RD21 Post Examination Report
Guidance: The Examiners are asked to use this form to make a
joint report on the recommended outcome following the assessment of the candidate. All
recommendations are subject to approval by the University Research Committee. If the Examiners
are not in agreement, the Examiners may submit separate RD21 Post Examination Reports.
This form should be typewritten or completed neatly in black ink
1.
The Candidate
First Name:
Family Name/Surname:
Submitting for the award of:
2.
Title of Thesis
3.
Present at the Viva Voce Examination
External Examiner:
External Examiner:
Internal Examiner:
Chair:
Supervisors present:
4.
Report of the Examiner(s) on the viva voce
The Examiners are requested to report below on the viva voce examination of the candidate.
4.1
Are you satisfied that the work presented is the candidate's own work?
4.2
Did the candidate show a satisfactory knowledge and understanding of:
4.3
(a)
matters relating to the work?
(b)
the background studies to the subject of the work?
In the case of a candidate whose research programme was part of a
collaborative group project, did the viva voce examination demonstrate
that the candidate's own contribution was worthy of the award?
Yes
No
Yes
No
N/A
4.4
Please comment further on the quality of the candidate's performance in the viva voce
examination.
5.
Report of the examiners on the approved alternative examination
Where the University has approved an alternative form of examination, a report on the
candidate's performance should be given below. The form of examination must be specified.
6.
Explanation of any disagreement between the examiners
If the provisional recommendations of the Examiners in their independent preliminary reports
were not in agreement, an explanatory statement of the final joint recommendation must be
made below. If the examiners are not in agreement and are therefore completing separate
copies of this form, details of the disagreement should be made below and, where appropriate,
related to the preliminary report.
7.
Recommendation
Please indicate the recommendation of the Examiners to the University Research Committee. If the
Examiners refer the thesis for any revision please indicate below which examiners will check the changes to
confirm that the thesis is acceptable. Please also indicate the period for resubmission of the revised work.
7.1.
Category of recommendation
Guidance: typical deficiencies- illustrative
Recommendation
Only
PASS
The substance of the submitted work is acceptable as it
stands. No substantive corrections or amendments are
required. If minor textual or formatting matters have been
identified by the examiners in a written list, these should be
addressed and submitted within one month via the Research
Student Office for the Chair to check they have been made
before the Pass is formally confirmed via the Research Student
Office on behalf of the University Research Committee
MINOR
AMENDMENTS
Some limited revision of matters of substance as distinct from
textual or formatting matters alone is required but there are no
significant problems which challenge the integrity of the
research. A combination of such matters as: typographical
and/or grammatical errors; minor omissions; presentational
matters; some re- drawing of diagrams; references missing,
combined with more substantive but still relatively minor
matters such as some rewriting of text to clarify arguments; the
rewriting of an abstract, or the addition of literature references.
In this instance it is normal for the internal examiner to check
the amendments have been satisfactorily made and confirm
this to the Research Office. Normally granted with up to six
months.
C
MAJOR
AMENDMENTS
Major revision is required; a number of significant matters of
substance to address such as significant omissions in the
written discussion or errors of interpretation; inconsistent
arguments; significant oversight in literature review; concerns
about the sufficiency of the research; significant or major rewriting needed; major restructuring needed; poor English; a
combination of these. In this instance it is normal for both
examiners to check that the candidate has fulfilled the
requirements for a successful outcome. Normally granted with
between six and a maximum of twelve months. If given “major
amendments” but the examiners do not require another viva,
the candidate is given the option to request another viva, which
request will not normally be refused.
D
FOR DOCTORAL
AWARDS ONLY
THE CANDIDATE IS
ADVISED TO
TRANSFER
REGISTRATION TO
THE MASTERS
AWARD
A combination of such matters as: a lack of originality; serious
flaws in the methodology; seriously inadequate interpretation;
direction of research questionable; evidence of modest
command of the subject; very weak presentation; many
significant errors.
A
B
E1
E2
FAIL: NO AWARD
THE CANDIDATE IS
NOT PERMITTED
TO RESUBMIT
An academic offence is suspected by the examiners or has
been acknowledged by the candidate. Examples of offences
include: fabrication and/or falsification of evidence; plagiarism.
An outcome of fail following resubmission and a second viva if
applicable.
Please
tick
In the event of a recommendation for revision, on the day of the viva voce examination the
Examiners are required to give the Research Student Office a list of the principal matters to be
addressed.
List of amendments attached (if applicable please tick the box)
7.2.
Revised thesis to be checked or re-examined by
Please tick
i) The Chair of the Viva Voce Examination
(Applies to category A only)
ii) One Examiner only
(Normally applies to Category B)
Name of Examiner……………………………………………
iii) All Examiners
(Normally applies to Categories C & D)
7.3.
Second Viva Voce Examination Required
A second viva voce examination is necessary
(A second viva will not usually be appropriate in the event of a Category B recommendation but
may be necessary in the case of a Category C or D recommendation.)
7.4.
Revised thesis to be resubmitted within the following period
Please indicate the period permitted for revision and re-submission. This should take into account the
extent of the revision and the personal circumstances of the candidate. The actual date will be confirmed
by the Research Student Office.
One year is the maximum period allowed, except for the MRes where three months is the maximum
allowed. Minor Amendments should not normally take longer than 6 months.
One month
Signed :
Three months
Six months
Not applicable for MRes
One year (maximum)
Not applicable for MRes
Examiner 1
……………………………………………………
Date …………………………
Examiner 2
……………………………………………………
Date …………………………
Examiner 3
……………………………………………………
Date …………………………
Please return this form to: The Research Student Office, University of Derby, Kedleston Road, Derby DE22 1GB
Telephone: 01332 591060 E-mail: researchoffice@derby.ac.uk
(Aug 2015)