Medical Microbiology and Immunology

Medical Microbiology and Immunology Graduate Program Handbook 2011/2012 (Please refer to the MMI website for updated versions in subsequent years.)

Table of Contents 1.

General Information 1.1 Areas of Research 1.2 Financial Assistance 1.3 Scholarships

2.

Program Timing 2.1 MMI Student Milestones 2.2 U of A deadlines

3.

Guidelines for the Graduate Program 3.1 Selection of a Supervisor 3.2 Course Requirements 3.3 Ethics Training 3.4 TAing Requirements 3.5 Annual Supervisory Committee Meetings 3.6 The Midstream Seminar 3.7 Candidacy Exams and Final Exams 3.8 Graduate Student Maternity, Other Leaves of Absence and Holidays 3.9 Graduate Appeals Committee

4.

Guidelines for Graduate Students and Supervisors 4.1 Qualifications of Graduate Student Supervisors 4.2 Graduate Student Financial Support 4.3 Graduate Student Supervisory Committee 4.4 Candidacy Exams and Final Exams 4.5 Equality and Respect 4.6 Expectations of Graduate Students 4.7 Student/Supervisor Conflicts

5.

Guidelines for the Candidacy Exam 5.1 Candidacy Exam 5.2 Timing 5.3 Selection of Topic and Proposal 5.4 The Examination Committee 5.5 The Examination 5.6 Evaluation of the Examination

6.

Guidelines for the Final Examination and Thesis Defense 6.1 The Final Examination and Thesis Defense 6.2 Teleconferencing & Attendance of Examiners at Thesis Defense 6.3 Results of Thesis Defense

Current FGSR Graduate Program Manual guidelines for supervision, examinations and program completion. Appendix 1––Forms Rotation Evaluations of Supervisor Rotation Evaluation of Student Seminar Evaluation Form Supervisory Committee Meeting TA Evaluation Form Candidacy Exam Report Thesis Acceptability Thesis Defense Report MMI Student Information Web Page Appendix 2—Exam/Thesis Instructions MMI Instructions for Candidacy Examiners Thesis Format for the Department

Revised––August 2011

2

1. General Information The Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology offers programs leading to the degrees of Master of Science and Doctor of Philosophy. Students may specialize in the following areas: bacteriology, immunology, and virology. Both programs require coursework, completion of a research project and preparation and successful defense of a thesis. Staff members are currently carrying out research in various aspects of cellular, and molecular, immunology, virology and microbial pathogenesis and the development of novel methods for the diagnosis and treatment of infectious diseases. 1.1 Areas of Research Department members are drawn from specialists in the basic biomedical sciences of medical microbiology and immunology, applied clinical microbiology and infectious diseases. We also have members cross-appointed from other basic science departments (Biochemistry, Biological Sciences and Cell Biology) and from clinical divisions or departments (Medicine, Surgery, Nephrology, Oncology, Pediatrics and Pulmonary Medicine). Consequently, we provide an environment fostering fruitful cross-disciplinary interactions that enrich our graduate program. Major research funding comes from a variety of sources. Students should consult their supervisors for agencies that fund research similar to that being done in the lab. Individual staff research laboratories are well-equipped for research. In addition, there is a Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry transmission and scanning electron microscopy lab and a Level 3 biocontainment laboratory for working with highly contagious or pathogenic pathogens. The department also has access to confocal microscopy and fluorescence-activated cell sorting facilities, as well as laboratory animal services and microcomputer laboratories within the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry. The th department’s research laboratories are located on the 6 floor of the Katz Group/Rexall Centre and of the Heritage Medical Research Building (HMRC). A new Institute of Virology has also been established which is part of the East West Alliance, a global network of institutions funded by the Li Ka Shing Foundation to advance medical research and education, which is housed in the Katz Building and the Alberta Diabetes Institute (ADI) in HRIF East. Additional research facilities for clinical microbiology and infectious diseases are located in the Walter C. Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, which also houses the John Scott Health Sciences Library with its extensive biomedical collection.

