Board for Doctorates
Doctorate Regulations
Delft University of Technology
2004 Edition/New revised edition september 2010
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Doctorate Regulations
2004 Edition/New revised edition september 2010
Board for Doctorates
Delft University of Technology
Further information regarding these Doctorate Regulations may be obtained from the Office of the Beadle:
telephone: (015) 278 64 56 / (015) 278 9162
e-mail: Pedel@tudelft.nl
1
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
2
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
The Doctorate Regulations, established on 18 February 2004 and amended on
27 February 2008. These regulations were amended again on 26 May 2010 and adopted
by the Chairman. The decision in question is appended to these regulations.
The amendments enter into force on 1 September 2010.
Prof.ir. K.C.A.M. Luyben
Rector Magnificus
Chairman of the Board for Doctorates
TU Delft
3
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Foreword
The public defence and conferral of the doctorate take place in the presence either of
the Board for Doctorates itself or of a Doctoral Committee appointed by the Board for
Doctorates which comprises professors and other competent academic authorities.
While this body is also responsible for the conferral of honorary doctorates, the
procedure for such conferral falls outside the scope of these Regulations. The Board for
Doctorates is composed of the Faculty Deans, the Rector Magnificus as chairman and
the Vice-Rector as deputy chairman. A Dean can appoint a professor from his faculty to
take his place on the Board for Doctorates.
No distinction is made between regulations and procedural rules. All rules are included
in the Doctorate Regulations (Part I). Explanations and rules which may be only
temporary in nature are included in Part II. The division into chapters has been chosen
so as to give a clear presentation of the responsibilities of all parties concerned. As a
result, the individual articles place less stress on the procedure to be followed. This
procedure follows clearly from Part III, which summarises the sequence of actions
and the minimum time required for them. The doctoral defence procedure comprises
a number of specific moments. To prevent either the supervisor or the candidate from
becoming bewildered by a plethora of administrative details, this procedure has been
standardised as far as possible. The use of standard forms, for instance, means that
participants can count on the greatest possible administrative dispatch. Examples of
these standard forms, which can be downloaded from the Internet (www.phd.tudelft.nl)
can be seen in Part IV of these Regulations, while Part V closes with an overview of the
relevant articles in the Dutch legislation. Further details on these administrative aspects
may be obtained from the Beadle.
The revisions in the September 2010 version concern:
• Article 5.5: the number of supervisors and co-supervisors;
• Article 7.4: ius promovendi after honourable dismissal;
• Article 9.1: justification for a proposed co-supervisor and required signatures;
• Article 11.7 (together with Article 12.1): clarification of the independence of
opposition during doctoral defence ceremonies;
• Articles 15.1 and 15.2: language of the dissertation and of the defence ceremony;
• Article 24: investiture with a doctorate cum laude;
• Part III: The order of events in the doctoral defence procedure and the minimal time
schedule, also the related Articles.
• The addition of Part VI: “Information on propositions”
• Other minor changes to the text.
The Office of the Beadle will be pleased to provide additional information on the
administrative aspects of the doctoral regulations. The Vice - Rector can provide more
information regarding the regulations themselves.
4
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
The main points of the Doctorate Regulations are summarised below.
1.
As the final authority, the candidate’s supervisor (promotor) has the first and the last
word, provided that all conditions specified by the Board for Doctorates with regard to
procedural and quality control issues have been met.
2.
Every student preparing for a doctorate must first reach agreement on the matter with
a professor. For the purposes of these Regulations, the student will be acknowledged as
a PhD candidate (promovendus) only after the Board for Doctorates has appointed the
professor as the candidate’s supervisor (forms: PROM 01 and 02).
3.
Before the candidate can fix a date for the doctoral defence ceremony the supervisor
must have approved the draft of the doctoral thesis [1] (form: PROM 03) .
4.
Both candidate and supervisor are obliged to respond to any proposals made by the
members of the Doctoral Committee (as appointed by the Board for Doctorates, forms:
PROM 04 and 05) or its advisors having regard to changes and/or additions to the draft
thesis. Any major difference of opinion concerning the acceptance of such proposals
must be reported to the Board for Doctorates.
5.
The candidate cannot be admitted to the doctoral defence ceremony before the
supervisor has approved the final text of the thesis and propositions (form: PROM 06).
6.
The candidate must be able to demonstrate during the doctoral defence ceremony that
he or she is able to publicly defend both the thesis and the propositions.
7.
Any disputes shall be submitted to the authority of the Board for Doctorates.
8.
Members of the Doctoral Committee who do not have the ius promovendi, that is, the
authority to supervise a doctoral candidate, must be associate professors employed by a
university. External experts who do not have the ius promovendi and doctorate assistant
professors may have seats on the Committee as advisors; the supervisor must submit a
request to this end to the Board for Doctorates, forms: PROM 04 and 05). Furthermore,
at least two professors (of whom no more than one may be a supervisor) from TU Delft
must have seats on the Committee in addition to the Chairman.
9.
A procedure has been laid down to deal with the eventuality that one or more members
of the Doctoral Committee, after having read the draft thesis, is of the opinion that the
candidate cannot be conferred a doctorate.
Delft, September 2010
[1]
These Regulations will deem the use of the term ‘thesis’ to include the doctoral design (‘proefontwerp’) together with the
accompanying scientific justification and documentation.
5
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
The minimal time schedule
(the numbers in brackets refer to the Articles in these Regulations)
STEP
Week
PhD candidate
Supervisor
Beadle
1
Start
2) r equest appointment of
1) a greement on topic of thesis [5.1]
3) s end application to Board for
2
of PhD
supervisor [5.7, possibly 5.8]
period
submit PROM 01 and 02
sign PROM 02
Doctorates [5.7]
Start
Send approval of application to
of PhD
supervisor and PhD candidate [5.9]
period
3
11
2) s ubmit PROM 03 together with
three copies of the draft thesis
to Beadle and set defence date
[13.1]
5) o ne copy to the proposed
members of the doctoral
1) a pprove draft thesis [10.1]
sign PROM 03
3) s ubmit proposal for appointments
4) s end proposal for appointments
to doctoral committee to Board
for Doctorates [11.7 and 12.1]
to Doctoral Committee to Beadle
[12.1]
PROM 04 and 05
committee [13.2]
6) s ubmit addresses and date of
submission to Beadle
4
8
3) c onsult with supervisor on any
proposed changes [13.4]
2) r eceive any proposals for thesis
1) inform members of doctoral
changes or additions [13.4],
committee about appointment
4) r eact to any proposed changes
with reference to the date on
[13.4]
which the draft thesis was sent
[12.2]
5
6
1) d eadline for receiving reactions
from committee members/
advisors [12.3, 13.3]
6
5
2) s ubmit propositions to supervisor
for approval [18.3]
4) s ubmit PROM 06 and supervisor
approval with authorised text of
propositions (1 copy) to Beadle
1) approve thesis [18.2]
3) a pprove propositions and
authorise text [18.4]
PROM 06
7) s ubmit proposal for cum laude
5) a uthorise copies of title page
and reverse [18.5] and inform
parties involved of candidate’s
admittance to defence. [18.7]
8) s end proposal for cum laude
and have thesis title page and
accolade, if applicable, along with
accolade along with letters of
reverse (2 copies) approved
letters of recommendation [24.2]
recommendation to Board for
Doctorates, if applicable.
[18.5]
6) h ave copies made of thesis and
propositions [19.1]
9) s chedule meeting with chair of
doctoral committee[20..3]
7
2
1) d istribute thesis and proposals
[19.2], [19.3] and [19.4]
3) m ake appointment with Academic
Protocol office on details of the
2) s ubmit (in highly exceptional
5) announce defence [20.2]
cases) request to use language
other than Dutch or English
during the defence [22.5]
defence [20.2]
4) a ppear before chair (members) of
the doctoral committee [20.3]
8
0
3) g ive presentation in advance of
defence [20.4]
4) defend thesis for one hour [22.1]
6
1) p resent in committee room before
defence and acts as supervisor
during defence [21.4]
2) a ssist in protocol during the
defence ceremony.
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Contents
Part I
Doctorate regulations
Chapter 1
General Conditions
10
Article
Article
Article
Article
Definitions
Admission to the doctorate application process
The doctorate
Confidentiality
10
11
12
12
Chapter 2
The candidate
13
Article 5
Article 6
Registration of candidacy and appointment of supervisor
Draft thesis preparation and the responsibilities of the candidate
13
14
Chapter 3
The supervisor and co-supervisor
15
Article
Article
Article
Article
The supervisor
The supervisor’s tasks and responsibilities The co-supervisor
Approval of draft thesis
15
16
16
17
Chapter 4
The Doctoral Committee and the assessment of
the draft thesis
18
Article 11
Article 12
Article 13
Composition of the Doctoral Committee
Installation of the Doctoral Committee
Assessment of the draft thesis by the Doctoral Committee and
the role of the candidate in this connection
18
19
Chapter 5
The doctoral thesis and propositions
21
Article
Article
Article
Article
Content of the doctoral thesis
Language of the thesis
Form of the thesis
Propositions
21
22
22
23
Chapter 6
Admission to the doctoral defence ceremony
24
Article 18
Article 19
Approval of the doctoral thesis and propositions
Distribution of the doctoral thesis and its propositions
24
25
Chapter 7
The doctoral defence ceremony
26
Article
Article
Article
Article
Article
Preparations
The defence ceremony
Protocol
Investiture with a doctorate
Investiture with a doctorate cum laude
26
26
27
28
29
Chapter 8
Procedure for settling disputes
31
Article 25
Disputes
31
Chapter 9
Final and interim provisions
32
Article 26
Article 27
Final provisions
Interim provisions
32
32
1
2
3
4
7
8
9
10
14
15
16
17
20
21
22
23
24
9
7
19
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Part II
Explanatory notes
33
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
j.
k.
l.
Admission to the doctorate (Article 2.1, a)
34
Composition of the Doctoral Committee (Article 11)
34
Standard forms (Article 1.4)
34
Research financing (Article 5.7)
35
The title page and its reverse (Article 16.2)
35
Approval of the propositions (Article 17.1)
37
The costs and distribution of the thesis (Article 19.3)
37
Press releases (Article 19.3)
37
Publication of a summary of the thesis (Article 19.3)
37
Clothing protocol during the defence ceremony (Articles 22 and 23) 37
Investiture formulas (Article 23)
38
Part IIIThe order of events in the doctoral defence
procedure and the minimal time schedule 39
The order of events
The minimal time schedule
Part IV
Examples of standard forms
40
42
43
Part VRelevant extracts from the Dutch Higher
Education and Scientific Research Act
51
Part VI
Information on propositions
55
8
I.
Part I
Doctorate Regulations
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Chapter 1
General Conditions
Article 1
Definitions
1.1
These Regulations employ the following definitions:
Act
: the Dutch Higher Education and Scientific Research
Act, known in the Netherlands as the Wet op het hoger
onderwijs en wetenschappelijk onderzoek, or WHW
co-supervisor
: that person appointed by the Board for Doctorates to
assist the supervisor in advising the candidate;
advisor
: an expert nominated by the supervisor and appointed to
the Doctoral Committee by the Board for Doctorates in an
advisory capacity;
Beadle
: official responsible for the ceremonial aspects of the
doctoral defence ceremony and for ensuring compliance
with protocol, and who acts as intermediary in many
information exchanges throughout the candidate’s
doctoral studies;
Board for Doctorates
: the board for doctorates of the university within the
meaning of Article 7.18 section 4 and Article 9.10 of the
Act;
candidate
: the person admitted to the doctorate and for whom
a supervisor has been appointed by the Board for
Doctorates;
diploma
: the certificate, signed by the chairman of the Doctoral
Committee, the supervisor(s) and the co-supervisor,
which is given as proof of the conferral of the doctorate;
doctoral course of study : the period from registration of candidacy up to and
including the defence ceremony;
doctoral design
: the original, technically innovative design proposal,
within the meaning of Article 7.18, section 2b of the
Act, which meets the requirements defined in these
Regulations;
Doctoral Committee
: the committee appointed by the Board for Doctorates
whose presence is required for the conferral of a
doctorate;
Doctoral Examination Working
Committee : a committee appointed by the Board for Doctorates,
comprising the Rector Magnificus, the Vice-Rector and
the other acting rectors involved in the doctoral defence
ceremony;
doctoral defence ceremony : the public session of the Board for Doctorates or the
Doctoral Committee during which the candidate defends
his doctoral thesis together with its propositions and
appendices, or his doctoral design, in order to obtain the
conferral of a doctorate;
doctoral thesis
: the academic dissertation, within the meaning of Article
7.18, section 2b of the Act, which meets the requirements
defined in these Regulations;
faculty
: the university faculty covering the academic field in which
the subject of the thesis lies;
10
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
draft thesis
professor
propositions
supervisor
university
Rector Magnificus
Vice-Rector
1.2
: the draft text of the doctoral thesis or the documentary
supplements to the doctoral design, which is presented
for approval to the supervisor and, after having received
his approval, is presented to the Doctoral Committee for
assessment. After the possible inclusion of amendments
suggested by the Doctoral Committee, this draft becomes
the definitive doctoral thesis which, together with the
propositions, is defended by the candidate at the doctoral
defence ceremony;
: a professor within the meaning of Article 9.19 2b of the
Act and Article 7.2 of these Regulations;
: the claims attached to the doctoral thesis or doctoral
design, the truth of which the candidate wishes to
demonstrate;
: the professor or emeritus professor appointed by the
Board for Doctorates in accordance with Article 7.18,
section 5 of the Act;
: TU Delft, within the meaning of the relevant Dutch
legislation (Wet openbare universiteit te Delft), unless
otherwise specified;
: the Rector Magnificus of the university and chairman
of the Board for Doctorates, or his replacement at the
doctoral defence ceremony;
: the deputy chairman of the Board for Doctorates and
chairman of the Doctoral Examination Working Committee.
