EX10 (EdD)
(August 2012)
RESEARCH SCHOOL
EdD Examination Guidelines
Page
1
Introduction
3
2
Confirmation of Submission
3
The candidate declaration form
3
Nomination and Appointment of the Examination Panel
4
Composition of the examination panel
Examination panels for resubmitted theses
The observer
Appointment criteria for the examination panel chair
Appointment criteria for examiners
Independence of examiners and examination panel chairs
Appointment criteria for the examination panel
Approval of nominations
4
4
4
5
5
6
6
6
Duties of the Examiners
6
Duties of the examination panel chair
Duties of the examiners
6
7
Fees and Expenses
7
Fees
Expenses
7
7
Submission
8
Eligibility
Binding of theses
Submission of the thesis
9
9
8
7
Arrangements for the Examination
9
8
Independent Pre-Viva Examiner Reports
9
9
The Oral Examination
9
3
4
5
6
10
Examiners’ meeting(s)
The scope and duration of the examination
Informing the student of the recommendation
9
9
10
Criteria for the Award of the Degree
11
Page 1 of 17
11
Recommendations Available to Examiners
11
Award the degree
Corrections and modifications
Substantial amendment
Major revision and resubmission for re-examination
Fail
11
11
11
12
12
12
The Examination Panel Report Form
12
13
Ratification of the Examination Result
13
Corrections and modifications to the thesis
Substantial amendment to the thesis
Major revision and resubmission of the thesis for re-examination
13
13
13
Award of the Degree
14
14
Page 2 of 17
1
Introduction
This document outlines the arrangements and procedures for the examination and award of
research degrees. It is intended to provide information for Heads of Department, supervisors
and examiners. If you have any queries or require advice please contact the Research
Degrees Office.
External address:
Research Degrees Office
The Open University
Milton Keynes
MK7 6AA
Internal address:
Research Degrees Office
Ground Floor, Charles Pinfold Building
Tel:
(01908) 659616
Email: research-degrees-EdD@open.ac.uk
2
Confirmation of submission
The EdD Office is responsible for confirming whether an individual student will be submitting
her/his thesis for examination. The student should declare if s/he has a disability or any
additional requirements for which adjustments may need to be made when the examination is
arranged.
2.1
The Candidate declaration form
The Research Degrees Office sends an email asking the student to confirm the details of
her/his submission. The student downloads a Candidate declaration form from the website,
completes it, then sends the declaration form to her/his EdD supervisor.
The supervisor is required to:
(a)
confirm the length of the thesis
(b)
comment on the student’s declaration
(c)
confirm that they have read the thesis as presented in Progress Report 12 (PR12), and
that it is, in their opinion, worthy of examination
(d)
confirm that the requirements for ethical review have been met (if applicable)
(d)
pass the completed declaration form to any other supervisors of the student, then the
Programme Leader, or their agreed delegate, who approves it and sends to the
Research Degrees Office.
The student’s submission will only be sent to the examiners when the fully completed
Candidate declaration form has been received by the Research Degrees Office.
Supervisors should not submit the Candidate declaration form if they are not able to confirm
that the thesis meets the criteria for the EdD degree (see section 10). Where the supervisor is
unable to confirm that the thesis is of adequate standard for submission to the examiners, s/he
is required to produce a written report, which may include copies of recent progress report(s)
and draw on progress report feedback, explaining how the thesis falls short of an adequate
standard. This should be submitted to the Head of Research Degrees and copied to the
student and Programme Leader in CREET. The report will be referred to the Chair of the
Research Degrees Committee, who may:
(a)
confirm to the student that submission for examination will not be permitted until
appropriate amendments have been made
Page 3 of 17
(b)
arrange for the thesis to be externally assessed and for the external assessor’s report to
include a judgement about whether the work is of an adequate standard for examination
(c)
decide (with the agreement of the Programme Leader in CREET) that the thesis should
be accepted for submission, as it stands, without the approval of the supervisor.
In the case of (b) a decision on eligibility for submission would be made by the Research
Degrees Committee, or the Chair acting on behalf of the Committee, on receipt of the external
assessor’s report and the comments of the Programme Leader in CREET.
