1. Admission to Candidature

1.1. Admission to candidature in the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) may be approved by the Committee only when the Head of School has:

(a) certified that the necessary facilities and appropriate support for the applicant undertaking the proposed PhD program are available; and
(b) nominated an appropriate Principal Supervisor and Co-supervisor(s) in accordance with Rule 5.

1.2. The Committee may, on the recommendation of the relevant Head of School, admit to candidature into the course for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) an applicant who:

(a) has a degree of Master (AQF Level 9) with at least a 25% research component undertaken at a sufficiently high standard; or
(b) has a degree of Bachelor with at least upper second class honours (AQF Level 8); or
(c) has a degree at AQF Level 8 or AQF Level 9 and have adequate research preparation since graduation. Adequate research preparation may be gained by an approved academic course, professional training, during an occupation or through peer reviewed publications; or
(d) has previously undertaken work of sufficiently high standard towards a higher degree by research (AQF Level 9) in the University but not have submitted it for any degree; and
(e) has produced documented evidence of capacity to undertake work at the PhD level; and
(f) has completed and had approved by the Committee a PhD research proposal.

1.3. Evidence of refereed research publications or reviews of at least two thesis chapters are required before the Committee will consider a request to upgrade from an incomplete higher degree by research (AQF Level 9) in the University (Rule 1.2(d)).
1.3.1. The reviews shall be carried out by two reviewers, one who may be internal and one who must be external to the University. Each reviewer should have a doctoral degree or equivalent.
1.3.2. Any application for an upgrade with evidence attached must be endorsed by the Principal Supervisor and Head of School and forwarded to Research Services, after confirmation of candidature or equivalent with sufficient candidature left to continue on into the PhD. The Committee will determine, in consultation with the principal supervisor, the appropriate period of PhD candidature, should the upgrade be approved.

1.4. All applicants must meet the University’s English Language Requirements for Admission Rule.

2. Period of Candidature

2.1. The minimum period of candidature is two years (four years for part-time candidates), unless otherwise approved by the Committee.
2.2. The maximum period of candidature is normally three years (six years for part-time candidates), Extensions may be granted by the Committee in recognition of exceptional circumstances.
2.3. International applicants with four-year funding may be permitted by the Committee to take a maximum period of four years as a full-time candidate.
2.4. For applicants upgrading from another course the maximum time limit is reduced by the period of enrolment in the course from which the student has changed.
2.5. For applicants transferring from an equivalent course in another institution the maximum period of candidature permitted to be completed at that institution is half of the maximum period specified in Rule 2.2.

3. Conditions of Candidature

3.1. Each PhD candidate is required to consult regularly with his or her supervisors. This may be either in person or using ICT, including video. The supervisors and the Head of School will determine the nature and extent of such consultation after consultation with the candidate.
3.2. The candidate is required to undergo a Confirmation of Candidature process as detailed in the Confirmation of Candidature Policy and Guidelines for UNE Doctoral Students.
3.3. The candidate is required to complete an academic progress report every 6 months.
3.4. The Committee, on the advice of the Head of School, may grant leave of absence from the course of study and research in special cases. The period of such leave shall not be counted as part of the prescribed term of candidature.
3.5. The candidate is required to pursue the course wholly under the control of the University.
3.6. Research may be undertaken away from the University, on the recommendation of the Head of School if the Committee is satisfied that:

(a) the candidate will have access to the required facilities; and
(b) an appropriate supervisor at the away location will be appointed, unless the Head of School recommends otherwise; and
(c) the nature and extent of the consultation between the candidate and University supervisor will be appropriate.

3.7. The candidate may enrol in specified coursework units concurrently with the PhD if the units are considered by the Committee, on the recommendation of the Head of School, to be necessary for successful completion of the PhD.
3.8. The Committee, on the recommendation and rationale from the Head of School, may approve enrolment in another course concurrently with enrolment in the PhD.
3.9. A candidate may be required to show cause in relation to their performance in the program, consistent with the Higher Degree Research Show Cause Policy and Procedures.