Where these Regulations, the explanatory notes or the appendices
a. make use of male pronouns, these should be read as female pronouns in the event
that they refer to a female person;
b. refer to Articles, they refer to Articles in these Regulations, unless otherwise
specified.
1.3Where these Regulations make reference to:
a. a supervisor, this should be understood to mean ‘supervisors’ in the event that more
than one supervisor has been appointed;
b. a thesis, then this can mean part of a thesis, a doctoral design, or the documentary
supplements to a doctoral design;
c. a professor in the sense of the (proposed) supervisor, this should be read as
‘professors’ in the event that more than one supervisor has been appointed.
1.4
Where these Regulations refer to written requests, proposals and explanations, the
standard forms described in the Explanatory Notes (Part II, section c) and in Part IV of
these Regulations should be used.
1.5
The written notification of decisions taken by the Board for Doctorates with regard
to submitted requests and proposals consists of a copy of the relevant standard form
signed on behalf of the Board.
Article 2
Admission to the doctorate
2.1
Admission to the doctorate can be granted to any person who, in accordance with
Article 7.18, section 2 of the Act:
a. has been granted a Master’s degree in accordance with Article 7.10a, section 1, 2 or
3 of the Act [2], and
[2]
Candidates who have obtained a pass certificate for their Master’s degree within the meaning of the Act on scientific education
which preceded the current WHW are held by Article 16.2 of the current Act to have obtained this certificate within the meaning of
the WHW and therefore meet this academic requirement.
11
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
b. has written a doctoral thesis or prepared a doctoral design (with documentary
supplements), as demonstration of his ability to carry out independent academic
research, and
c. meets all the remaining requirements specified in these doctorate regulations.
2.2
By virtue of Article 7.18, section 3 of the Act, the Board for Doctorates can in
exceptional circumstances grant admission to the doctorate to persons who meet
the requirements laid down in Article 2.1, sections b and c, but who do not meet the
academic requirements laid down in Article 2.1, section a.
2.3
Candidates not meeting the academic requirements described in Article 2.1, section a,
may submit a request for this requirement to be waived, for instance on the grounds
that a course at a foreign institute of academic education has been successfully
completed. In such cases, the following procedure should be adopted:
a. A candidate wishing to be admitted to a doctoral degree course must apply to the
university Protocol Officer (ProZa). The application should be accompanied by a copy
of the candidate’s birth certificate or an extract from the municipal register and by
authenticated copies of any certificates which, in the candidate’s opinion, justify
admission to the doctorate.
b. The Protocol Officer then carries out the following actions on behalf of the Board for
Doctorates: he verifies the certificates supplied, assesses the lists of marks (after
their translation if necessary), compares the course followed with its Dutch academic
counterparts and informs the candidate of his decision as soon as possible.
c. If the decision is positive, the candidate should reach agreement with the most
suitable professor about the subject of the thesis and its working title.
d. He should then approach the Dean of the faculty for advice, bringing with him both
a written recommendation from the professor and the Protocol Officer’s written
statement.
e. If necessary, he should ascertain whether the faculty can provide him with either a
research post or a ‘declaration of hospitality’.
f. He should submit a written recommendation from the Dean of the faculty with his
application for appointment of a supervisor.
Article 3
The doctorate
3.1
The doctorate may be awarded by the university after the candidate has successfully
defended his thesis in public in the presence of the Board for Doctorates, or the
Doctoral Committee appointed by the Board.
3.2
The award of the doctorate must be approved by the Board for Doctorates.
3.3
This Article does not apply to the award of an honorary doctorate within the meaning of
Article 9.10, section 2 of the Act.
Article 4
Confidentiality
All those present at the closed sessions mentioned in these Regulations must treat the
matters discussed as strictly confidential.
12
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Chapter 2
The candidate
Article 5
Registration of candidacy and appointment of supervisor
5.1
A candidate wishing to prepare for a doctorate should obtain a copy of these
Regulations. Before he can be recognised as a candidate, he must make sure that he
is entitled to be admitted to the doctoral defence ceremony in accordance with Article
2 of these Regulations, and should consult with the professor most appropriate to the
academic area concerned about the subject of his doctoral research and the professor’s
preparedness to act as supervisor. This professor will further be referred to as the
(intended) supervisor.
5.2
Doctoral research or experimental designs carried out at the university must be clearly
related to an academic area being researched by one or more professorial chairs at
the university, given the desirability of involving the university’s academic staff in the
preparation of the thesis.
5.3
If the research underlying the thesis has been carried out under the supervision of
a given professor, then as a rule the PhD candidate is expected to put that professor
forward for designation as the doctorate supervisor. An exception to this rule may
be made only after a detailed written request has been submitted to the Board for
Doctorates; after hearing the parties involved, the Board will act according to its
discretion.
5.4
In the event that the agreement described in Article 5.1 is not reached, or if only a
provisional agreement is reached, then the most appropriate party may present a
reasoned argument of their case to the Board for Doctorates, which will act according to
its discretion.
5.5
No more than two professors may supervise any doctoral course of study; if a
co-supervisor has been appointed, no more than one professor may act as supervisor.
In exceptional circumstances the Board of Doctorates may appoint three professors as
supervisors, or two as supervisors and one as co-supervisor.
5.6
In the event that the candidate requests that a supervisor be a professor from a
university other than TU Delft, the Board of Doctorates reserves the right, after having
consulted the proposed supervisor, to nominate a professor from within the university
as (co-) supervisor.
5.7
Within a month after reaching agreement with the intended supervisor, the candidate
shall report to the Board for Doctorates, through the intermediation of the Beadle, with
a written request to be admitted to the preparation for the doctorate and to be
allocated a supervisor. This admission request must be accompanied by:
a. the written consent of the professor described in Article 5.1, who may also elect to
complete the appropriate standard form to propose an co-supervisor;
b. a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate or extract from the municipal register, and
c. an authenticated copy of the certificate entitling the candidate to admission to
the doctoral defence ceremony. In the event that no authenticated copy of this
document can be produced, then at the Beadle’s request the original certificate must
be shown together with valid proof of identity.
13
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
5.8
In the event that the candidate does not possess a Dutch university graduation
certificate, then the Board for Doctorates will make the appointment of supervisor
dependent upon the written recommendation of the professor concerned; this
recommendation must accompany the request for the allocation of a supervisor.
Candidates not meeting the academic qualification requirements laid down in Article
2.1, section a, must nevertheless follow the procedure described in Article 2.3 and
include the relevant faculty recommendation in the request described in Article 5.7.
5.9
On receipt of the application for registration of candidacy and appointment of a
supervisor, the Board for Doctorates will send as soon as possible, through the
intermediation of the Beadle, written notification of its findings to the candidate and to
the intended supervisor. If the application is rejected, then the notification shall detail
the reasons for this rejection.
Article 6
Draft thesis preparation and the responsibilities of
the candidate
6.1
The candidate shall carry out the research underlying the thesis independently or
shall be responsible for an essential contribution thereto. This research can relate to a
doctoral design as described in Article 14.2.
6.2
Research carried out together by two or three candidates can form the foundation for a
joint thesis, provided the stipulations laid down in Article 14.5 are met.
6.3
The candidate is responsible for the academic contribution made by the thesis.
6.4
The candidate is responsible for ensuring that the research
a. takes place in accordance with the professional code of conduct applying to
professional activities carried out in the academic field concerned;
b. has the full and informed consent of those involved, or of their appointed
representative, in the event that the thesis requires that tests be carried out on or
with the cooperation of test subjects;
c. conforms to the laws concerned, in the event that the research makes use of
laboratory animals, hazardous (e.g. radioactive) materials, hazardous (e.g.
biological) substances etc.;
d. is not subjected to the imposition of restrictions inconsistent with academic freedom
and the freedom of publication of research data and results, including where
research has been partly or wholly financed by third parties.
14
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Chapter 3
The supervisor and co-supervisor
Article 7
The supervisor
7.1
The Board for Doctorates appoints a university professor within the meaning of Article
7.18 of the Act as supervisor.
7.2
A professor attached to a foreign institute of academic education having equal
standing can also act as a supervisor at the university in the event that he possesses
this authority in the country of the institute concerned by virtue of procedures
which correspond with the professorial appointment procedures employed in Dutch
universities. Professors attached to Dutch institutes providing international courses may
act as supervisors only if they also have a university professorial appointment.
7.3
Close relatives of the candidate or other persons whose relationship with the candidate
is such that they cannot reasonably be expected to state an opinion about him do not
come into consideration as (intended) supervisor.
7.4
Emeritus professors retain the ius promovendi, that is, the right to supervise a doctoral
candidate at a Dutch university, for a period of five years following their retirement or
for five years after termination of a temporary contract of employment. They should
submit a written request to the Board of Doctorates no less than 30 days before their
retirement date in order to receive permission to act as supervisor for one or more
named candidates after their retirement, with the proviso that they must already have
been appointed as supervisor by the Board of Doctorates for the named candidate(s).
This request, together with a list of candidates, must be co-signed by the Dean of the
faculty in question, and be accompanied by details of how continuity of supervision is to
be assured.
7.5
In certain instances an exception can be made to the stipulations laid down in section
7.4, for instance if the candidate has carried out his research outside the university
within a particularly specialised academic subject area for which no professor is
employed by the university. In such cases, the Board for Doctorates’ appointment of
a supervisor shall depend on the results of written consultations with the dean of the
faculty by which the retired professor was employed.
7.6
In the event that the former professor appointed as supervisor has not given his
approval of the thesis and its propositions to the Board of Doctorates in accordance with
Article 18.2 within five years of his departure date, or should it become evident that
the supervisor has become protractedly or permanently incapable of carrying out his
supervisory tasks, then his appointment becomes invalid. The Board for Doctorates shall
then, after having consulted with the candidate, appoint another supervisor, unless the
Board is of the opinion that no new appointment is necessary; this can be the case if
more than one supervisor was originally appointed.
7.7
The Board for Doctorates shall send written notification of the appointment of a
supervisor to both candidate and supervisor within 30 days of the receipt of the
application.
15
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Article 8
The supervisor’s tasks and responsibilities
8.1
The supervisor shall ascertain that the candidate has been granted admission to the
doctorate in accordance with Article 2 and shall submit to the Board for Doctorates
an application for appointment as supervisor. He shall supervise the candidate’s
preparation of the thesis, ensuring in this connection that the research is carried out in
accordance with Article 6.4.
8.2
The supervisor shall send the Board for Doctorates his written acceptance of his
appointment as supervisor and after approving the draft thesis he shall submit a
proposal concerning the composition of the Doctoral Committee, shall approve the
definitive doctoral thesis with propositions and shall make the necessary preparations
for the doctoral defence ceremony to proceed.