3
Nomination and appointment of the examination panel
The Programme Leader in CREET is responsible for nominating an examination panel and
confirming that a maximum of one of the EdD supervisors will attend the examination as
observer. The nomination should be sent to the Research Degrees Office on the Examination
panel nomination form, accompanied by a completed CV form for each nominated member of
the examination panel. These forms can be downloaded from
http://www.open.ac.uk/research/research-degrees/forms-and-guidance-notes.php
The Programme Leader in CREET should approach the examiners before they are formally
nominated to check that they are willing to accept the appointment.
3.1
Composition of the examination panel
The three possible examination panel combinations are:
(a)
examination panel chair
internal examiner
external examiner
(b)
examination panel chair
internal examiner
2 external examiners
(c)
examination panel chair
2 external examiners.
The student’s supervisor cannot be appointed either as the examination panel chair or the
internal examiner.
3.2
Examination panels for resubmitted theses
The original panel should normally be appointed for the second oral and re-examination of the
resubmitted thesis. If it is not possible to appoint the same panel, a case outlining the
circumstances should be made to the Research Degrees Office.
3.3
The observer
The Research Degrees Committee will normally expect one of the student’s supervisors to be
present as an observer at the examination, and be available to attend the pre- and postexamination meetings (at the discretion of the examiners). The observer is then able to offer:
(a)
advice to the panel, as someone who is familiar with the candidate’s work
(b)
reassurance to the candidate, as a familiar face
(c)
support in interpreting the exam panel’s request for amendments following the viva (if
applicable).
Page 4 of 17
Observers should, before the day of the examination, clarify their role with the examination
panel chair, who should consult the examiners before discussing this with the observer.
Observers may be asked to withdraw from any part of the examination and should do so
without discussion if an examiner requests this. The examiners may want to have a short
private discussion prior to the examination.
In exceptional circumstances, where a supervisor is unable to act as the observer, the
Research Degrees Committee requires an experienced member of the Centre for Research in
Education and Educational Technology to act in this capacity. It is recommended that only one
supervisor is present at the examination.
Students may elect not to have their supervisor present as an observer. The Research
Degrees Committee is of the view that this is not in the student’s best interest. Students who
do not wish to have an observer present at their examination must confirm this in writing to the
Research Degrees Office.
3.4
Appointment criteria for the examination panel chair
The examination panel chair should normally:
(a)
have experience of UK research degree supervision and examination
(b)
not be registered for a research degree themselves
(c)
be a member of academic staff at The Open University of lecturer status or above
(d)
be familiar with research degree regulations with specific reference to those relating to
examinations.
Where the nominated examination panel chair does not meet these criteria, a supporting
statement should be included with the nomination. EdD Academic Co-ordinators may be
appointed as exam panel chair, subject to meeting the formal requirements regarding
experience.
3.5
Appointment criteria for examiners
Examiners should:
(a)
be qualified and experienced in the field of the thesis to be examined
(b)
not normally be registered for a research degree themselves
(c)
normally have experience of UK research degree supervision and examination
(d)
meet the criteria set out in section 3.6 and 3.7.
The Research Degrees Committee will consider exceptions to the normal criteria. A case
should be included with the Exam panel nomination form. Faculties should contact the
Research Degrees Office for advice about nominations that do not meet the normal criteria,
prior to submitting the Exam panel nomination form. Interpretation of the criteria in the context
of individual examinations, and the extent to which there may be a potential conflict of interest,
is often a matter of judgement. The Research Degrees Office can provide guidance on the
case being prepared for approval by the Research Degrees Committee.
Internal examiners should be members of academic staff at The Open University of lecturer
status or above. Project officers will not normally be considered. Former members of staff
who have retained a formal connection with the University through visiting appointments may
be appointed as internal examiners (without pay). They may not be appointed as external
Page 5 of 17
examiners unless they left the University at least three years previously. External supervisors
on the EdD Programme may act as an internal examiner.
Emeritus professors may be appointed as internal examiners (with pay) if their knowledge and
expertise is current and pertinent to the thesis being examined. This should be stated on the
Exam panel nomination form. Retired or emeritus staff should not normally be considered as
external examiners.
Visiting professors, academic and visiting research fellows are considered for this purpose to
hold academic appointments and can be internal examiners but should not be appointed as
external examiners.