Revised––August 2011

3

1. General Information 1.2 Financial Assistance Each supervisor is responsible for finding financial support for the graduate student until completion of the degree. The supervisor is required to support the student for up to three years for an MSc and up to five years for a PhD. Stipends are provided for fulltime study only. It is the responsibility of students to inform their supervisor and the MMI gradate program administrator if they enroll in another program such as Medicine or Nursing or accept employment. There is no obligation to pay a stipend when students are significantly engaged in another program or employed elsewhere. However, for students who enter other programs or employment who are very close to completion supervisors are encouraged to pay the supplement to cover tuition for one semester, particularly when there are experiments still necessary to complete the research for the thesis. The student may be rehired during the summer months if they return to perform experiments or engage full time in writing of the thesis. If students lapse their registration, it is the responsibility of the student to cover the reinstatement penalty. It is the student’s responsibility to be fully aware of the policies of the University of Alberta and the conditions of any scholarships they hold with regard to a conflict of commitment. The current level of stipend support in MMI is $19,000 per year plus fees. The supervisor will also provide funds to cover the entire cost of students’ tuition fees; international students incur an additional differential fee which makes their tuition higher. Students who are completing their theses may be provided with up to three months support for MSc students and up to six for PhD students during the period when they are writing up; supervisors are not obligated to provide any financial support beyond this. Exceptionally qualified applicants who are Canadian citizens or permanent residents of Canada may be nominated by the department for the University of Alberta PhD Scholarship, which provides a stipend and tuition fees for up to the first two years of graduate school or the University of Alberta MSc Scholarship which provides a stipend and tuition fees for the first year of graduate school. Exceptional foreign applicants may be nominated by their department to receive the F.S. Chia award which pays a stipend and tuition fees for up to 2 years. PhD students may also be nominated for the Provost’s Doctoral Entrance award ($4,400 to Canadian and $8,000 to foreign students). In MMI, students who win this award apply it towards tuition. To learn more about graduate student scholarships, please consult the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research web page at: http://www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca/awardsfunding/ . Entrance awards must be applied for early and therefore students who have applied to the program later in the year will not qualify. Students accepted into a graduate program are encouraged to apply for studentships through the Department to outside agencies such Alberta Innovates, NSERC or CIHR, etc. Admitted graduate students may have the option of undertaking one or two laboratory rotations in separate supervisors’ laboratories in their first term, financially supported by the Revised––August 2011

4

1. General Information department, before selecting a laboratory. In any event, all students must find a supervisor willing to financially support them from external operating grants or contracts awarded to the supervisor, or possibly student awards (see below), by January 1 (or May 1, depending on the entry date) of the first year to remain in the program. Since graduate student tuition fees for the duration of the student’s program are paid by research supervisors, this allows students to make full use of their stipends to cover expenses other than tuition. In the case of those students who are successful in applying for scholarships from Alberta Innovates, these studentships fund PhD students at $20,000 and MSc students at $18,000 per annum, renewable on an annual basis for up to five years (or three years for a MSc student), with an annual $1500 research allowance. In addition, there is a further incentive from Alberta Innovates for students who are awarded a graduate studentship from another agency like CIHR or NSERC that can result in stipends of over $25,000 for a PhD student. PhD students receiving major scholarships from NSERC and CIHR are eligible to receive the U of A President’s Doctoral Prize of Distinction which is valued at $10,000 for the first year and provides 18 units of fee index plus noninstructional fees in subsequent years that the major doctoral prize is held. MSc scholarship winners may be eligible to receive Walter H Johns Graduate Fellowship ($4435 per annum in 2008) from the Faculty of Graduate Studies. Please refer to the FGSR website for detailed information. For information on paid holidays and other leaves, please see section 3.8. Financial support may be withdrawn when the student is not making normal progress towards completing his/her degree. Examples of inadequate progress would include not maintaining the minimum grade average, unsatisfactory performance at two consecutive supervisory meetings and failure to pass the candidacy exam.