8.3
The supervision described in Article 8.1 is also aimed at ensuring that the draft thesis is
presented and approved within a reasonable time of the start of the doctoral research
programme. If the doctoral research takes place within the framework of a full-time
appointment by the university as doctoral student, then this ‘reasonable time’ is
deemed to be four years.
8.4
The supervisor shall read the draft thesis in its entirety or in instalments, and shall
assess the text presented to him on the grounds he has determined, with a view to his
responsibility for the thesis, to be the foundation of the doctorate. He shall also give the
co-supervisor, if one has been appointed, timely opportunity to give his opinion of the
draft thesis.
8.5
In assessing the draft thesis, the supervisor will devote attention to:
a. the relevance of the subject;
b. the importance of the research question and its precise formulation;
c. the originality of the treatment;
d. the academic content of the research work: its organisation, analysis, data
processing and synthesis;
e. the presence of creative proposals in the academic area to which the thesis belongs;
f. the critical confrontation of the candidate’s own conclusions with existing theories
and concepts;
g. a well-balanced layout of the thesis, the clarity of its style, and the correct use of
language;
h. the absence of anything contrary to public order or decency.
8.6
If more than one supervisor is appointed, the supervisors will determine the division of
their tasks in consultation with the candidate. The division of tasks shall be laid down in
writing if one of the supervisors or the candidate requests this.
8.7
The supervisor may propose changes and/or additions to the thesis in consultation with
the candidate, the co-supervisor (if applicable) and others involved in the preparation of
the draft thesis.
Article 9
The co-supervisor
9.1
On receipt of a written proposal from the supervisor and after consulting with the
candidate, the Board for Doctorates may appoint an assistant professor or associate
professor from the University as co-supervisor. The proposal must describe the role and
function of the co-supervisor. It must be co-signed by the co-supervisor.
9.2
The Board for Doctorates can appoint as co-supervisor any senior staff member working
for an academic research institute attached to the university, or for an international
training institute with which the university has a joint working relationship.
16
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
9.3
A request for a person to be nominated as co-supervisor may be presented to the Board
for Doctorates at any time up to the approval of the draft thesis.
9.4
In the event that the proposed co-supervisor refuses his nomination or wishes to revoke
a previous acceptance of this nomination, then he must give the Board for Doctorates
written notification of his decision; the Board for Doctorates shall then act according to
its discretion.
9.5
It is the co-supervisor’s responsibility to supervise the candidate in the preparation
of the thesis. The supervisor and the candidate must be involved in discussions at the
faculty on the nature of this supervision.
9.6
The co-supervisor shall provide the supervisor with a brief written assessment of the
draft thesis.
Article 10
Approval of draft thesis
10.1
If the supervisor is of the opinion that the draft thesis meets the requirements made
of it and can be accepted as evidence of the candidate’s competence to carry out
independent academic work, then he shall give the draft thesis his approval and may if
applicable also state the co-supervisor’s assessment.
10.2
In the event that the co-supervisor is of the opinion that the draft thesis does not merit
approval, and this opinion is not shared by the supervisor, then this shall be regarded as
a difference of opinion within the meaning of Article 25.1.
10.3
The supervisor is obliged to provide both the Board for Doctorates and the candidate
with written notification of his approval of the draft thesis, or his refusal to give it
this approval, within two months of its receipt. The supervisor may postpone this
notification only in the event that and as long as the candidate gives his permission.
10.4
In the event that the candidate is of the opinion that the draft thesis is completed
and that the supervisor has not produced an approval or a rejection within the period
specified in Article 10.3, then the candidate can request the Board for Doctorates to
instruct the supervisor to take a decision on such approval within a given time period.
The Board for Doctorates shall take a decision on such a request within a period of 30
days.
10.5
In the event that more than one supervisor has been nominated, then the approval of
the draft thesis is arrived at in a process of mutual consultation. Should the supervisors
fail to reach agreement, then each supervisor shall bring his own detailed written
assessment to the attention of the Board for Doctorates, while sending a copy to the
candidate. The Board for Doctorates shall then act according to its own discretion.
10.6
If approval is withheld from the draft thesis, and the requirements of Article 10.3
have been met, then at the candidate’s request the Board of Doctorates, after hearing
both the candidate and the supervisor, may choose to release the supervisor from his
obligations. The Board shall then appoint another supervisor, unless it is of the opinion
that such an appointment is unnecessary, as might be the case for instance if more than
one supervisor was originally appointed. The appointment of another supervisor shall
take place only after the dean of the faculty concerned has been given an opportunity to
put forward any recommendations.
17
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Chapter 4
The doctoral committee and the
assessment of the draft thesis
Article 11
Composition of the Doctoral Committee
11.1
A Doctoral Committee consists of members having voting powers and possible
advisors present in an advisory capacity. With the exception of the chairman, they
should all be experts in the academic field of the thesis or part of it. Their task, apart
from that stipulated in the rest of these Regulations, is to act as ‘opponents’ (i.e. to
pose questions about or make objections to the content of the research) during the
ceremonial defence of the thesis. The number of persons in the Doctoral Committee,
including the chairman, shall be no fewer than six and no more than eight.
11.2
Members can include individuals who have the right to award PhDs, who hold a post
at a Dutch university or equivalent foreign academic institution, as well as associate
professors who may or may not hold a university post.
Assistant professors can also be granted membership, on the condition that they meet
the following requirements:
– the request that they do so is made by the PhD supervisor;
– the assistant professor has made a genuine contribution to the completion of the
dissertation in question;
– the assistant professor has tenure at the university;
– there are no more than two PhD supervisors and there is no non-tenured PhD
supervisor.
11.3
The following provisions apply to emeritus professors:
a. Former professors who still possess the ius promovendi in accordance with Article
9.1.9, section 3, of the Act, are regarded as professors for the purposes of this article.
b. Former professors who are entitled to bear the title ‘professor’ in the Netherlands
in accordance with Article 9.19, section 3, of the Act but who no longer possess
the ius promovendi may be admitted as members of the Doctoral Committee after
the supervisor has submitted a written application to this end, with reasons, to the
Board for Doctorates.
11.4
The Rector Magnificus is chairman of the Doctoral Committee; he may however delegate
this task to a member of the Examination Working Committee or of the Board for
Doctorates.
11.5
The supervisor and the co-supervisor are ex officio members of the Doctoral Committee.
11.6
There shall be at least five professors, including the chairman and the supervisor, on the
Doctoral Committee.
11.7
In order to ensure independence of the ‘opposition’ (to the ceremonial defence of the
thesis), at least four of the Doctoral Committee members and advisors must not have
been directly involved in the doctoral research programme and at least one of these
members or advisors must not be attached to the university. The supervisor must detail
the committee’s independence in his proposal for committee composition. The university
shall be represented by at least two of its professors, of whom at least one shall not be
the supervisor. The chairman is not included in the minimum numbers mentioned in this
article.
18
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
11.8
If the Doctoral Committee has six members or contains the minimum number of professors mentioned in Articles 11.6 and 11.7, a professor of the university shall be appointed
as substitute Doctoral Committee member. The substitute member shall hold himself in
readiness up to ten minutes before the start of the public defence of the thesis, and is
called on to participate only if one of the members or advisors is unable to attend.
11.9
No more than two advisors may be included in the Doctoral Committee. An advisor will
in general have a doctorate, and may be attached to the university’s academic staff or
may be an expert not attached to a university. Application for the inclusion of an advisor
without a doctorate should be made in writing, with reasons, by the supervisor.
Article 12
Installation of the Doctoral Committee
12.1
The supervisor, through the intermediation of the Beadle, shall submit, no later than
the eleventh week before the provisional defence date, a written proposal for the
installation of a Doctoral Committee in accordance with Article 11.7, after he has
satisfied himself that the proposed Doctoral Committee members and advisors are
prepared to accept their nominations.
12.2
Within three weeks of receipt of the proposal mentioned in Article 12.2, the Board for
Doctorates shall make a decision to install the Doctoral Committee and shall inform the
supervisor, the candidate and the members and advisors of the Committee of this decision
in writing.
12.3
Within three weeks of receipt of their nomination, the members and advisors of the
Doctoral Committee shall inform the Beadle in writing whether they accept this
nomination.
12.4
If the Board for Doctorates does not agree with the composition of the Doctoral
Committee proposed by the supervisor, it shall ask him to make a new proposal.
The Board for Doctorates reserves the right to nominate one member of the Doctoral
Committee itself.
Article 13
Assessment of the draft thesis by the Doctoral Committee
and the role of the candidate in this connection
13.1
After the draft thesis has been approved by the supervisor in accordance with Article 10.1,
the candidate can apply for admission to the doctoral graduation procedure. To this end he
should, in consultation with the Beadle, apply for permission to hold the graduation ceremony on a date that is also acceptable to the supervisor. This application must include:
a. the final title of the thesis and three copies of the draft thesis, and
b. a written statement by the supervisor that the enclosed draft thesis has been
approved by him.
Doctoral defence ceremonies are not held during a period lasting four weeks in the
summer or during the Christmas holidays.
13.2
The candidate shall send, no later than the eleventh week before the defence date:
a. a copy of the draft thesis to each proposed member and advisor of the Doctoral
Committee;
b. the addresses of all proposed members and advisors of the Doctoral Committee and
the date on which the draft thesis was sent to them, to the Board for Doctorates
through the intermediation of the Beadle.
13.3
No later than the sixth week before the defence date the members and advisors of the
Doctoral Committee shall send the Board for Doctorates, through the intermediation of
the Beadle and with a copy to the supervisor, a written report indicating whether in their
19
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
opinion the draft thesis provides adequate evidence that the candidate is capable of
carrying out independent academic work, and whether the candidate may be allowed to
defend the thesis in public.
13.4
The members and advisors of the Doctoral Committee may make their approval for the
defence conditional, by sending written proposals for modification of and/or additions
to the draft thesis to the supervisor and the candidate within three weeks of receipt of
the draft thesis. They will receive a written reply from the supervisor as to whether these
proposals are accepted, copies of this reply being sent to the other members and advisors of the Doctoral Committee and to the Board for Doctorates. If a difference of opinion
arises between the Committee members and advisors on the one hand and the supervisor
on the other concerning the inclusion of the proposed changes, the supervisor shall report
this in writing to the Board for Doctorates, which will deal with the matter at its own
discretion.
13.5
If one of the members of the Doctoral Committee produces an adverse judgement, this
member may not be removed from the Committee for this reason. In order to ensure
proper monitoring of the level of the doctorate, one must in such a case oppose the
awarding of the doctorate and must inform the Rector Magnificus of this fact without
delay.
13.6
If one or more members of the Doctoral Committee consider the draft thesis to be of
inferior quality, the decision as to whether to give approval for the defence is taken in
a meeting of the Doctoral Committee chaired by the Rector Magnificus or his replacement, by a majority of the votes cast. The chairman has the right to abstain from voting.
Those who cannot attend the meeting shall give their vote in writing, with reasons, to the
chairman before the meeting. In the event that the votes are equally divided, admission
to the defence ceremony is assumed to be withheld.
13.7
The Doctoral Committee may only refuse permission for the candidate to defend the
thesis in public on the grounds of major objections to the content, academic quality
and/or size of the draft thesis, and/or language usage in the draft thesis.
13.8 The supervisor passes the decision referred to in Article 13.6, in writing and countersigned by the chairman of the Doctoral Committee, to the Board for Doctorates, the
candidate and the Beadle. If the Doctoral Committee refuses to give approval for the
defence, the grounds for this refusal are also mentioned. The Board for Doctorates shall
deal with the matter further at its own discretion.
20
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Chapter 5
The doctoral thesis and
propositions
Article 14
Content of the doctoral thesis
14.1
The subject of the doctoral thesis is related to the fields of academic research dealt with
in one or more professorial chairs at the university. The content of the thesis is in the
public domain.
14.2
The provisions concerning the doctoral thesis contained in these Regulations also apply
to the doctoral design. In this context, the doctoral design is taken to mean the original,
innovative technical design consisting of design drawings, models and/or other products
made on the basis of appropriate academic knowledge, methods and/or calculations, in
combination with written academic justification and documentation.
14.3
The doctoral thesis should provide clear evidence of the candidate’s ability to engage in
independent academic activity. It consists of an academic dissertation, a collection of
previously published papers or a combination of the two, which is the original work of the
candidate. If one or more papers were produced by more than one author, only those articles may be included in the thesis which may be largely ascribed to the candidate; moreover, the co-authors must have given their written permission for use of these papers.