4. Progression Pathway

A candidate exiting the PhD before completion may be eligible to transfer from the PhD to a relevant Masters by research qualification (AQF Level 9).

5. Supervisors - Nomination, Appointment and Responsibilities

5.1. The Head of School must nominate at least two supervisors of the candidate, for appointment by the Committee. This will be varied only under exceptional circumstances as deemed by the Head of School.
5.2. One supervisor shall be nominated as Principal Supervisor and the remaining as Co-supervisors.
5.3. Principal and Co-supervisors must comply with the Registration of Research Higher Degree Supervisors Policy and Procedures.
5.4. The nomination of supervisor will include an estimate of the expected percentage input from each supervisor.
5.5. For external candidates, a suitable supervisor at the external location, who has agreed to act as such, shall be nominated, where appropriate, as a Co-supervisor.
5.6. The Committee, on the joint recommendation of the Head of School and the relevant PVC, may recommend termination of candidature, if it is satisfied that the University can no longer provide appropriate supervision. In such circumstance, the University will provide any necessary administrative assistance to the student to facilitate the transfer to another institution.
5.7. The candidate has the right to request a change of supervisor. Such a request must be submitted to the Head of School, who after consultation will provide the Committee with a recommendation and nomination of alternative supervisor for approval.

6. Examination Process

6.1. Submission Requirements

6.1.1. The candidate shall present for examination a thesis in a format approved by the Committee embodying the results of the PhD work.
6.1.2. The thesis, exclusive of appendices, shall not exceed 100,000 words and in scientific subjects should not normally exceed 50,000 words (200 pages). In special cases these limits may be exceeded on the recommendation of the Principal Supervisor and Head of School and approval of the Committee.
6.1.3. A thesis must be in English unless the Committee has approved otherwise.
6.1.4. The sources from which the information is derived, the extent to which the work of others has been used and to which the assistance of individuals, associations or institutions has been obtained, must be acknowledged generally in a preface or introduction, specifically in notes, a bibliography or appendices, and must be, throughout the thesis, shown clearly and fully by appropriate references.
6.1.5. The candidate may not present as the thesis any work that has been the basis of the award of a degree at this or another university but, if clearly indicated may be incorporated in the thesis.
6.1.6. The candidate and supervisors will ensure compliance with the Management and Storage of Research Data and Materials Policy.
6.1.7. The candidate shall submit to the Committee the thesis in digital format and three hard copies. If the thesis has multi-media or creative practice components, four copies of such components must also be submitted along with clear instructions as to their usage as well as a listing of computer hardware, software and other requirements needed by examiners and other readers of the work. All multimedia or creative practice components must be accessible by examiners.
6.1.8. At the time of thesis submission, the Principal Supervisor shall submit certification to the Committee that the supervisors and Head of School consider the form and content of the thesis are suitable for examination.
6.1.9. Candidates can appeal to the Committee if thesis examination is requested without certification of the Principal Supervisor and the Head of School. If the Committee accepts the thesis for examination then the examiners will not be advised that the thesis was submitted without School support.