External examiners should normally be members of academic staff at a British university or
research institution at lecturer status or above. They should not normally be from the same
department as the student’s external supervisor.
External members of the Life and Biomolecular Sciences Management Group or the Theology
and Religious Studies Management Group may not be appointed as external examiners for
Open University research students.
External examiners from outside of the UK may only be nominated if their travel and
subsistence costs do not exceed £250 or if CREET is able to cover any expenses in excess of
this maximum limit, see section 5.2.
3.6
Independence of examiners and examination panel chairs
Those nominated for appointment as independent examination panel chairs or examiners
should not have had any influence on the design and implementation of the student’s research
project. The Research Degrees Committee requires that examiners are neither related to, nor
have a close personal, professional or contractual relationship with the candidate, supervisors,
and where there is any interest that might prejudice this, it should be declared at nomination
stage. For example, examiners are required to ‘declare an interest’ if they:
(a)
plan to employ the candidate
(b)
have co-published, or plan to co-publish with the candidate
(c)
are involved, or have been, with the candidate or supervisors in a close personal
relationship of any kind
(d)
are a past student of any of the supervisors, with an ongoing professional relationship
(e)
are the ‘regular’ examiner for a particular supervisor or CREET
(f)
have a close professional, contractual or personal relationship with any other member of
the examination panel
(g)
are being nominated as an external examiner and have a relationship with the
department, for example through collaboration or as an external supervisor for another
current or recent student in that department.
Research Degrees Committee normally considers recent (i.e. within five years) co-publication
to be an indication of a close professional relationship and requests that the nomination of
examiners who have co-published with the candidate and/or other nominated examiners is
avoided where possible.
Potential examiners are required to declare all co-publications with the candidate, the
supervisor and other nominated examiners at nomination stage. The Programme Leader is
asked to provide a supporting statement explaining the extent of the collaboration in each
Page 6 of 17
case, so that the committee can make an informed judgement about the relationship and
decide if there is a potential conflict of interest.
The Programme Leader is asked to verify that all nominations conform to the ‘Independence
of Examiners and Examination Panel Chairs’ statement by endorsing the nominations on the
Exam panel nomination form. S/he is asked to declare all nominations which may potentially
be affected by the ‘Independence of Examiners and Examination Panel Chairs’ statement,
and provide a supporting statement for consideration by the Research Degrees Committee.
If there is difficulty nominating an independent examination panel according to the terms
outlined in the statement above, because there is a small field of research experts, a second
external examiner may be nominated if they are an expert in a related field and can bring the
necessary independence to the panel. The Programme Leader should provide a supporting
statement explaining the reason for the nomination.
Internal examiners are not excluded by virtue of having conducted the student’s probationary
review. Third party monitors may be required to offer advice after the viva, so should not be
selected as internal examiner unless an alternative third party monitor is available.
3.7
Appointment criteria for the examination panel
When considering examination panel nominations, the Research Degrees Committee will look
at the balance of subject expertise, independence and UK research degrees examination
experience, across the panel as a whole.
Examination panel nominations will not normally be approved where the examiners
collectively, do not have experience of examining at least five research degree examinations,
and wherever possible, at least one of which should be an EdD research (not taught) degree.
The expectation is that as experience of EdD examination increases, all examination panels
will include at least one examiner who has previously examined an EdD thesis. If this
minimum requirement is not met, a case must be made by the Programme Leader and
included with the Exam panel nomination form. The nominated examiners’ PhD and EdD
examination experience from the UK and all other education systems should be presented
with the CV and case.
A second external examiner may be nominated to ensure that the examination panel has the
required level of UK research EdD examination experience1.
If there is difficulty nominating an independent examination panel according to the terms
outlined in the statement above, because there is a small field of research experts, a second
external examiner may be nominated if they are an expert in a related field and can bring the
necessary independence to the panel. The Programme Leader should provide a supporting
statement explaining the reason for the nomination.
Although the examination panel chair is normally required to have UK PhD and research EdD
examination experience, this is not taken into account as part of the examiners’ collective
experience.