14.4
If the thesis consists wholly or in part of previously published papers, then:
a. these papers must have been published, or accepted for publication, in academic
journals of international renown;
b. they must be in line, or have been brought in line by means of suitable added
comments, with current academic insights at the time of submission of the thesis;
c. the topics dealt with should show a logical cohesion;
d. the thesis should be provided with an introduction in which the cohesion between
the topics is elucidated by means of summarising, connecting text.
14.5
If two or three candidates carried out a joint programme of research, this can lead to the
production of a joint thesis if the following conditions are satisfied:
a. each candidate has made an independent, demonstrable and sufficient contribution
to the doctoral programme, in the opinion of the supervisor;
b. each candidate assumes individual responsibility for both the various parts of the
thesis and the cohesion of the whole;
c. an explanatory note or foreword indicates what role each candidate played in the
production of the thesis, and for which parts each one is responsible;
d. each candidate appends the required number of propositions to the thesis.
14.6
The thesis shall contain a title page, a contents list, a summary, a reference list and the
candidate’s curriculum vitae. The summary shall in any case contain a statement of the
problem considered and a brief description of the method of investigation, the results
obtained and possible applications.
14.7
The (concise) curriculum vitae of the candidate given at the end of the thesis shall
contain the following information:
a. date and place of birth;
b. type of secondary education followed, and the period occupied by this education;
c. the period and nature of the tertiary education courses leading to the final
21
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
examination mentioned in Article 2;
d. any special qualification [such as cum laude] mentioned in connection with the
gaining of the diplomas;
e. if applicable, details of any professional activities engaged in after the completion of
the training mentioned in Article 2, and
f. the name of the institute where the research was carried out.
14.8
The thesis, in particular the foreword and/or postscript if present, may contain brief
expressions of thanks formulated in consultation with the supervisor so as to avoid
over-flowery language; these may include acknowledgements in the form commonly
employed in the international literature.
14.9
The thesis shall not contain any advertisements or other matters not directly related to
the topic under investigation. Institutions or persons that have made financial contributions or helped in other ways to make the production of the thesis possible may if desired
be mentioned on the reverse of the title page.
Article 15
Language of the thesis
15.1
The thesis shall be written in Dutch or English. Another language may only be used
in highly exceptional cases. The candidate must then submit a letter of application
(including written approval from the supervisor) to the Board for Doctorates via the
Beadle before submitting the thesis to the supervisor. The Board will inform its decision
on this matter to the candidate in writing, also sending a copy to the supervisor.
15.2
The following provisions apply to the language used in the title and the summary of the
contents of the thesis:
a. When the thesis is written in Dutch, an English translation of the title and the
summary shall be appended.
b. When the thesis is written in English, a Dutch translation of the title and the
summary shall be appended.
c. If, in highly exceptional cases, the thesis is written in a language other than Dutch or
English, a translation of the title and the summary into both Dutch and English shall
be appended.
Article 16
Form of the thesis
16.1
The thesis shall be produced as a conveniently sized book, unless in the opinion of the
supervisor another format is desirable. The candidate is responsible for the further
design of the thesis, in line with normal Dutch usage.
16.2
A standard text shall be used for the title page of the thesis (including the reverse of this
page), in line with the model given in section e of Part II of these Regulations.
16.3
If the thesis is produced by two or three candidates, the title page shall include mention
of their names. Details of what role each candidate played in the production of the thesis
and for which parts each one is responsible, as laid down in Article 14.5, shall be given on
one of the following pages before the contents list.
16.4
If the candidate received appreciable guidance or support concerning the production of
the thesis from a member of the academic staff of the university other than the
(co-)supervisor, or from a member of the academic staff of an external institution for
academic research, the name of this person may be mentioned on the reverse of the title
page if the supervisor gives his approval for this.
22
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Article 17
Propositions
17.1
Propositions are appended to the thesis. At least six of these propositions should concern
topics not related to the subject of the thesis. It may be stated as a general rule that the
total number of propositions should not exceed ten. All propositions shall be academically
sound, shall lend themselves to opposition and be defendable by the candidate, and shall
be approved by the supervisor. The supervisor’s approval shall be explicitly mentioned
on the sheet bearing the propositions, as laid down in the Explanatory Notes (Part II of
these regulations, section f). No more than two propositions may be somewhat playful in
nature.
17.2
The propositions should show that the candidate’s academic knowledge is broadly based
and not limited to the subject of the thesis. Possible topics dealt with in the propositions
may include:
a. extensions of ideas dealt with in the thesis, or perspectives offered by the thesis;
b. results of incidental interest which are not included in the thesis;
c. (critical) comments on the academic literature;
d. comments on related disciplines and/or methods used;
e. speculative statements concerning future developments, which cannot yet be
objectively verified.
Propositions should preferably be provided with references to the literature, or mention
of sources.
17.3
The propositions shall be written in Dutch and, if appropriate, in the language in which
the thesis is written.
23
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Chapter 6
Admission to the doctoral
defence ceremony
Article 18
Approval of the doctoral thesis and propositions
18.1
The doctoral thesis is subject to the approval of the supervisor, in the same way as the
draft thesis.
18.2
The supervisor gives his approval if he is of the opinion that the thesis meets the requirements stipulated in Article 14. If he does not give his approval, he shall report this in
writing, with reasons, to the Board for Doctorates, with copies to the candidate and the
members of the Doctoral Committee. The Board for Doctorates will deal with the matter
further at its discretion.
18.3
The candidate shall submit the propositions to be appended to the thesis to the supervisor no later than the fifth week before the defence date. The supervisor may, if he
deems this appropriate, advise the candidate to discuss a proposition with a professor in
whose field the proposition lies.
18.4
If the supervisor considers that the propositions submitted to him lend themselves to
opposition and are defendable, he countersigns the text of the propositions. The statement given in Part II, section f, shall be appended to the propositions.
18.5
The supervisor will inform the Beadle in writing of the approval of the thesis and propositions. The following items are enclosed with this report in accordance with Article 17.1:
a. the text of the propositions as approved by the supervisor;
b. two proofs of the title page and the reverse of the title page.
The Beadle checks the proofs and returns a countersigned copy to the candidate.
18.6
The candidate is given permission to proceed to the public defence of the thesis and propositions after:
a. the opinion of all members and advisors (if any) of the Doctoral Committee,
requested in accordance with Article 13.1, has been received by the Beadle;
b. if at least one member and/or advisor gave his approval conditionally as described in
Article 13.4, the supervisor has stated that the suggestions for improvement made
by that member and/or advisor have been adopted;
c. in the case mentioned in Article 13.6, the Doctoral Committee has approved the draft
thesis by a majority vote;
d. the supervisor has approved the thesis and propositions, and
e. the requirements of Article 18.5 have been met.
18.7
Permission to proceed to the doctoral defence ceremony must be given no later than the
fifth week before the defence date. The Beadle shall then, within a week, send the candidate written confirmation that permission has been granted for the public defence of the
thesis and its propositions on the date fixed, while also sending copies to the supervisors
and the members and advisors of the Doctoral Committee.
24
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Article 19
Distribution of the thesis and propositions
19.1
The final version of the thesis may not be reproduced until the candidate has received
written permission to proceed to the defence ceremony as laid down in Article 18.7. The
thesis may, at the discretion of the candidate, be printed or reproduced in some other way
as long as the requirements of Article 16 are met.
19.2
No later than the second week before the defence date, the candidate shall send copies of
the thesis with its propositions to:
a. the chairman, members, advisors and substitute member (if there is one) of the
Doctoral Committee (1 copy each);
b. the Beadle (3 copies);
c. the Dean of the faculty to which the supervisor belongs (1 copy);
d. the library of the faculty to which the supervisor belongs (1 copy), and
e. the university’s scientific information officer (2 copies).
19.3
The candidate must submit the thesis in PDF format to the university library (for the TU
Delft Repository) before the defence date. The thesis will be made available for viewing
on the library’s website. The following provisions apply to the digital publication of the
thesis:
a. the library is not granted exclusive publication rights;
b. the candidate retains the copyright;
c. the digital version does not replace the hard copies of the thesis.
19.4
The candidate shall also take responsibility for the further distribution of the thesis
and for information about the contents of the thesis, in accordance with the guidelines
contained in sections f, g and h of Part II of these Regulations.
19.5
In the event of a joint thesis in the sense of Article 14.5, the provisions of Articles 19.1,
19.2 and 19.3 are applicable severally to each of the candidates.
25
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Chapter 7
The doctoral defence ceremony
Article 20
Preparations
20.1
The definitive date and time of the defence ceremony is fixed on behalf of the Rector
Magnificus by the Beadle, in consultation with the supervisor, the co-supervisor if applicable, and the candidate, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 13.1 and 18.7.
20.2
The candidate shall appear before the Beadle at least two weeks before the defence date.
The Beadle shall ensure that the defence ceremony is announced at least two weeks
before the defence date, and that the candidate is aware of the protocol during the
defence ceremony.
20.3
At least two weeks before the defence date, the candidate shall pay a preparatory visit
to the chairman of the Doctoral Committee. As a rule, he will also pay similar visits to the
other members and advisors of the Doctoral Committee.
20.4
The candidate is most strongly advised to give a presentation lasting no more than 15
minutes before the defence ceremony, in which he explains the essence of the doctoral
thesis, the results obtained and the possible applications of these results in terms which
are understandable to non-experts in the specific field of his research. Details of this
presentation should be arranged with the Beadle well in advance.
20.5
The permission of the Rector Magnificus is required for the making of radio or TV
recordings or live broadcasts during the defence ceremony. An application to this end
should be made well in advance, to allow the permission to be granted at least three
weekdays before the ceremony.
Article 21
The defence ceremony
21.1
The thesis and propositions are defended at a public meeting of the Board for Doctorates
or of the Doctoral Committee appointed by the Board. If the candidate and/or at least one
of the members of the Doctoral Committee do not speak Dutch, the entire ceremony will
in principle be conducted in English.
21.2
The Rector Magnificus shall chair the defence ceremony. As a rule, however, this task is
delegated to a member of the Examination Working Committee. Members of the Board
for Doctorates can also take the place of the Rector Magnificus for this purpose.
21.3
The candidate may be accompanied by one or two paranymphs (supporters) during his
defence of the thesis and propositions.
21.4
The Doctoral Committee shall meet 30 minutes (or 45 minutes if a cum laude proposal
has been made) before the defence ceremony. The following rules apply to the presence
of members and advisors of the Committee at this meeting:
a. If the chairman of the Doctoral Committee is unable to attend the meeting, this shall
be reported without delay by intermediation of the Beadle to the Vice-Rector, or in
his absence to another member of the Examination Working Committee, who will
deal with the matter at his discretion.
b. If one of the members or advisors of the Doctoral Committee is unable to attend the
26
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
meeting, this shall be reported to the chairman who will deal with the matter at his
discretion – on the understanding that the defence ceremony can only take place if
the minimum number of professors laid down in Articles 11.6 and 11.7 is present.
The chairman determines, in consultation with the members and advisors of the
Doctoral Committee, the order in which the ‘opposition’ questions are to be asked
and objections made.
21.5
The defence ceremony is generally held in the Senate Hall of the university. The chairman
can restrict access to this room if considerations of good order or (fire) safety require
this. Children less than four years of age are not allowed to be present during the defence
of the thesis and propositions. Pets and other animals may not be present at all, with
the exception of guide dogs for the blind. The chairman may further refuse access to the
defence ceremony to persons considered likely to cause a disturbance.
21.6
If persons other than the members and advisors of the Doctoral Committee and members
of the Board for Doctorates wish to participate in the opposition during the public defence
of the thesis and propositions, they should apply for permission to do so in writing to the
Rector Magnificus at least two weeks before the defence date. The Rector Magnificus shall
decide whether to grant this request within one week. The person making this request
should have a doctorate or be qualified to act as a supervisor.
21.7
If the doctoral thesis was written by two or three persons, the defence ceremony shall be
considered as comprising two or three separate ceremonies, and the rules concerning the
defence of the thesis and propositions, the opposition and the duration of the ceremony
shall apply for each candidate separately. The investiture ceremony for all candidates is
then held immediately after the end of the defence by the last candidate.