6.2. Thesis Examination Process

6.2.1. Prior to the submission of a thesis the Head of School and Principal Supervisor must recommend to the Committee the names of three examiners and a reserve fourth examiner, selected from a pool of at least five potential examiners, assembled through consultation between the Principal Supervisor, the candidate and all current supervisors. The Committee makes the final appointment. The candidate will not be given any indication of the final set of examiners that have been recommended and appointed.
6.2.2. At least two of the actual examiners must be independent experts with international standing who are external to the University and to any collaborating institution involved in the work. The Committee must be advised on both potential conflicts of interest (Conflict of Interest Policy), provide evidence of international standing and indicate whether each examiner has experience examining higher-degree research theses. The Head of School or Principal Supervisor, as appropriate, will obtain written or email consent from each examiner excepting the reserve, to examine the thesis within 6 weeks of receipt.
6.2.3. Additional examiners, if required during the examination process will be made from the original pool of examiners, unless otherwise instructed by the Committee.
6.2.4. Each examiner shall make a separate written report on the merits of the thesis or the exegesis and creative work if for a PhD in creative practice, but thereafter may be required to consult with the other examiners and report to the Committee. Each examiner will be requested to provide his or her report within six weeks of receipt of the thesis. If an examiner fails to provide his or her report, after appropriate reminders, within a maximum of two months, the Committee, after consultation with the relevant Head of School, may notify the examiner that his or her services are no longer required and the reserve examiner may then be activated as a replacement.
6.2.5. For a PhD in creative practice to pass, both the exegesis and the creative work must be deemed by examiners to be of pass standard.

6.3. Thesis Examination Outcomes

6.3.1. Taking into account the recommendations of the examiners, the Committee may:

(a) recommend that the degree be awarded;
(b) recommend that the degree be awarded conditional upon the making of such amendments as the Committee deems appropriate;
(c) request the examiners to consult and report to the Committee;
(d) appoint an additional examiner or examiners;
(e) appoint an external adjudicator who shall consider the examiners’ reports in light of the thesis and recommend a resolution to the Committee;
(f) require the candidate to sit for such written, oral or practical examinations as the Committee may prescribe;
(g) permit a candidate to revise the thesis for re-examination if, in the opinion of the Committee the work is of sufficient merit to warrant this concession;
(h) recommend that the degree be not awarded.
(i) A doctoral candidate may be awarded the Chancellor's Doctoral Research Medal in cases where at least two thesis examiners have recommended the award of the Medal, and the Academic Board Higher Degree Research Examination Subcommittee has approved the award of the Medal. The Medals will be given for doctoral research that is of exceptional merit and at the forefront of the field.

6.3.2. A candidate awarded the degree in terms of Rule 6.3.1(b) shall complete the amendments within three months for minor amendments and six months for major amendments. These will be made to the satisfaction of the Principal Supervisor and the relevant Head of School.
6.3.3. A candidate permitted to revise a thesis for re-examination in terms of Rule 6.3.1(g) shall complete the revision within 9 months under the supervision of a Principal Supervisor or supervisors endorsed by the Committee.
6.3.4. A candidate who has revised a thesis in terms of Rule 6.3.1(g) and the outcome is that the degree not be awarded shall only be eligible for a further examination through an appeal under the Academic Assessment Appeals Policy.
6.3.5. An external adjudicator will only be appointed by the Committee if the three examiners are unable to come to a consensus recommendation. The adjudicator will be required to consider the examiners’ reports and the thesis and recommend a resolution. If the adjudicator recommends that the candidate’s thesis be revised and resubmitted, then the adjudicator will serve as the sole examiner for the resubmitted thesis.

6.4. Process Upon Recommendation of 'Degree Not Be Awarded'

6.4.1. Where any examination, adjudication or consultation report is received by the Committee, on which basis the Committee is considering recommending that the candidate not be awarded the degree pursuant to 6.3.1.(h), the Candidate and their Principal Supervisor shall be notified in writing of the content of that report and may within eight weeks lodge a response limited to the academic and substantive matters raised therein.
6.4.2. The Principal Supervisor and student’s responses may then be sent to the examiners who shall be invited to provide a comment on the impact of those responses on their original recommendations.
6.4.3. The Committee shall take into account the submissions of the Principal Supervisor and/or student, and any comments on these from the examiners, in determining whether the degree be awarded.

6.5. Appeals against decisions of the Committee concerning academic assessment of PhD candidates

Candidates have the right of appeal against an unfavourable examination outcome described in Rule 6.3.1(h) and may appeal the outcome to the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research).