3.8
Approval of nominations
The examination panel nominated by the Programme Leader in CREET must be approved by
the Research Degrees Committee. Once the panel has been approved, the Research
1
Where there is a potential internal examiner who has relevant subject expertise and fulfils the
independence criteria, yet has little or no UK EdD or PhD examination experience, the Programme
Leader is encouraged to nominate external examiner(s) experienced in UK PhD and research EdD
examinations. In this way UK EdD examination experience of OU academic staff may be developed. It is
strongly recommended that all new internal examiners attend the EdD examiner training session.
Page 7 of 17
Degrees Office will send formal offers of appointment to the examiners, and inform the student
of the examiners’ names. If the thesis has been submitted, and the Candidate declaration
form received before the examination panel is approved by the Research Degrees Committee,
the thesis will be sent to the examiners with their letters of appointment. Otherwise the thesis
will be sent to the examiners as soon as the thesis and the Candidate declaration form have
been received.
4
Duties of the Examiners
4.1
Duties of the examination panel chair
The examination panel chair does not assess whether the student has met the requirements
of the degree or make a recommendation on the award of the degree. S/he is not required to
read the thesis or prepare a pre-viva report.
The duties are:
4.2
(a)
to ensure that the examiners prepare independent Pre-viva reports, see section 8
(b)
to identify with the examiners the main points to be raised at the examination
(c)
to confirm with the examiners and the observer the role of the observer at the
examination and in the examiners’ meetings
(d)
to chair the examination and the examiners’ meetings
(e)
to ensure that the examination is conducted according to the University’s regulations
and procedures
(f)
to ensure that the Examination report form is completed diligently and agreed by all the
examiners at the end of the examination. This should include a report on the
examination and a recommendation on the award of the degree. If amendments are
required, they should be specified in section 7 of the Examination report form
(g)
to send by email the completed Examination report form, any list of amendments which are
not specified in Section 7 of the report and the examiners’ independent pre-viva reports to
the Research Degrees Office on the day of the viva or on the next working day. At least
one copy of the thesis must also be returned to the Research Degrees office
(h)
to ensure the feedback given to the student is appropriate and that the recommended
outcome is interim until approved by the Research Degree Examination Results Approval
Committee
(i)
to ensure that any amendments specified in section 7 of the Examination report form match
the criteria / examples associated with the appropriate recommended outcome in these
guidelines.
Duties of the examiners
The duties are:
(a) to prepare an independent Pre-viva report, see section 8
(b) to identify the main points to be raised at the examination
(c) to assess, with the other examiner(s), whether the student has met the requirements of the
EdD degree, see section 10
Page 8 of 17
(d) to make a recommendation, with the other examiners, on the award of the degree and any
amendments required
(e) to check corrections/amendments to the thesis following the viva voce as specified in
section 11
(f) to abide by The Open University’s confidentiality statement.
5
Honoraria Payments and Expenses
5.1
Honoraria Payments
Fee levels for external examiners, and supervisors who act as the observer (who are not Open
University staff), are specified in their appointment letters. Payment is made when the
examination results have been approved by the Research Degrees Examination Result
Approval Committee.
There is no fee for examination panel chairs or internal examiners unless an external
supervisor is acting as internal examiner.
5.2
Expenses
External examiners, and supervisors (who are not Open University staff), who act as the
observer or internal examiner, may claim for travel, subsistence, postage and telephone
expenses associated with the examination or the subsequent checking of the corrected thesis.
Travel is reimbursed for the actual cost of standard class public transport. Approval for
travel by car will be granted if the use of public transport is genuinely not possible, a full
explanation must be provided. All claims should be made on Open University claim forms.
Expenses should be claimed within one month of the expenditure being incurred.
The Research Degrees Office is unable to cover travel costs to and from the UK. The
Research Degrees Office will pay travel and subsistence costs up to a maximum of £250 for
an external examiner who is based outside of the UK. If you wish to nominate someone from
outside of the UK, the Exam panel nomination form should be used to clarify whether s/he will
incur expenses over this limit. If appropriate, please include the CREET budget code from
which expenses over the £250 maximum will be paid.
Examination panel chairs, internal examiners and, and EdD supervisors who act as the
observer, may claim expenses only if the examination is not held at their usual place of work.
Claims should be made using the electronic expense claim system.