Article 22
Protocol
22.1
The candidate shall defend the doctoral thesis and propositions for one hour against
objections expressed by the Doctoral Committee, or by other persons who have
received permission to take part in the opposition in accordance with the provisions of
Article 21.6.
22.2
During the defence ceremony, the chairman, the supervisor, the members and advisors
of the Doctoral Committee, the candidate and his paranymphs (if any) shall be clothed
as laid down in the protocol (as explained in section j of Part II of these Regulations).
In special cases, on written application by the candidate and after consultation with the
supervisor, the Rector Magnificus can grant dispensation against the obligation to wear
the prescribed clothing during the defence ceremony.
22.3
The chairman opens the meeting and invites the candidate to take his place at the lectern
(and the paranymphs to take their places on the chairs provided for this purpose). He
then invites each opponent in turn to state his objections or to ask a question; after each
opponent has spoken, the chairman gives the candidate the opportunity to reply.
Opponents remain seated while making their comments or putting their questions; only
the chairman may interrupt them. If the candidate is interrupted by an opponent, he is
given the chance to reply. The order of opposition is governed by the following rules:
a. If a member of the audience has been granted permission to make a comment or ask
a question, this is given first priority – with a time limit of five minutes for comment
or question and answer together.
b. Within the Doctoral Committee, external members and advisors are allowed to speak
first; the supervisor speaks last.
c. A co-supervisor speaks before the main supervisor.
d. All members of the Doctoral Committee will, as far as possible, be given an
opportunity to speak. The chairman, however, does not normally take part in the
opposition.
27
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
22.4
The opposition to and defence of the thesis and propositions shall take place in Dutch.
If one of the members or advisors of the Doctoral Committee does not speak Dutch,
English will be used throughout the ceremony. If the candidate does not have a
sufficient command of Dutch, the whole defence ceremony will also be held in English.
Agreement concerning the language to be used during the defence ceremony will be
reached between the candidate, the supervisor and the chairman, well before the date
of the ceremony, and the results will be communicated to the members and advisors of
the Doctoral Committee.
22.5
In highly exceptional cases, the Board for Doctorates may permit opposition to and
defence of the doctoral thesis wholly or in part in a language other than Dutch or
English. If this is desired, the supervisor should submit an application to this end via the
Beadle to the chairman of the Doctoral Committee no later than two weeks before the
set defence date. The chairman of the Doctoral Committee will decide on this application within a week, and communicate this decision to the members and advisors of the
Doctoral Committee and any other persons involved.
22.6
Members of the Doctoral Committee (and any opponents speaking from the audience)
address the candidate as waarde promovendus or waarde promovenda (‘worthy candidate’). The candidate addresses the members of the Doctoral Committee as follows:
Chairman: mijnheer/ mevrouw de rector (Mr/Madam Rector);
Supervisor: hooggeachte promotor (esteemed supervisor);
Co-supervisor: zeergeleerde promotor (learned supervisor), or if he does not have a
doctorate geachte promotor (honourable supervisor);
Professors: hooggeleerde opponent (most learned opponent);
Committee members and advisors with a doctorate: zeergeleerde opponent (learned
opponent);
Committee members and advisors without a doctorate: geachte opponent (honourable
opponent);
Any persons making comments or asking questions from the audience shall be
addressed as zeergeleerde opponent (learned opponent) – or hooggeleerde opponent
(most learned opponent) in the case of a professor. These forms of address are also
used if part or all of the meeting is held in a language other than Dutch.
22.7
If any events occur during the defence ceremony which in the opinion of the chairman
interfere with the normal procedure, he shall decide what course of action should be
taken. If he decides to suspend the meeting this decision shall be communicated as
quickly as possible to the Rector Magnificus, who will deal with the matter further at his
discretion.
22.8
Unless decided otherwise by the chairman, the session lasts for precisely one hour. The
Beadle announces the end of this hour by saying ‘hora est’. The chairman then asks the
candidate (and the paranymphs) to return to their seats in the audience, and announces
that the committee will retire for further deliberation. After he has adjourned the session,
all stand and the Doctoral Committee leaves the room preceded by the Beadle.
Article 23
Investiture with a doctorate
23.1
The decision whether to confer the doctorate in accordance with Article 3.1 is taken in
a private meeting of the Doctoral Committee, held immediately after the closure of the
public ceremony as described in section 22.8. If at least one member of the examination
desires this, a poll shall be taken concerning the decision. Members vote for or against,
or abstain; advisors have an advisory vote. The doctorate is only conferred if a majority
of the members with voting rights vote for this, having heard the votes of the advisors.
If the doctorate is conferred, the chairman of the Doctoral Committee signs the degree
certificate together with the supervisor (and possibly the co-supervisor).
28
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
23.2
If it has been decided to confer the doctorate the chairman, after reopening the defence
ceremony, invites the candidate (with his paranymphs, if any) to stand facing the
Doctoral Committee and declares, using the formula laid down in the protocol, that the
Doctoral Committee has decided on behalf of the Board for Doctorates to confer the
doctorate. If the doctorate is awarded cum laude, mention is also made of this fact.
The supervisor then performs the investiture ceremony by pronouncing the investiture
formula and presenting the signed degree certificate to the candidate. The statement
by the chairman and the investiture formula are spoken in Dutch, while all present are
standing.
23.3
As soon as the members of the Doctoral Committee and the audience are seated,
the supervisor or co-supervisor addresses the newly fledged doctor while standing,
expressing his opinion of the thesis and if desired the academic qualities of its author,
and ends by congratulating him. The chairman congratulates the newly fledged doctor on
behalf of the Board for Doctorates, invites him (and his paranymphs, if any) to take their
places in the body of the hall again, and closes the meeting. The Doctoral Committee then
leaves the Senate Hall, preceded by the Beadle, while all stand.
23.4
If the doctorate is not conferred;
a. the chairman informs the candidate of this fact during the meeting mentioned in
Article 23.1;
b. after reopening the public meeting, the chairman announces that the investiture has
been suspended and closes the meeting, and
c. the chairman informs the Rector Magnificus in writing of the decision of the Doctoral
Committee. The Rector Magnificus then convenes a special meeting of the Doctoral
Committee together with the Board for Doctorates.
23.5
At the meeting mentioned in Article 23.4, subsection c, it may be decided to allow
the candidate to proceed to the defence of his thesis and propositions again or it may
be decided that the doctorate should not be conferred. In the latter case the Rector
Magnificus informs the candidate of this decision in writing, with reasons.
Article 24
Investiture with a doctorate cum laude
24.1
If the supervisor or another member of the Doctoral Committee considers that the thesis
gives evidence of the candidate’s exceptional ability to engage in independent academic
activity, he can submit a written proposal that the candidate should be awarded a
doctorate cum laude, (‘with honours’). This proposal may only be submitted on approval
of the supervisor. The proposal must be accompanied by at least two letters of recommendation from leading external experts in the same scientific field as the thesis. The
criteria for conferring a doctorate cum laude are that the work done during the doctorate
was pioneering, innovative, and was performed with a high degree of independence.
The thesis must have been completed in a reasonable amount of time. The Doctoral
Committee may also take exceptional scientific performance outside the scope of the
dissertation into consideration.
24.2
The proposal mentioned in Article 24.1 shall be sent no later than the fifth week before
the defence date to the chairman, the other members and the advisors (if any) of the
Doctoral Committee, with a copy to the Beadle. The date of dispatch shall be mentioned
in the proposal. This proposal shall be treated with strict confidentiality. The Beadle will
submit the cum laude proposal to the Board for Doctorates for consideration. The Board
will inform the person who submitted the proposal and the members of the Doctoral
Committee of its decision.
24.3
If a proposal for awarding the doctorate cum laude has been made and there are no
objections from members of the Board for Doctorates, the chairman (via the intermediation of the supervisor) may, if desired, call a meeting of the Doctoral Committee before
or on the day of the defence to discuss this matter. If this deliberation has not taken
29
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
place beforehand, the Doctoral Committee shall meet 45 minutes before the start of the
defence ceremony.
24.4
A proposal to award a doctorate cum laude shall be discussed during the meeting
mentioned in Article 23.1 or, as discussed in Article 24.3, in a previous meeting. This
discussion will consider the content of the thesis and propositions and the defence of the
thesis and propositions by the candidate, the criteria for awarding the accolade and the
letters of recommendation together with the arguments put forward by the proposer(s),
including the duration of the doctoral studies and other exceptional scientific performance
outside the scope of the dissertation .
Before a vote is taken on the proposal, the opinions of the advisors shall be heard.
24.5
After the deliberation mentioned in Article 24.4, the members of the Doctoral Committee
vote on the proposal to award the doctorate cum laude by filling in anonymous voting
slips. The members of the committee (including the chairman) may vote for or against the
proposal, or may leave their voting slip blank.
24.6
The proposal to award the doctorate cum laude is rejected if:
a. there is more than once vote against it;
b. there is one vote against and more than one blank voting slip;
c. there are no votes against, but more than two blank voting slips.
In all other cases the proposal is accepted and the accolade cum laude is added to the
degree certificate.
30
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Chapter 8
Procedure for settling disputes
Article 25
Disputes
25.1
If a difference of opinion should arise between the candidate, the co-supervisor and/
or members or advisors (if any) of the Doctoral Committee before permission has been
granted for the candidate to proceed to the public defence of his thesis and its propositions, but after the nomination of the supervisor in accordance with Article 7.1 and if this
difference cannot be resolved amicably by consultation between the parties involved, the
supervisor shall inform the Board for Doctorates of this fact in writing within 30 days. The
Board shall then deal with the matter at its own discretion.
25.2
If, after permission has been granted for the candidate to proceed to public defence of
his thesis and its propositions in accordance with the terms of Article 18.6, new facts
become known which might have influenced the decision to grant the above-mentioned
permission had they been known before this decision was taken, the person who is
aware of these facts shall inform the Board for Doctorates of them in writing without
delay, with copies to the candidate and the supervisor. The Board for Doctorates shall
then convene a special meeting of the Doctoral Committee as soon as possible, but in
any case within two weeks (except during the summer vacation). At this meeting, after
the candidate and advisors have been heard, a decision as to whether the defence shall
proceed or must be cancelled shall be taken by a simple majority of votes. In the event
that votes are equally divided, the defence shall be cancelled.
25.3
If a difference of opinion between the candidate, members or advisors of the Doctoral
Committee or other opponents arises during the doctoral defence ceremony, the chairman
of the Doctoral Committee shall deal with the matter at his own discretion.
25.4
If a conflict arises concerning decisions taken in connection with any aspect of the
conferral of the doctorate, the complainant shall bring this matter to the attention of the
Board for Doctorates within six weeks of the taking of the decision in question. The Board
shall set up a committee consisting of three professors who have had no involvement
either in the preparation of the thesis or in the defence to advise them on this matter.
25.5
The advisory committee mentioned in Article 25.4 shall give its recommendations, with
reasons, within 60 days of its having been set up, after having heard all parties involved
and – if necessary – other experts and with due regard to the general principles governing
the handling of disputes. The Board for Doctorates shall then come to a decision
concerning the conflict within 30 days of the reception of the above-mentioned advice
and shall inform all parties concerned of this decision in writing, stating the reasons which
led it to this decision.
25.6
If necessary, the Board for Doctorates can extend the periods mentioned in Articles 25.4
and 25.5 by a further 30 days.
31
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Chapter 9
Final and interim provisions
Article 26
Final provisions
26.1
The Board for Doctorates is entitled to formulate further rules governing the
implementation of the provisions of these Regulations.
26.2
In cases not covered by these Doctorate Regulations, or when any provision is found to
lend itself to differing interpretations, the Board for Doctorates shall decide what course
to follow.
26.3
If anyone wishes a particular provision from these Regulations to be waived, he shall
submit a written application to this end, with reasons, to the Board for Doctorates.
The Board shall come to a decision on this matter within 30 days.
26.4
Decisions concerning changes to these Regulations shall be taken by the Board for
Doctorates by a simple majority of votes. In special cases, the Board for Doctorates can
authorise departures from these Regulations for which adequate reasons have been put
forward.
26.5
These Regulations come into effect on the first day of September 2004. The amendments
will come into force on 1 September 2010.
Article 27
Interim provisions
27.1
Decisions made concerning the nomination of a supervisor or a co-supervisor, or
the composition of a Doctoral Committee, prior to the coming into force of these
Regulations shall retain their validity in full.