Revised––August 2011

5

1. General Information 1.3 Scholarships All students, if they are qualified to do so, are required to apply to outside granting agencies, such as the Alberta Innovates Health Solutions for funding as soon as it is appropriate to do so. Students with excellent academic records are encouraged to apply for NSERC awards prior to or at the initiation of the graduate program. They should also apply for any University-sponsored fellowships for which they qualify. The Department can make no commitment to the financial support of the graduate students beyond first term rotations and has no source of long-term funding for students. Following are deadlines for some of the most commonly applied-for scholarships in the department. This is not a complete list and students and supervisors are advised to familiarize themselves with other scholarship possibilities. Alberta Innovates Studentships:

March 1 and October 1

CIHR MSc awards (direct)

February 1

MSc awards (through Univ.)

January 5

Doctoral Research awards

October 14

Canada Grad. Schol. Doctoral awards

October 14

NSERC awards

mid-October (must be ranked earlier)

Fac. of Medicine and Dentistry 75th Anniversary awards

beginning of October

FGSR General awards

~ March 5 (must be ranked earlier)

QEII and Miscellaneous Awards

~June 1 (QEIIs and nominations for other small U of A awards are decided internally)

Revised––August 2011

6

2. Program Timing

2.1 MMI Student Milestones • Year One • • • • Year Two • • •

Year Three

• • • • •

Year Four • Year Five • Additional

•

Revised––August 2011

Rotating students must decide which lab to enter by December 31 or April 30 depending on the term in which they start the program. Register in two courses in consultation with the supervisor or both rotating supervisors. First year students register in MMI 601 in their second term for credit. Supervisory committee must be put in place and first meeting held by the anniversary date at the latest. MSc students must make the decision to change to the PhD program by the 18 month mark (this decision must be affirmed by their committee). PhD students (and MSc students planning to change programs) will normally register in MMI 605 in Fall term. MSc students will fulfill their TAing commitment this year, and PhD students may do so. Candidacy exams must either be taken or scheduled by the 24 month mark. Complete TA requirement. Candidacy exams should be completed by the 30 month mark. Graduating MSc students will give a public seminar of their work prior to their thesis defense. PhD students will normally give a mid-stream seminar in this year (can be tied to a committee meeting). Graduating PhD students present their PhD thesis defense seminars if graduating this year. Graduating PhD students present their PhD thesis defense seminars if graduating this year. The university mandates that all graduate students must receive eight hours of ethics training before convocating. This should be completed through a student’s program, preferably in the first couple of years. Students need to have a committee meeting at least once per year. Committee meetings can also happen more frequently and can be initiated by either student or supervisor. Students must also have permission from their committees to write up their theses. Supervisors should be prepared to call a committee meeting if after three months a MSc student, or after six months a PhD student, has not demonstrated significant progress on writing their theses.

7

2. Program Timing 2.2 U of A deadlines 2011 - 2012 2011––September 7 Classes begin 20 Fall Registration deadline 30 Fees Payment deadline Last day for submission of unbound theses and Reports of Final completion for course-based Master’s degrees to FGSR to ensure graduation at Fall Convocation November 16-17

Fall Convocation

2011––January 9 Classes begin 20 Winter Registration deadline 31 Fees Payment deadline February 1

Last day for submission of Graduate Studies award applications to FGSR

April 2

Last day for submission to FGSR of unbound thesis for students in thesisbased programs to ensure graduation at Spring Convocation

