Confirmation of candidature: A
stressful, horrible experience
Archie Clements
Deputy ogre of PhD execution
committee
Confirmation of candidature: A
positive, useful experience
Archie Clements
Member of SPH Research and RHD
Committee, Confirmation Convener
Website
• http://www.sph.uq.edu.au/confirmationprocess
• From SPH web page, click “Research Degrees”
tab, and then “Confirmation process” link.
You and your supervisor need to TALK about:
-When to time your confirmation
-Who should be on the panel (two people
external to the advisory team, but experts in
the area)
Timing: 9–15 months into candidature (i.e. from
enrolment) for full-time PhD
-Aim for 12 months
-9 months if anticipate early submission
-15 months if ethics/data collection have
delayed progress (try to avoid)
Divide by two for MPhil
Multiply by two for part-time PhD
Use panel as an opportunity to learn, get ideas,
clear up uncertainty, refine research questions
and advise direction of the thesis.
Panel members are unlikely to be suitable
examiners, so you might want to avoid
nominating possible examiners at this stage.
Setting up the date
• Your advisor should contact the confirmation convenor (me) to
determine rough dates that are suitable; if we cant find suitable
date, RHD co-ordinator (Andrea Whittaker) or other member of
Research/RHD committee can chair (ask Mary for list of names).
• S/he should contact the panellists to obtain their agreement to
participate and to co-ordinate dates.
• S/he should also contact associate advisors to co-ordinate
dates.
• S/he should then inform Mary Roset of agreed date and time so
that a room can be booked.
• Schedule 3 hours for the session (most take 1.5-2 hrs).
• OK for advisors/panellists from outside Brisbane to phone in.
Preparing the documents
• The school form:
– Candidate report (written by you); Before; Be Honest
and think about what you want/need from your advisor
and SPH
– Advisor report (written by your primary advisor);
Before
– Review panel chair report (written by me/chair); After
– RHD coordinator recommendation (written by Andrea);
After
• Attainment of milestone form
– Signed by advisor, you and the RHD co-ordinator;
include your details and signatures Before, and give to
Mary Roset so that Andrea cans sign After
The confirmation document
• Title page Title of project, advisors
• Introduction (2-4 pages) Aims, objectives, hypotheses, research
questions
• Literature review (10-15 pages) Critical, concise, identifies gaps
• Research plan/methods (6-10 pages) Study design, data collection tools,
analytical plan
• Progress to date (2 pages) Include ethics; specify papers published, in
press, submitted or in preparation
• Expected outcomes (2-3 pages) What will the research show/add?
• Thesis structure (2 pages) Chapter headings and 2-3 sentences
describing each chapter
• Timelines (1 page) Gantt chart
• Appendices Papers, technical reports
• If in doubt, phone a friend, or come see me – I have loads of old
confirmation documents you can look at
• Send to panel, chair and advisors >2wks prior to confirmation meeting
The presentation
• 20 minutes (only!)
• Powerpoint presentation (any electronic media
acceptable)
• 15-20 slides
• Background (Intro and lit review)
• Research questions/hypotheses
• Research completed: aims, methods, results, discussion
and conclusions
• Research plan for studies yet to be completed
• General discussion and conclusions
• Timelines for completion
• Go over it with your supervisor, and do a dry run with your
PhD colleagues
The meeting
• Introductions
• Presentation (20 minutes)
• Panellists and chair ask questions Literature; Methods and results; Research plan
– especially feasibility and cohesion (does it tell a story); Thesis structure (by papers?
Traditional format?) YOU should answer and your advisor should only interject if necessary,
perhaps to clarify a point, provide some context, or answer concerns about resources,
funding, or access to data or target populations.
• You leave, we ask advisors about progress, problems, writing,
analysis, intellectual contribution, funding, resources,
communication, teamwork.
• Advisors leave, we ask you about supervision, resources,
wants/needs, experience as a student, conferences, workshops or
courses you want to attend. Think about what you want to say in this
section. We will go in to bat for you if there are things you have identified that you
want improved.
• Brief discussion just between panellists and chair – decide on
outcome and recommendations
Possible outcomes
• Pass with no conditions Vast majority
• Pass with conditions (usually more detailed thesis
plan) Rare
• Extension (usually 3 months, in which agreed
outcomes need to be achieved) Very rare
• Conditions not met for confirmation of candidature;
goes to Graduate School; Exceedingly rare
Possible outcomes
– Conversion to MPhil
– Student voluntarily withdraws (no academic penalty)
– Termination of candidature (academic penalties)
Things to do to make unconditional
pass very, very likely
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Interesting, cohesive story
Evidence of forward thinking with a feasible thesis plan
Coherent literature review, good scientific writing
Ethical clearance obtained
Evidence of good lines of communication with your primary
supervisor
Evidence that you are making use of your wider advisory
team
Evidence of critical thinking and strong intellectual leadership
of your research
Confident presentation; own your topic; know what you are
talking about
Home run: paper published/in press; data collection
completed for at least one study
Alarm bells
• Insufficient detail in research plan
• Unrealistic timelines (will you master multi-level modelling in
six weeks?)
• Over-ambitious project plans (insufficient funding, time,
expertise, access to participants)
• Lack of progress in literature review, ethics, design of
protocols/survey tools
• Poorly presented scientific writing in your confirmation
document
• Inability to answer basic questions on the study area and
research plan
• Inadequate supervisory arrangements (e.g. where the
supervisor is leaving their post; or not all key methodological
elements are covered in the team)
Things to think about
• What skills do I want from my PhD?
• What do I want to do after my PhD? How will I badge
myself?
• Should I build a relationship with the panellists? Use this
as a networking opportunity
• Do I want to do a thesis by publication, or a traditional
thesis? Panellists typically ask about this; be prepared if,
by papers, to explain contribution to multi-authored work
• Is that sixth paper really necessary for my PhD, or can I do
it in my post-doc?
• My advisory team have made a commitment to me; I am
therefore going to get the supervision that I deserve!