32
II.
Part II
Explanatory notes
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
a.
Admission to the doctorate (Article 2.1 a)
In accordance with Article 7.18, subsection 2 of the Act, the following classes of persons
may be admitted to the doctoral course of study at a Dutch university:
1. those who have successfully completed the final examination for a Master’s degree
at a Dutch university or other institution for higher academic training;
2. those who have successfully completed the final examination for a Master’s degree
at a Dutch institution for higher professional education (HBO in Dutch);
3. those who have successfully completed the final examination of an accredited
Master’s degree course at postgraduate level at a Dutch university or other
institution for higher academic training.
Candidates for the doctorate who hold a foreign degree should ask the Board for
Doctorates before they start the doctoral course of study whether they can be admitted
to the doctorate on the basis of their degree. The Board for Doctorates will make the
nomination of a supervisor dependent on a written recommendation from the professor
in question; the procedure to be followed in this case is described in Article 2.3. In order
to ensure that this does not lead to delays in the doctoral course of study, it is highly
recommended that the procedure should be initiated as early as possible, in any case
before the registration of the candidate. The provisions of Article 5.7 must be complied
with here. Candidates for a doctorate who possess a Dutch HBO (higher professional
education) qualification should accompany their application for admission to the doctoral
course of study by a written recommendation from the professor in question.
b.
Composition of the Doctoral Committee (Article 11)
A number of possible compositions of the Doctoral Committee are summarised below in
tabular form.
Rector Magnificus plus (first) supervisor
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2
Professors, including other supervisors
6 5 4 5 5 4 4 4 4
3 3 3 3 3 3
Co-supervisor, including associate professors
0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0
2 1 1 1 0 3
Advisors
0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 1
1 2 1 0 1 0
Total
876888887
887668
Substitute members (required)
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 1
Further conditions:
1. at least two professors (apart from the chairman), of whom at least one should not
be a supervisor, should be attached to TU Delft;
2. at least four members and/or advisors should have had no involvement in the
doctorate research;
3. at least one of these should not be attached to the university.
c.
Standard forms (Article 1.4)
To speed up the administrative processing of admission to the doctoral defence
ceremony, written applications and other communications should as far as possible
make use of the following standard forms:
Article 5.6:
application to enrol in doctoral defence ceremony, PROM 01.
Article 8.2:
consent to nomination as supervisor, PROM 02.
Article 10.3:
supervisory approval of draft thesis, PROM 03.
Article 12.2:
composition of Doctoral Committee, PROM 04.
Article 12.3:
addresses of members and advisors of Doctoral Committee, PROM 05.
Article 18.5:
supervisory approval of thesis and of propositions, PROM 06.
Article 19.3: Information for the media.
Examples of these forms are included in Part IV of these Regulations. Copies of these
forms are obtainable from the Beadle or can be downloaded via the Internet (www.phd.
tudelft.nl).
34
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
d.
Research financing (Article 5.7)
The written acceptance by the professor of his nomination as supervisor should include
details of how the research is to be financed. Four different ‘flows of funds’ may
be distinguished here, one or more of these being used to finance part or all of the
research. These flows of funds are defined as follows:
First flow of funds: also known as ‘direct’ or ‘government’ funding, these are funds
made available by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
(OCW in Dutch) to the university for the purposes of research,
policy development, promotion of education and the like;
Second flow of funds:a lso known as ‘indirect funding’, these are government funds
made available by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
to NWO (the Dutch Foundation for Scientific Research) and its
subsidiaries such as FOM (Fundamental Materials Research),
STW (Technical Science Foundation) and SON (Foundation for
Chemical Research in the Netherlands);
Third flow of funds: also known as ‘contract research’ funds, these are made available
by companies, institutions or organisations, including the KNAW
(Royal Dutch Academy of Sciences), IOP (Innovative Research
Programmes) – even though FOM or STW may administer the
funds – the European Union, the Ministry of Economic Affairs and
the OCW itself;
Fourth flow of funds: t hese are incidental funds from other sources such as donations,
awards, interest, profit from projects and the like.
e.
The title page and its reverse (Article 16.2)
The title page of the thesis and the reverse of this page shall bear the standardised text
shown on the next two pages.
[Even if a thesis is produced in English or another language, this standardised text is in
Dutch. The present English translation is given for the sake of information.]
35
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
The title page bears the following standard text:
(Title of thesis)
Thesis
presented for the degree of doctor
at TU Delft
under the authority of the Rector Magnificus, Professor …………………………,
Chairman of the Board for Doctorates
to be defended in public in the presence of a committee
on ………day ………………… 20… (date) at ……… o’clock
by ……………………………… (first names in full and surname in capitals)
……………………………… (title in full)
born at ……………………………… (place) (country) [3]
The reverse of the title page bears the following standard text:
This thesis is approved by the supervisor(s):
Professor ..............................
(Professor ............................)
Composition of Doctoral Committee:
Rector Magnificus, chairman
Professor ……………………, TU Delft, supervisor
Professor ……………………, (institute), supervisor
Dr ………………………………, TU Delft, co-supervisor
Professor ……………………, (institute)
Professor ……………………, (institute)
Professor ……………………, (institute)
Dr ………………………………, (institute)
Dr ………………………………, (institute)
(if desired)
…………………… has provided substantial guidance and support in the preparation of this
thesis.
(if desired, the institutions referred to in Article 14.9 may be mentioned here.)
(recommended)
ISBN ……………………
If the thesis is printed by a publisher, the latter will apply for the ISBN number.
[3]
If born outside the Netherlands.
36
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
f.
Approval of the propositions (Article 17.1)
The supervisor’s approval of the propositions shall be explicitly mentioned at the bottom of
the sheet bearing the propositions, in the following form: “These propositions are regarded
as opposable and defendable, and have been approved as such by the supervisor(s).
g.
The costs and distribution of the thesis (Article 19)
The following provisions apply here.
1. The costs of printing and distributing the thesis shall in principle be borne by the
candidate.
2. The number of copies of the thesis to be sent to the faculty is determined in
consultation with the supervisor. The Dean of the faculty to which the supervisor
belongs can provide information about possible reimbursement of (part of) the costs
for these copies. The faculty office should be contacted about this, in plenty of time
to allow the matter to be arranged.
3. The candidate shall provide the university library (for the Repository) with an
electronic version of the thesis (as a PDF file, or in some other format agreed
between the candidate and the library).
h.
Press releases (Article 19.4)
It may be appropriate to provide information about certain theses to selected media by
means of a press release or in some other way. In such cases, the university’s Press and
Scientific Information department will prepare a press release. This may or may not be
done at the initiative of the supervisor or candidate; in any case, the supervisor and the
candidate should receive a copy of the press release well before it is issued to the press.
When such a press release is required, the candidate shall provide the scientific
information officer of TU Delft with a brief written explanation of the essential results
and possible applications of his doctoral research. The scientific information officer
can if so desired give details of the approach to be taken in this explanation and the
required content. The supervisor can, in consultation with and with the permission of
the Rector Magnificus, ask for an embargo to be imposed on a press release and/or
press interview with the candidate till the time of the defence.
j.
Publication of a summary of the thesis (Article 19.3)
The candidate should consider placing an abstract of his thesis in Dissertation Abstracts
International – Section C (European Abstracts)..
k.Clothing protocol during the defence ceremony
(Articles 22 and 23)
If the defence ceremony is held in the Senate Hall, the following protocol concerning
the clothing of the Doctoral Committee, the candidate and his paranymphs (if any)
shall apply.
a. Male professors: gown, ceremonial cap, dark suit, white shirt and grey tie, black
shoes.
b. Female professors: gown, ceremonial cap, white blouse, black, dark blue or dark
grey clothing, black shoes.
c. Delft professors wear bands; in addition, the chairman of the Doctoral Committee
wears the Rector Magnificus chain of office.
d. Associate professors and advisors wear a dark morning coat and a grey waistcoat;
ladies wear a white blouse, black, dark blue or dark grey clothing and shoes .
e. Male candidates and male paranymphs wear a black dress suit with white waistcoat
and white tie; female candidates and paranymphs wear similar suitable clothing:
white blouse, black, dark blue or dark grey clothing and shoes..
f. The Beadle: dark suit, white shirt, grey tie, black shoes, gown with bands and
ceremonial cap, Beadle’s staff. Female Beadles shall wear similar suitable clothing.
37
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Professors from universities other than Delft may wear the academic dress of their own
university, or a gown and ceremonial cap of TU Delft.
Professors wear the ceremonial cap while acting as opponents and after the reopening
of the defence ceremony in accordance with Article 23.2; the chairman wears the
ceremonial cap throughout the entire ceremony.
If the candidate wishes to wear foreign academic dress or military dress uniform instead
of the ceremonial dress described above, permission to do so shall be requested of the
chairman of the Doctoral Committee.
l.
Investiture formulas (Article 23)
The investiture formulas are all spoken in Dutch, and are translated here for the
purposes of clarification.
During the second part of the defence ceremony, the chairman shall say while standing:
“The Board for Doctorates of TU Delft;
represented by the present committee;
has decided, after having considered your thesis and its propositions
and having heard your defence of them;
and having regard to the provisions laid down in the Higher
Education and Scientific Research Act;
to confer on you the title of doctor (cum laude).
I now request the supervisor
appointed as such by the Board for Doctorates
to perform the task with which he has been charged.”
The supervisor pronounces the following investiture formula, standing on the right hand
side of the chairman:
“By virtue of the powers vested by law
in the Board for Doctorates;
I declare, on behalf of the Board;
represented here by the Rector Magnificus
and the other members of the committee;
that you;
……………………………………………………………………………………………
are hereby conferred with the title of doctor (cum laude)
and are invested with all rights associated with this title.
In evidence of which I present you with this certificate
which gives you the right to bear the title of ‘doctor’;
which is signed by the Rector Magnificus and the supervisor(s)
and which bears the seal of TU Delft.”
38
III.
Part III
The order of events in the
doctoral defence procedure
and the minimal time
schedule
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
The order of events
The order of events described here applies to PhD candidates who have a Dutch university
degree. Candidates with a foreign degree or a Dutch degree from an institute of higher
professional education (HBO) must meet additional criteria; see the Explanatory notes (Part II,
section a). It is recommended that these candidates ascertain whether they meet the criteria
before embarking on their doctoral research.
Step 1:
The person wishing to prepare himself for doctoral defence
1. has a preliminary meeting with the professor, being in possession of an authorised
copy of certificates attesting to the successful passing of a final examination giving
the right to proceed to the doctoral defence ceremony or following the procedure laid
down in Article 2.3 [4] and reaches agreement with the professor concerning the subject
for his research;
2. fills in and signs form PROM 01, fills in form PROM 02 and has it signed and
applies to the Beadle for nomination of a supervisor within one month of reaching
agreement with the professor in question (Article 5.7);
3. the Beadle forwards the application to the Board for Doctorates.
Step 2:
After processing of the application for nomination of a supervisor by the Board for
Doctorates, the Beadle sends the decision concerning the nomination of a supervisor to
the supervisor and the candidate.
Step 3:
1. The supervisor approves the draft thesis.
2. The candidate fills in form PROM 03 and has it signed along with the three copies of
the approved draft thesis, and schedules a defence date with the Beadle.
3. The supervisor makes a proposal for the composition of the Doctoral Committee with
the aid of forms PROM 04 and PROM 05, after having ascertained that the proposed
members and advisors are prepared to assume this function and having ascertained
that the committee will be independent.
4. The Beadle sends the proposal for the Doctoral Committee to the Board for
Doctorates.
5. The candidate sends a copy of the draft thesis to the proposed members and advisors
of the Doctoral Committee and sends the Beadle three copies of the draft thesis
together with the addresses and the date of dispatch.
6. The candidate informs the Beadle of the dispatch date and all the addresses of the
committee members.
Step 4:
1. After processing of the proposal by the Board for Doctorates, the Beadle informs the
members and advisors of the Doctoral Committee of their nomination, mentioning
the date of dispatch of the draft thesis by the candidate.
2. The supervisor receives any suggestions made by members and advisors of the
Doctoral Committee for changes and/or additions to the draft thesis.
3. The candidate consults with the supervisor on implementing proposed changes and/
or additions to the draft thesis.
