Thesis assessment: Guidelines and procedures
The Assessment Committee will receive a digital copy of the thesis along with practical instructions for the assessment procedure.
Once the PhD thesis has been received, the committee is granted a 2-month period for evaluation. The committee chair is responsible for organizing the assessment, setting interim deadlines, and arranging meetings among committee members.
The PhD student’s supervisors may not serve on the Assessment Committee, but the principal supervisor is assigned to the committee without the right to vote (cf. Ministerial PhD Order §16, subsection 2). In this capacity, supervisors may be invited to the Assessment Committee’s meetings to provide clarification on matters related to the PhD project. At a minimum, the supervisor must be given the opportunity to comment on the preliminary assessment before it is submitted to the PhD School.
At the start of the assessment process, the chair also bears the responsibility for scheduling a date for the public defence, coordinating with all involved parties, including the supervisor, co-supervisor(s), and PhD student (NB: Please direct inquiries through the supervisor, as no direct communication between the committee and the PhD student is allowed). The scheduled date must be communicated to the department administration and the PhD Administration at the earliest opportunity.
Criteria for the assessment of the PhD thesis
In accordance with the PhD Order, a successful PhD thesis must “document the student's ability to apply the subject's academic methods and to conduct research in a way that corresponds to the international standards for PhD degrees in the research area.”
The thesis must demonstrate the PhD student's capacity to make a significant contribution to the development of new knowledge and understanding within the research area. This includes:
- Clearly defining the objectives and research question of the thesis.
- Reviewing the international state of the art within the research domain.
- Providing an account and explanation of key theories, concepts and methods used in the thesis.
- Describing the empirical material and criteria used for its selection (if applicable).
- Formulating a concise conclusion that summarizes and discusses the contribution of the thesis to the research field(s).
Read about the required format and content for a PhD thesis.
Guidelines for the preliminary written assessment and recommendation
The Assessment Committee must submit a preliminary recommendation to the PhD school on whether the thesis can be accepted for oral defence. Please use the template provided for the written assessment.
The assessment should include:
- A factual description of the structure, scope, and content of the thesis.
- A presentation of the purpose and results of the thesis, and its contributions to the research field.
- A discussion of the strengths, weaknesses, and scientific significance of the thesis.
For article-based theses with a significant degree of co-authorship, the assessment should also include:
- A description of the PhD student's independent research contributions.
The chair of the committee bears the responsibility of crafting a unified and coherent assessment and must ensure consistency between the premises and conclusions, maintaining a balanced approach between positive and negative remarks.
The written assessment will conclude in the committee’s recommendation regarding the thesis’ suitability for defence. If the recommendation is positive, the oral defence will take place at the date scheduled by the chair of the committee.
Approval and dissent regarding assessment and recommendation
The preliminary recommendation is submitted to the PhD Administration. It must be signed either by the entire Assessment Committee or have approvals (preferably emails) attached from all committee members.
If members of the Assessment Committee disagree, the majority vote will prevail. The minority committee member may submit a dissenting opinion in a brief report, stating the sections of the majority assessment with which the member disagrees. The dissenting report is attached to the positive or negative recommendation and is signed by the dissenting member.
Negative preliminary assessment and recommendation
If the assessment leads to a negative recommendation (the PhD thesis is not suited for defence), the committee must specify whether they recommend the thesis to be revised and resubmitted and set a deadline for the resubmission (a minimum of 3 months later). The deadline should align with the scope of revisions required.
A negative recommendation must be clearly justified. If the recommendation is to revise and resubmit, the written assessment should conclude with a clear summary of the parts and aspects of the thesis that need improvement in order for the thesis to be accepted for defence.
The Assessment Committee may also recommend that the thesis is not suited for defence and should not be resubmitted. In this case, the negative recommendation must be clearly justified in the written assessment.
Upon receiving a negative recommendation, the PhD student and the supervisor will have the opportunity to comment and present a rebuttal to the written assessment within two weeks.
In the event of a negative assessment, the Head of the PhD School must make one of the following decisions based on the Committee’s recommendation and the comments made by the author and the principal supervisor:
- The PhD thesis is resubmitted in revised form within a deadline of at least three months. Except in special circumstances, a resubmitted thesis will be assessed by the same Committee as the original submission.
- The thesis is assessed by a new Committee.
- The defence does not take place.
The decision made by the Head of the PhD School cannot be appealed except for procedural errors.