6
Submission
6.1
Eligibility
To be eligible to submit an EdD thesis for examination, the student must:
(a)
be registered for the EdD
(b)
have completed the minimum period of study specified for the degree
(c)
have satisfied the supervisors that the thesis is of an adequate standard and worthy of
examination for the EdD degree
(d)
not be in debt to the University.
Page 9 of 17
Once the thesis has been submitted the Research Degrees Committee requires the
examination to take place even if the examiners consider the submission not to be of the
required standard.
6.2
Length and format of thesis
The University’s regulations state that the length of thesis must be appropriate to the subject
area covered and must not exceed 50,000 words (including footnotes, bibliographies and
references) for the Doctor of Education.
6.3
Thesis presentation
6.4
Text
The thesis must be printed on international A4 (297 mm x 210 mm paper of good quality. It
may be typewritten or printed on both sides of the paper. It should be typed or produced on a
word processor and printed on a printer which produces letter quality print. Dot matrix printing
is not acceptable. The text must be double spaced and the pages numbered consecutively.
The margins must be wide enough to allow for subsequent binding. The minimum
requirement is:

inside margin
40mm

top and outside margins
15mm

bottom margin
20mm.
The title page must provide the following information:

the student’s full name and degrees

the thesis title

the degree for which it has been submitted

the date of submission for examination (or resubmission for re-examination if applicable)
There should be a contents page and, where appropriate, a table of illustrations and/or a list of
any items not bound with the thesis (e.g. supporting digital media, maps, plans, etc).
6.5
Footnotes
The regulations do not make any recommendations about the positioning of footnotes. The
method of referencing should be consistent, whether footnotes are positioned at the bottom of
the page, at the end of each chapter, or at the end of the thesis.
6.6
Binding of examination copies of the thesis
Examiners should not discriminate against students because of a personal dislike for the way
in which the thesis is bound for examination.
The pages of an examination copy of the thesis may be:

glued

stapled together or in sections

held in a ring binder
Page 10 of 17

comb bound.
Loose pages in a wallet folder are not acceptable. Ring binders should not be used for a very
heavy or bulky thesis.
In the guidelines to research degree examinations for students (EX11 EdD), students are
advised to consult their supervisor about suitable binding for the examination copies of their
thesis.
6.7
Submission of the thesis
Students should submit three copies of their thesis to the Research Degrees Office with the
Candidate declaration form. They should also submit an abstract of the thesis, not exceeding
300 words, in a form suitable for publication at the front of each copy of the thesis and bound
with the text.
7
Arrangements for the examination
Arrangements for the examination are made by the EdD Office in CREET. The Examination
arrangements form should be completed with the following details and returned to the
Research Degrees office.
(a)
Date
(b)
Time
Examinations are generally held in the afternoon, particularly if external examiners have
far to travel.
(c)
Venue
Examinations are normally held at Walton Hall, in which case a room should be booked
by the EdD Office in CREET. The Research Degrees Office can provide advice about
booking a room at one of the Regional Centres. Alternatively, examinations may be
held at the external examiner’s place of work.
(d)
Lunch
If the examination is held at Walton Hall, the Research Degrees office will book lunch in
the Mulberry Suite or arrange for a buffet to be delivered and pay for:

the examination panel

the observer

one guest – any additional guests should be paid for by CREET.
Otherwise, the EdD Office should book and pay for lunch. Expenses to cover lunch for
those people mentioned above may be reclaimed from the Research Degrees Office.
The student should not be invited if lunch is held before the examination has taken place. If
the student is invited to lunch after the examination has been completed, CREET must pay for
her/his lunch.
The Research Degrees Office will confirm the examination arrangements to all concerned.
8
Independent Pre-viva reports
All examiners are required to prepare independent written reports in advance of the viva as
specified in the Pre-viva report form. Examination panel chairs are exempt from this
requirement because they are not required to assess whether the student has met the
requirements of the degree or make recommendations about the award.
Page 11 of 17
Examiners are asked to send their Pre-viva reports by email to the examination panel chair at
least five working days before the viva. The Pre-viva reports should be used to inform the
panel’s discussion at the pre-viva meeting.
The Pre-viva reports must not be made available to students in advance of the viva. However
they could be made available subsequently in the event of an appeal or an access request
under the Data Protection Act.