4. The supervisor responds to any proposals and/or disapproval from Doctoral
Committee members and advisors.
Step 5:
The Academic Protocol office has received responses from all Doctoral Committee
members and advisors regarding admission to the thesis defence.
[4]
See section a of Part II of these regulations (Admission to the doctoral programme – Article 2, page 34).
40
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Step 6:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The supervisor approves the thesis.
The candidate submits propositions to the supervisor for approval.
The supervisor approves the propositions and initials the text.
The candidate fills in PROM 06, has it signed and submits it to the Beadle together
with a copy of the approved propositions; he also submits two proofs of the title page
and the reverse of this page to the Academic Protocol office for approval.
5. The Beadle initials the proofs of the title and the reverse of this page, and informs the
persons concerned that the candidate has received permission to proceed to defence
of the thesis.
6. The candidate has copies made of the thesis and propositions.
7. The supervisor and/or members of the Doctoral Committee send any proposal for the
accolade of cum laude together with two letters of recommendation to all other parties
involved, including a copy to the Beadle. This is strictly confidential.
8. The Office of the Beadle sends the proposal for the accolade of cum laude to the Board
for Doctorates for approval.
9. The candidate schedules an appointment with the chairperson of the Doctoral
Committee.
Step 7:
1. The candidate distributes the thesis and propositions and sends copies to the persons
and bodies mentioned in Articles 19.2 and 19.3.
2. In highly exceptional cases, the supervisor submits a proposal to the chairman
concerning the use of a language other than Dutch or English during the defence
ceremony. Members and advisors of the Doctoral Committee are informed by the
supervisor of the decision.
3. The candidate reaches agreement with the Beadle about the course of the promotion
ceremony.
4. The candidate makes preparatory visits to the chairman and members and advisors of
the Doctoral Committee, if applicable.
5. The Beadle arranges an announcement of the defence ceremony, no later than two
weeks before the defence date.
Step 8:
1. Members and advisors of the Doctoral Committee assemble 30 (or 45) minutes
before the start of the defence ceremony, for deliberation.
2. The Beadle assists in ensuring strict compliance with protocol during the defence
ceremony.
3. The candidate explains the content of the thesis, in terms which are understandable
to non-experts.
4. The candidate defends the thesis for one hour against comments and objections
raised by the Doctoral Committee.
A timetable for the defence procedure is given on the next page. It should be stressed
that all activities mentioned here must take place no later than the time indicated to
ensure reasonable certainty that the defence ceremony can indeed be held on the
planned date, given the time required for the various formalities involved. It is highly
advisable to carry out these activities somewhat earlier than indicated, to allow some
leeway in the planning.
41
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
The minimal time schedule
(the numbers in brackets refer to the Articles in these Regulations)
STEP
Week
PhD candidate
Supervisor
Beadle
1
Start
2) r equest appointment of
1) a greement on topic of thesis [5.1]
3) s end application to Board for
2
of PhD
supervisor [5.7, possibly 5.8]
period
submit PROM 01 and 02
sign PROM 02
Doctorates [5.7]
Start
Send approval of application to
of PhD
supervisor and PhD candidate [5.9]
period
3
11
2) s ubmit PROM 03 together with
three copies of the draft thesis
to Beadle and set defence date
[13.1]
5) o ne copy to the proposed
members of the doctoral
1) a pprove draft thesis [10.1]
sign PROM 03
3) s ubmit proposal for appointments
4) s end proposal for appointments
to doctoral committee to Board
for Doctorates [11.7 and 12.1]
to Doctoral Committee to Beadle
[12.1]
PROM 04 and 05
committee [13.2]
6) s ubmit addresses and date of
submission to Beadle
4
8
3) c onsult with supervisor on any
proposed changes [13.4]
2) r eceive any proposals for thesis
1) inform members of doctoral
changes or additions [13.4],
committee about appointment
4) r eact to any proposed changes
with reference to the date on
[13.4]
which the draft thesis was sent
[12.2]
5
6
1) d eadline for receiving reactions
from committee members/
advisors [12.3, 13.3]
6
5
2) s ubmit propositions to supervisor
for approval [18.3]
4) s ubmit PROM 06 and supervisor
approval with authorised text of
propositions (1 copy) to Beadle
1) approve thesis [18.2]
3) a pprove propositions and
authorise text [18.4]
PROM 06
7) s ubmit proposal for cum laude
5) a uthorise copies of title page
and reverse [18.5] and inform
parties involved of candidate’s
admittance to defence. [18.7]
8) s end proposal for cum laude
and have thesis title page and
accolade, if applicable, along with
accolade along with letters of
reverse (2 copies) approved
letters of recommendation [24.2]
recommendation to Board for
Doctorates, if applicable.
[18.5]
6) h ave copies made of thesis and
propositions [19.1]
9) s chedule meeting with chair of
doctoral committee[20..3]
7
2
1) d istribute thesis and proposals
[19.2], [19.3] and [19.4]
3) m ake appointment with Academic
Protocol office on details of the
2) s ubmit (in highly exceptional
5) announce defence [20.2]
cases) request to use language
other than Dutch or English
during the defence [22.5]
defence [20.2]
4) a ppear before chair (members) of
the doctoral committee [20.3]
8
0
3) g ive presentation in advance of
defence [20.4]
4) defend thesis for one hour [22.1]
42
1) p resent in committee room before
defence and acts as supervisor
during defence [21.4]
2) a ssist in protocol during the
defence ceremony.
IV.
Part IV
Examples of standard forms
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Board for Doctorates Application
for registration as candidate for a doctorate Form PROM 01
I, the undersigned;
Surname:
Christian names (in full):
Work address:
Post code:
City:
Telephone:
Private address:
Post code:
City:
Telephone:
Type of education thus far:
Degree:
Working title of doctoral thesis:
E-mail:
hereby apply for registration as candidate for a doctorate at TU Delft and request, in accordance with
the requirements of Article 5 of the Doctorate Regulations, that the following person(s) be appointed as
doctorate supervisor(s):
Professor
University
Faculty
Telephone
1. Professor
2. Professor
and declare that I have received a copy of the Doctorate Regulations of TU Delft and undertake to observe
its stipulations.
Signed on (date)
Volgnummer
Signature
Datum binnenkomst:
aanmelding:
Paraaf aanmelding
Datum behandeling in
Paraaf akkoord namens
ProZa:
CvP:
CvP:
This request must be accompanied by:
1. the written consent of the professor(s) concerned (Form PROM 02);
2. the applicant’s birth certificate or extract from the municipal register;
3. an authenticated copy of the certificate entitling the applicant to proceed to the doctorate application
process;
4. if Article 2.3 applies: written declarations from the Protocol Officer (acting on behalf of the Board for
Doctorates), the professor, and the dean (or vice-dean) of the faculty (or sub-faculty) concerned, as
described in Article 2.3;
5. if Article 5.8 applies, but Article 2.3 does not: the written recommendation of the professor.
Note: always inform the Office of the Beadle concerning your new address etc.
44
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Board for Doctorates Consent
to appointment as supervisor Form PROM 02
I/we, the undersigned;
Name
Professor at the University of
Signature
Professor
Address:
Professor
Address:
accept the request to act as doctorate supervisor for
Surname:
Christian names (in full):
Work address:
Post code:
Intended doctoral defence year:
City:
Telephone:
Working title of thesis:
Funding:
and propose the following person as co-supervisor (please include letter and supervisor’s justification for
appointing this co-supervisor. See Article 9.1):
Name
Associate professor in the Faculty of:
Signature
Dr
Address + telephone
Volgnummer
aanmelding:
Datum binnenkomst:
Paraaf aanmelding ProZa:
Datum behandeling in
Paraaf akkoord namens CvP:
CvP:
45
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Board for Doctorates Supervisory Approval
of
Draft Thesis Form PROM 03
I, the undersigned;
Name
University
Faculty
Professor
having been appointed by the Board for Doctorates as doctorate supervisor of
Surname:
Christian names (in full):
Work address:
Post code:
Intended doctoral defence month:
Title of thesis:
City:
Telephone:
and having regard to the stipulations of Article 10.1 of the Doctorate Regulations, declare that I have
approved of the draft thesis mentioned above and agree that the candidate should schedule a date to
defend it in public. Three copies of the draft thesis are enclosed.
Signed on (date)
Signature
Opmerkingen Protocollaire Zaken:
Datum binnenkomst:
Behoort bij volgnummer:
Before giving his approval to the draft thesis, and in additions to his responsibilities described in Articles
6.1 and 14.3, the supervisor must read the text presented to him and assess it on the grounds he has
determined, with a view to his responsibility for the thesis, to be the foundation of the doctorate. He must
devote particular attention to the criteria described in Article 8.6.
Note: always inform the Office of the Beadle concerning your new address etc.
46
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Composition
Board for Doctorates of
Doctoral Committee Form PROM 04
I, the undersigned;
Name
University
Faculty
Professor
propose that the following persons be appointed as members or advisors of the Doctoral Committee
assessing the thesis of ……………………………… (the candidate) on …………………………… (date of defence):
Name and titles
Professor,
University,
associate
company or
Faculty or post
Degree of
involvement
professor or
organisation
in candidate’s
advisor
1.Rector Magnificus (chairman)
Prof
2.Professor ………………
Prof
research
(supervisor)
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Reserve:
Prof
Delft, (date)
Opmerkingen
TU Delft
Signature
Aantal hoogleraren
Aantal gasten
Aantal UHD
Totaal aantal
Datum binnenkomst
Paraaf voorstel
Behandeling College
Akkoord College voor
voor Promoties:
Promoties
Protocollaire Zaken
Volgnummer aanmelding
The composition of the Doctorate Doctoral Committee must be in accordance with the requirements described in Article 11 of the Doctorate Regulations. A
number of possible combinations are presented in tabular form in Explanatory Note b (Part II of these Regulations).
47
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Board for Doctorates Addresses
of
Doctoral Committee Form PROM 05
Name of candidate:
Second member (promotor): Letter NL/E
Sixth member:
Name and titles: ..................................................... Name and titles: ...................................................
Address: ................................................................ Address: . .............................................................
Postcode and city: .................................................. Postcode and city: .................................................
Telephone: . ........................................................... Telephone: ...........................................................
Mobile: .................................................................. Mobile: . ...............................................................
E-mail: .................................................................. E-mail: .................................................................
University: ............................................................. University: ............................................................
Faculty: ................................................................. Faculty: ................................................................
Third member (promotor):
Seventh member:
Letter NL/E
Letter NL/E
Letter NL/E
Name and titles: ..................................................... Name and titles: ...................................................
Address: ................................................................ Address: . .............................................................
Postcode and city: .................................................. Postcode and city: .................................................
Telephone: . ........................................................... Telephone: ...........................................................
Mobile: .................................................................. Mobile: . ...............................................................
E-mail: .................................................................. E-mail: .................................................................
University: ............................................................. University: ............................................................
Faculty: ................................................................. Faculty: ................................................................
Fourth member (promotor): Letter NL/E
Eighth member:
Name and titles: ..................................................... Name and titles: ...................................................
Address: ................................................................ Address: . .............................................................
Postcode and city: .................................................. Postcode and city: .................................................
Telephone: . ........................................................... Telephone: ...........................................................
Mobile: .................................................................. Mobile: . ...............................................................
E-mail: .................................................................. E-mail: .................................................................
University: ............................................................. University: ............................................................
Faculty: ................................................................. Faculty: ................................................................
Fifth member (promotor):
Reserve member:
Letter NL/E
Letter NL/E
Letter NL/E
Name and titles: ..................................................... Name and titles: ...................................................
Address: ................................................................ Address: . .............................................................
Postcode and city: .................................................. Postcode and city: .................................................
Telephone: . ........................................................... Telephone: ...........................................................
Mobile: .................................................................. Mobile: . ...............................................................
E-mail: .................................................................. E-mail: .................................................................
University: ............................................................. University: ............................................................
Faculty: ................................................................. Faculty: ................................................................
48
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Board for Doctorates Approval
of
Thesis
and its
Propositions Form PROM 06
I, the undersigned;
Name
University
Faculty
Professor
having been appointed by the Board for Doctorates as doctorate supervisor of
Surname:
Christian names (in full):
Work address:
Post code:
Intended doctoral defence date:
Title of thesis:
City:
Telephone:
declare, in accordance with Articles 18.2 and 18.4 of the Doctorate Regulations, that I have approved the
above thesis and its propositions. An authorised copy of the text of the propositions is enclosed.