5-14

Spring Convocation

June

Revised––August 2011

8

3. Guidelines for the Graduate Program 3.1 Selection of a Supervisor Many students enter directly into a lab when they start their graduate programs. Those who choose to rotate should have selected a supervisor to direct the thesis project by the end of the first term. The supervisor can be anyone in MMI (or a cross-appointee who is permitted to supervise MMI grad students) and does not have to be anyone with whom rotations were done. This decision is made by mutual agreement between the student and staff member. No staff member is obligated to accept a student into their laboratory and a student must have a supervisor to remain in the program. Therefore, if a student has not found a lab in which to carry out their project by term end, they may not continue in the program. Once selection of a supervisor is made the student must then, after consultation with the supervisor, design a suitable thesis project. This project is then presented to the student’s supervisory committee for approval. 3.2 Course Requirements Students in both the MSc and PhD programs must take MMI 601, a required seminar course that is taken for credit in their first year. In addition, MSc students must take at least two graduate-level courses and PhD students three courses. In the case of PhD students, one of their three courses must be MMI 605 (MSc students may take this course but they are not required to do so). MMI 605 will generally be taken in the fall term of the second year. Students in both programs are expected to maintain a GPA of 3.0 or more in these designated courses and in all courses taken for credit while in graduate school. The Department generally does not accept students with less than an honor grade (3.3 at the University of Alberta) in the last two years of their undergraduate degree, or an equivalent qualification from another recognized institution. Terminal MSc students are required to maintain a program GPA of at least 2.7; however, students wishing to proceed to a later PhD in the Department must maintain a program GPA of at least 3.0. Students are required to maintain a GPA of at least 3.0 in the PhD program. 3.3 Ethics Training All students are required to take a minimum of eight hours of ethics and academic integrity training as part of their graduate program. Ethics Sessions: ∗ MANDATORY session: Dr. Luis Schang’s Introduction to Ethics and Personal Responsibility in the Lab (1 hour)

Revised––August 2011

9

3. Guidelines for the Graduate Program ∗ Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry Ethics and Scientific Integrity (ESI) Day (5 hours) ∗ Part I – The Care and Use of Animals in Research, Teaching and Testing (1.5 hours) ∗ Ethics Online (Link: http://www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca/degreesuperv/ethics/) (5 hours) ∗ Online Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS) (Link: http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/english/tutorial/) (2 hours) ∗ Research Facilitation Offices provides various sessions intended to make up-to-date information available to the dynamic university research community. (Link: http://www.rso.ualberta.ca//pdfs/RASS_2009_10.pdf) ∗ Different seminar sessions are offered at various times during the year and the best way to find out about those is to scan the seminar lists regularly. 3.4 TAing Requirements All MMI graduate students are required to serve as teaching assistants at least once. This is generally undertaken in the second or third years (PhD students must be mindful of when they will be taking their candidacy exams so there is no time conflict). Students cannot TA in their first term and can do so only with permission during their second term. TAships are set up as 'teaching units'. Students may teach additional teaching units during their careers--up to two per term, but this teaching requires permission from their supervisor and it must not interfere with their work in the lab. A teaching unit is considered to be approximately 3 hours per week X 17 weeks (one term) @ around $30 per hour. The FGSR mandated pay for this is slightly different for MSc students than for PhD students, totaling $1817 and $1900 per unit respectively (2011/12 rates). Students will not be paid for the hours they spend attending the lectures for the course they are TAing, but they will have to attend so as to be aware of the material covered and where student questions may be coming from. Students will be paid for tutorial preparation, tutorial or lecture presentation time, and time spent answering student questions in person or by email. Some of the ~51 paid hours mapped to a TAship may also be spent in marking, depending on what the instructors’ needs are. There will also be some money available to instructors who require marking help over and above the TA teaching unit time--this will be paid at a slightly lower hourly rate than for TAing proper and it will not count toward the mandatory TAing requirement. The 3 hours per week is an average and approximate--there may be intense work over a short period of time, fewer hours over two terms, or some other configuration needed for individual courses. Students will be asked their TAing preferences and where possible, they will be matched with these. However, where there is interest from several students in the same course, the coordinator will select the student they think would be best suited to TA and therefore students will not necessarily get their first pick. Instructors have a responsibility to provide TAs with a good experience. They must communicate expectations clearly at the beginning, give frequent feedback and provide a written evaluation for each TA at the end of the course (see form Appendix 1).