The examination panel chair is responsible for ensuring that the Pre-viva reports are emailed
to the Research Degrees Office with the Examination report for the examination result
approval process.
9
The Oral Examination
9.1
Examination panel meeting(s)
The examination panel should meet, normally without the observer present, before the
examination (e.g. over lunch), to confirm:
(a)
the structure of the questioning
(b)
the main points to be raised at the examination
(c)
the role of the observer.
The examination panel may also wish to meet the observer before the examination to discuss
their role. The observer should make themselves available to meet as directed by the
examination panel chair.
9.2
The scope and duration of the examination
Examinations usually last two to three hours depending on the nature of the thesis. The
examination should cover all aspects of the thesis and confirm that the thesis is the student’s
own original work.
The student should be given an opportunity to comment on any adverse points and on any
revisions which the examiners intend to recommend.
The examination may include the inspection of experimental apparatus, demonstration of
software, viewing of original data or other reasonable requests from the examiners. The
examiners should make any such requests in advance to the student.
Equally, the student may offer some form of practical introduction. Again such an offer should
be made in advance.
The student may take an annotated copy of the thesis and other source materials to the
examination.
9.3
Informing the student of the recommendation
Generally, the panel should inform the student of their intended recommendation following the
examination, after the examiners have adjourned for a brief discussion. Exceptionally, the
panel may inform the student of the likely recommendation at the start of the examination,
which may reduce her/his uncertainty and allow him/her the opportunity to defend her/his work
against an adverse recommendation. In the case of an adverse2 recommendation, the
examiners should make clear to the student that their intended recommendation is based on
2
Major revision and resubmission for re-examination or fail.
Page 12 of 17
the written thesis, and the examination offers the student a chance to demonstrate that her/his
knowledge and expertise is of the required level.
At this stage the decision of the examination panel is only a recommendation to the Research
Degree Examination Results Approval Committee. The decision of the Committee, based on
the examiners’ recommendation, is the formal result of the examination; this should be borne
in mind when the examination panel informs the student of their recommendation.
10
Criteria for the Award of the Degree
To be awarded the EdD degree, the student’s thesis must show evidence of:
(a) good style and presentation
(b) demonstrate reflection on the relationship between theory and practice in education, in
particular, the thesis should:
• address research questions of relevance to and arising from educational practice/policy
• demonstrate a sound understanding of the main issues and debates in the area under
investigation
• provide a clear and well-argued rationale for the research questions addressed – in
terms of existing research, methodology, theory and educational practice/policy
• locate the professional focus of the research within relevant academic traditions
(c) make a significant contribution to the theory and practice of education, in particular, the
thesis should:
• address research questions which either have not been addressed previously or have
been addressed in different ways
• clearly demonstrate how the research findings contribute to and advance knowledge of
the research area under investigation, in relation to existing methodology, research
findings, theory and educational practice/policy
• identify further research questions/issues
• explain in what ways the research provides a significant contribution to the theory and
practice of education
• state the implications of the research for professional practice and policy in education
• report research, which is of potentially publishable quality in professionally relevant,
refereed journals
(d) show an ability to select and apply appropriate research methods, in particular, the thesis
should:
• demonstrate that the research methods, data and analyses are appropriate means of
addressing the research questions
• provide a clear and concise description of the research which has been carried out,
including methodology, ethical issues, findings, analyses
(e) exhibit a high level of critical analysis, in particular, the thesis should:
• provide a thorough, critical, balanced and integrated review of the literature(s) relevant
to the research questions being addressed, including reviews of research findings,
theory and educational practice/policy based on primary sources.
• critically review relevant epistemological and methodological issues and demonstrate
how these apply to your research.
• demonstrate how the research findings relate to the research questions being
addressed.
Page 13 of 17
11
Recommendations available to examiners
The examiners may make the following recommendations. Note that in all outcomes where
amendments or further work is to be conducted, supervision must be available to the student
while this work is undertaken. Examiners should use their academic judgement to consider
their recommendation carefully against the criteria / examples set out below for each of the
recommended outcomes.
11.1 Award the degree
This recommendation should be made if the requirements of the EdD degree have been met
in full and no corrections and modifications or amendments are required.