Delft, (date)
Opmerkingen Protocollaire Zaken
Signature
Datum binnenkomst:
Behoort bij volgnummer
49
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
50
V.
Part V
Relevant extracts from the
Dutch Higher Education and
Scientific Research Act
(Wet op het hoger onderwijs en
wetenschappelijk onderzoek, or WHW),
translated into English
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Article 1.2
Application
This Act shall apply to:
a. universities and universities of professional education as described in Article 1.8,
and the Dutch Open University;
b. the universities and universities of professional education specified in Article 6.9;
c. the teaching hospitals specified in Article 1.13, section 1;
d. the Royal Netherlands Academy of Science (Koninklijke Nederlandse Academie
van Wetenschappen, or KNAW) in Amsterdam and the Royal Library (Koninklijke
Nederlandse Bibliotheek, or KNB) in The Hague.
Article 1.8
List of funded institutions of higher education
1.
The funded institutions of higher education are those institutions listed in the
Appendices to this Act under a up to and including h;
The institutions listed in the Appendices to this Act under a [5], c and h possess corporate
rights.
2.
Article 7.18
Doctorates, access and doctoral defence
1.
The Board for Doctorates of a university or the Dutch Open University can award a
doctorate on the basis of a doctoral defence.
Admission to the doctorate shall be granted to any person who:
a. has been granted a Master’s degree in accordance with Article 7.10a, section 1, 2 or 3;
b. has written a thesis or developed a design, as demonstration of his ability to carry
out independent academic research, and
c. meets all the remaining requirements specified in Article 7.19 of the Act.
In exceptional circumstances the Board for Doctorates can grant access to the doctoral
defence ceremony to persons who meet the requirements laid down in section 2,
sections b and c above, but who do not meet the requirements laid down in section a.
Responsibility for the conferral of the doctorate lies with the Board of Doctorates, as
described in Article 9.10.
The Board for Doctorates shall appoint a university professor as supervisor for each
doctorate. The public defence and conferral of the doctorate shall take place in the
presence either of the Board of Doctorates itself or of a Doctoral Committee appointed
by the Board of Doctorates, which shall comprise professors and others the Board
judges to be competent to sit on the Doctoral Committee, taking into account the
Doctorate Regulations described in Article 7.19.
In the application of section 5 above, ‘university professors’ shall be held to include
the ecclesiastical professors and professors occupying endowed chairs at public
universities.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
[5]
TU Delft comes into this category.
52
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Article 7.19
Doctorate Regulations
1.
The Board for Doctorates shall establish Doctorate Regulations which have due regard
for everything for which conditions have been laid down in this Act. These Regulations
shall specify:
a. The arrangements concerning preparations for the doctoral defence ceremony and
the conferral of the doctorate, including the responsibilities and authorities of all
those involved or who may become involved, and
b. The provisions put in place to settle any disputes arising from such preparations.
At the special request of the Board of Governors of the institution, the Board for
Doctorates has the right to award an honorary doctorate to natural persons in
recognition of their exceptional merit.
2.
Article 9.10
Board for Doctorates
1.
2.
A university shall have its own Board for Doctorates, which shall consist of professors.
The Board for Doctorates shall consider recommendations from the Executive Board
with regard to the conferral of honorary doctorates as described in Article 7.19, section
2 of this Act.
The institution’s administrative and executive regulations shall define the
responsibilities, the composition and the appointment method of the Board for
Doctorates.
3.
Article 9.19
Rights and responsibilities of professors
3.
Former professors retain the right to supervise doctorate candidates for a period of five
years after their honourable discharge.
Professors shall be entitled to professorial title. Professors having been given an
honourable discharge for reasons of health, voluntary early retirement or by reason of
having reached or exceeded the retirement age set for appointment to public office may
also bear professorial title.
4.
53
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
54
VI.
Part VI
Information on propositions
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
Opposability of propositions in
the Doctorate Regulations
The propositions appended to the thesis were discussed repeatedly by Board for
Doctorates of Delft University of Technology. To ensure the quality of the propositions,
the supervisor is required to sign a statement confirming that the propositions are
‘opposable and defendable’. The author explains the reasons on behalf of the Board.
Concerns about the quality of the propositions appended to the thesis
The Board for Doctorates has had concerns about the quality of the propositions
appended to theses. Weak jokes or statements that might give offence to many
people have been submitted as propositions; in the opinion of the Board, these did not
contribute to the academic objectives of the graduation ceremony or the good name
of our University. This does not mean that none of the propositions appended to a
thesis may be humorous. On the contrary, every joke is characterized by a change in
assumptions during the narrative, and the primary task of science is to replace existing
assumptions by hypotheses that show empirical reality and its technical potential in a
new light. The testing or verification of such hypotheses is its second task. A proposition
casting new light on our preconceived ideas lends itself very well to a humorous
formulation, but humour is not the primary objective of scientific propositions. The
origin, purpose and meaning of the propositions appended to a thesis are still relevant
today (perhaps more so than ever, in a world where popular myths are disseminated so
rapidly), but they do not always receive due appreciation.
The function of propositions
Until the 19 th century, theses consisted solely of propositions. (After all, the basic
meaning of the word “thesis” is “proposition”.) It was only later that these propositions
were preceded by written explanation and empirical testing or logical proof. As
the thesis grew into its present form, the propositions came to be regarded as less
important and were banished to a separate sheet included with the thesis. Many
candidates find it hard, after completion of a prolonged investigation, to go on to
formulate propositions that can spark a scientific debate. After so many years of
research, they would seem to be left with no unanswered questions. While their thesis
then demonstrates their ability as a researcher, it gives no evidence that they are able
to formulate hypotheses that would serve as a challenge to further investigation. The
hypotheses underlying a doctoral study are developed with the necessary guidance, and
are no longer explicitly discussed during long periods of investigation. It is precisely
the ability to pose scientific questions oneself that is tested by the formulation of bold
propositions and their defence in public.
The importance of opposability
To this end, the propositions appended to a thesis must not be only positive statements
that can be defended within a certain field of science, but must also be challenging. For
example, the proposition ‘the sun will rise tomorrow’ may be defendable but it is not
at all challenging in the current intellectual climate and could never trigger a debate of
pros and cons capable of advancing the boundaries of science. The section 17.1 of the
Doctorate Regulations therefore states that propositions appended to the thesis must
be not only scientifically sound and defendable but also opposable. The supervisors
must confirm that the propositions meet both criteria. The Board for Doctorates hopes
that this simple requirement will eliminate many half-baked propositions, and give
propositions in general more scientific weight. In fact, the demand that propositions
must be opposable as well as defendable adds two further requirements: decisiveness
and boldness. The Board for Doctorates also permits normative statements, i.e. the
56
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
proposition may state not only an empirical truth or a technical possibility but also a
moral desirability. The criteria of decisiveness, boldness and defendability apply to all
three types of statements, though they will be illustrated below mainly with reference to
empirical truth.
Decisiveness
A proposition may be said to be ‘decisive’ if for example it is true or false (i.e. not a
question, exclamation or command) and without tautology or attenuating qualification
such as ‘often’, sometimes’ or ‘to a considerable extent’. Vague quantors cannot be
refuted by opponents during the public defence of the thesis, and must therefore
be regarded as ‘not opposable’. If necessary, a proposition may contain the qualifier
‘generally’ or ‘usually’, since this means literally ‘in more than 50% of the cases’,
but such probabilistic quantors make both opposition and defence impossible when
the relevant statistical data are not available during the debate. A proposition with
existence quantor (there is a case where ... applies) is only opposable when no example
is yet known (e.g. before 1988: ‘a proof of Fermat’s last theorem exists’). In fact, such
propositions are very appropriate for a university of technology, for inventions and
designs. They have the general form “There is a possible method (or technique) to ...”.
A generalizing all-quantor (it may be stated in any case that …) challenges the
opposition to present counter-examples. When the proposition does not contain an
explicit quantor, an implicit all-quantor may be assumed, though the opponent would do
well to ask the candidate “Does this apply in all cases?” before producing his counterexample. Such a debate is scientifically productive when it clarifies the assumptions
under which the proposition applies and those under which it does not. If a counterargument is produced, the candidate can reformulate the proposition to “Apart from
such and such a case, it may be stated that …” and invite the opponent to find a further
counter-example. If the revised proposition stands up to attack, it has been successfully
refined and may be regarded as a ‘triumph of science’. It would be appropriate in
such cases to reprint the propositions and send all the initial recipients a copy, to
demonstrate that the tradition of defending and opposing the propositions appended to
a thesis is not merely an empty formality.
The challenging nature of propositions
To state that a proposition is ‘challenging’ means that there is some doubt about its
scientific truth or falsehood, so that arguments for and against it can be weighed
against one another. If there is absolutely no doubt about the truth of a proposition,
it no longer has any relevance for the advancement of science. A proposition assumed
by everyone to be true can be defended, but there is no point in investigating it any
further. Conversely, a proposition that is clearly false does not come into consideration
for further investigation. It only becomes scientifically interesting if some doubt
exists as to its truth. A scientific hypothesis (literally sup-position) to be tested by
investigation is thus challenging by definition, since otherwise there would be no point
in the investigation. The most valuable propositions are those which are generally
regarded to be untrue (such as the views put forward by Copernicus in his time) but
which, possibly on the basis of new evidence, turn out to be defendable. One would
be fortunate to come up with discoveries of this magnitude today! Such propositions
demonstrate the candidate’s critical and innovative approach and his or her ability to
advance the boundaries of science. It would be useful if the candidate were always
to formulate the central hypothesis of the thesis in extreme terms, ‘sailing as close to
the wind’ as possible, and to present this as the first proposition. For example, if the
thesis offers the solution to a problem, the first proposition could state that this is the
only or the best solution. Such a statement would not be appropriate in the body of the
thesis, which must aim at scientific exactitude, but is acceptable in a proposition which,
as we have noted, should be scientifically sound but also challenging. Subsequent
propositions may concern matters not dealt with in the thesis, and indeed belong to
other scientific disciplines. For example, the candidate may question the validity of the
results of other investigations, possibly in fields other than his or her own, which may
be cited in the proposition. If a direct quotation from another investigator’s results is
given in a proposition, it would be gracious for the candidate to invite that investigator
57
TU Delft Doctorate Regulations | New revised edition September 2010
to oppose the proposition in question from the floor during the public defence of the
thesis.
Defendability
The ‘defendability’ of a proposition, on the other hand, means that while the truth of
the proposition is not self-evident (i.e. the proposition is challenging in the sense used
above), sound scientific arguments can be advanced in its favour. The field of science
in which these arguments are valid (not necessarily ‘reliable’) and defendable should be
mentioned explicitly in the proposition (e.g. ‘in psychology’). This will serve to limit the
number of playful propositions and allows the candidate to show that his or her insights
extend beyond the boundaries of his or her own domain (universitas). In this context,
‘defendable’ also means ‘morally acceptable’. When approving the propositions, the
supervisor must consider to what extent it is appropriate for the candidate to include
normative statements among the propositions to be defended during the graduation
ceremony.
The utility of clear-cut formulation
It may be hoped that the new requirement of opposability will reduce the number of
propositions to a subset that is more useful from a scientific and teaching point of view.
It will not however make it any easier to formulate the propositions. The candidate must
possess the ability to appreciate both sides of an argument here. Anyone who has ever
organized a debate will know how hard it is to formulate a proposition that one person
is prepared to defend and another is equally prepared to attack. If one half of the
audience supports the proposition while the other half opposes it, it may be concluded
that the proposition is socially relevant and the audience will listen to the arguments
put forward with full attention. Precisely the same holds true for scientific relevance.
While sowing division is regarded as reprehensible in political terms, only propositions
that engender strong differences of opinion lead to truly worthwhile scientific debate
and research programmes that society is prepared to fund. Too much money has already
been spent in the past on underpinning self-evident facts. It is precisely the facts that
are not self-evident that are relevant for scientific and technological research.
58
Delft University of Technology
Protocollaire Zaken
Mekelweg 5
2628 CC Delft
T +31 (0)15 278 6456 / +31 (0)15 278 9162
F +31 (0)15 278 1896
E pedel@tudelft.nl
www.phd.tudelft.nl