Non-Compliance
View Current
This is the current version of this document. To view historic versions, click the link in the document's navigation bar.