11.2 Corrections and modifications
This recommendation should be made if the requirements of the EdD degree have been met
in full subject to typographical corrections and/or editorial modifications.
The required corrections and modifications should be specified in section 7 of the Examination
report form, in a format and language which is appropriate for forwarding to the student. The
internal examiner is responsible for checking the corrected thesis. The Research Degrees
Examination Result Approval Committee may request that the corrected thesis is also referred
to the external examiner(s).
Students are allowed two months, from the date of the letter confirming the ratification of the
examination result, to complete corrections and modifications. A second oral examination is
not required.
Examples of minor corrections include:
 Typographical and grammatical errors
 Corrections to references (citations and bibliography)
 Improvements to figures (e.g. image resolution, legends, scale bars)
 Minor corrections of fact
 Minor revisions to interpretation of data, results, conclusions
 Minor re-organisation of material
11.3 Substantial amendment
This recommendation should be made if the requirements of the EdD degree have been met
in full subject to limited deficiencies which the panel is confident can be corrected satisfactorily
by the student.
The required amendments should be specified in section 7 of the Examination report form in a
format and language which is appropriate for forwarding to the student. The Research
Degrees Examination Results Approval Committee requires the amended thesis to be
checked by all the examiners.
Students are allowed six months to complete substantial amendments. Supervision should
be provided during this period. A second oral examination is not required. Following
consideration of the amended thesis, it is not expected that the examination panel will invite
further substantial amendments.
Examples of substantial amendment include:
 Reinterpretation of the data (including additional review of background literature)
 Substantial rewriting of large portions of the text (e.g. redrafting chapters)
 Substantial additional material to be incorporated within the text
 Substantial revisions to results and conclusions
 Thorough revisions of presentational matters which require a complete edit.
Page 14 of 17
The research degree regulations are clear that the amended thesis must satisfy the examiners
for the degree to be awarded. It is appropriate for the examiners to require the student to
undertake minor corrections to the amended thesis to add polish to the document prior to
lodging it in the library, but not to revisit the original amendments. When considering a viva
outcome of Substantial Amendment, the examination panel is urged to carefully consider
whether Major Revision and Resubmission for Re-examination may be more appropriate when
considerable changes to the thesis are requested.
11.4 Major revision and resubmission for re-examination
This recommendation is not available where a thesis is being examined following a
resubmission result at an earlier examination.
This recommendation should be made if the requirements of the EdD degree have not been
met but the panel is confident that the degree can be awarded subject to major revision and
re-examination.
Examiners should recommend resubmission rather than a fail result wherever they see the
prospect of the thesis being brought up to the required standard if the revisions are
satisfactorily completed.
The required revisions, which may include additional research work, should be specified in
section 7 of the Examination report form.
Students are allowed twelve months to complete the major revision and resubmit their thesis
for re-examination. Supervision should be provided during this period. A second oral
examination must be held.
Examples of major revision include:
 Additional data collection (including additional background literature)
 Major revisions of large portions of the text (e.g. drafting new chapters)
 Major revisions to results and conclusions
When this outcome is recommended by the panel, the required revisions, which may include
additional research work, should be specified in section 7 of the Examination report form. At
re-examination, the thesis must be evaluated against these requirements. Should the thesis
fall significantly short of the requirements, an appropriate alternative recommendation should
be made. Details of the available options post-re-examination can be found in the
Examination guidelines for resubmitted theses.
11.5 Fail
This recommendation should be made if the requirements of the EdD degree have not been
met. If this recommendation is made, the Examination report form must include details of:
(a)
why the candidate failed to meet the requirements of the EdD degree
(b)
why the examination panel is unable to recommend major revision and re-submission of
the thesis.
11.6 Recommendations Available for Re-examinations
Where a student is resubmitting a thesis for re-examination, the examiners are required to
make a judgement as to whether the candidate has, following revision and re-examination as
specified by the examiners on the basis of the previous examination, met the criteria for the
relevant degree.
Page 15 of 17
12
The Examination Report Form
After the examination, the examiners should complete the report form, giving their
recommendation as to the award of the degree, and justifying the recommendation by
providing information about:
(a)
the presentation and style of the thesis, including the standard of English
(b)
how the thesis demonstrates reflection on the relationship between theory and practice
in education
(c)
the way in which the thesis makes a significant contribution to the theory and practice of
education
(d)
the evidence from the thesis and the examination of the candidate’s ability to select and
apply appropriate research methods, and exhibit a high level of critical analysis
(e)
the candidate’s defence of the thesis in the examination, include an outline of the topics
covered and the candidate’s ability to respond to questioning on those topics.
The rationale for the recommended outcome should be explicit and referenced against the
academic benchmarks outlined above. It is helpful to the Research Degrees Examination
Result Approval Committee if examiners summarise additional factors they have taken into
account about the circumstances of individual students. The time allowances for completion
of the different outcomes are fixed, such that it can be appropriate to take them into account
when recommending a particular outcome.
The report must provide, in section 7, comprehensive information about any corrections and
modifications, substantial amendment or major revisions which are required. It is not
acceptable for examiners to annotate the examination copy of the thesis and hand it to the
candidate. Lists of corrections or amendments, including typographical errors, must be
provided to the Research Degrees office on the Examination report form to allow the result
recommendation to be approved, and should not be passed directly to the candidate following
the examination. Where an examiner has annotated the thesis with the corrections or
amendments that are required, these should either be reproduced in the report or in a
document appended to the report.
The Examination report form, including the list of corrections, the Pre-viva reports (see section
8) and at least one copy of the thesis submitted for examination should be returned to the
Research Degrees office on the next working day after the examination.
If an examiner wishes to retain a copy of the thesis to check that corrections and
modifications, or substantial amendment have been completed, this should be indicated on the
Examination report form. All copies of the thesis and any other materials must be returned to
the Research Degrees Office once the examination process has been concluded.
If the examiners recommend the award of the degree subject to corrections and modifications,
substantial amendment, or major revision and resubmission, an examination copy of the thesis
will be retained by the Research Degrees Officel until the academic requirements of the
degree have been met in full. This measure has been implemented by the Research Degrees
Committee to avoid any confusion concerning the material submitted for examination in the
event of an appeal.
13
Approval of the examination result
The decision as to the award of the degree is taken by the Research Degrees Examination
Result Approval Committee on the basis of the Examination report form.
Page 16 of 17
When the Committee has made its decision, the Research Degrees office sends written
notification of the examination result to the student and the examiners.
The formal examination result letter, together with a copy of the examiners’ report is copied to:
(a)
the student’s supervisor
(b)
the Programme Leader
(c)
the Programme Leader in CREET.
13.1 Corrections and modifications to the thesis
The student has two months from the date of the approved result letter to supply the Research
Degrees Office with the corrected thesis. The examiner(s) will then be asked to confirm that
the corrections and modifications have been completed satisfactorily.
The date of the award is the date of the examiners’ confirmation that the academic
requirements of the degree have been met in full. Notification of the award is sent to the
student and copied to the examiners, the supervisor and the Programme Leader in CREET.
13.2 Substantial amendment to the thesis
The student has six months from the date of the approved result letter to supply the Research
Degrees Office with the amended thesis. Supervision should be provided during this period.
Otherwise, the arrangements are the same as for corrections and modifications in section
13.1.
The amended thesis is not subject to re-examination; the examiners should consider the
amendments in the context of the requested amendments listed in the Examination report
form. Should the thesis not meet the requirements set by the examiners, it is not expected
that a further round of substantial amendments be invited. Minor corrections and amendments
may be requested.
13.3 Major revision and resubmission of the thesis for re-examination
The student has up to twelve months of supervised study from the date of the result letter to
revise and resubmit the thesis for examination. Supervision should be provided during this
period. The original panel should normally be appointed for the second oral and reexamination of the resubmitted thesis. Detailed guidance for the management of resubmitted
theses can be found in the Examination guidelines for resubmitted theses.
13.4 Illness and suspended registration after the viva
During the ‘corrections period’, the student is entitled to apply for suspended registration,
subject to approval by the Research Degrees office, and subject to the standard terms and
conditions.
14
Award of the Degree
When the student has satisfied the academic requirements of the EdD degree, s/he is required
to submit three bound copies of the work to the Research Degrees Office. Two copies will be
for deposition in the University Library, the third will be held by CREET. The degree will be
conferred and the student will be invited to attend a degree ceremony.
Page 17 of 17