Revised––August 2011

10

3. Guidelines for the Graduate Program

3.5 Annual Supervisory Committee Meetings Students are expected to have at least one committee meeting per year (meetings may be held more frequently if deemed necessary by the supervisor, committee or the student). To maintain good standing in the department students must receive a satisfactory rating at these meetings. These meetings can be initiated by either the student or the supervisor. See 4.3 and 4.4 for further information on the composition of the supervisory committee and the details of supervisory committee meetings. 3.6 The Midstream Seminar: All PhD students will give an hour-long seminar on their own research open to all members of the department at approximately the half-way point through their degree work. Although these seminars are not given for credit, they are a requirement. They are designed to help the student focus on how things are going in their work, gain experience giving scientific seminars and allow them to share their research progress with department. This is also an opportunity for students to solicit feedback from the MMI community about how they might surmount research challenges. These will be given in the MMI 601 timeslot, usually in the first term of the student’s third year. Dr. Deborah Burshtyn will contact students to schedule these seminars.

3.7 Candidacy Exams and Final Exams Although supervisors cannot help students write their candidacy exam proposals, they are encouraged to advise students on good grant writing strategies and general approaches on how to select topics and how to define hypotheses. Supervisors should encourage students to talk to their other committee members, experts on and off campus and other students about their research proposal. The details of the process are outlined in section 5. The thesis is a document that is also written by the student. Since a thesis may contain significant portions of manuscripts, students should have made a major contribution to the writing of the manuscripts. Supervisors are encouraged to allow the students to write the initial drafts of the manuscripts and the student should also be involved in the editing process. Supervisors should encourage and facilitate the completion of the degrees in a timely fashion. It is the responsibility of the supervisor to schedule the exams and obtain appropriate rulings from FGSR. Details of the process are outlined in 6. 3.8 Graduate Student Maternity, other Leaves of Absence and Holidays A leave of absence for up to one year may be requested by MMI graduate students who are pregnant or need to be away from the lab for a period of time for ‘documented compelling reasons, such as a serious illness’. Students should initially discuss the need for such absences with their supervisors. See the following information from FGSR: Revised––August 2011

11

3. Guidelines for the Graduate Program “Approved Leave of Absence Students who are unsure about appropriate start and end dates for a proposed leave of absence and how these dates align with University's four-term system, should initially consult with the graduate program administrator and graduate coordinator, and if still unsure, with the FGSR. The FGSR will consider a departmental recommendation for a leave of absence for parental or other documented compelling reasons, such as a serious illness. The department and student must complete an Application for Leave of Absence form and submit it to the FGSR with detailed documentation from the student’s family physician or specialist. An expected date of return must be indicated. A leave of absence is normally granted for up to one year. The form is available on the FGSR website at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca (Registration & Fees). [A copy of this form is also included with the forms at the back of this handbook in Appendix 1]. If approved, the student must return by the specified date in order to continue in the program. Readmission to the program will not be required. The department should direct a returning student to the FGSR to reinstate registration in the program. The time limit for completion of the degree will be extended by the duration of any FGSR-approved leave of absence.”

Supervisors who pay their students’ stipends from their CIHR grants as well as students who hold CIHR scholarships, should be aware that the agency will reimburse them for up to six months of parental or other leave. Such leaves must be requested at least 30 days in advance with a letter from the student that includes: 1) the dates of the leave 2) that the student is the primary caregiver for the child 3) that the student will not be receiving employment insurance or other parental benefits from other sources and 4) that during the leave the student will not be engaged in his or her research activities or employed in any capacity. A second letter from the supervisor approving the leave and confirming the dates of absence must accompany that letter. After it has been confirmed that the student has returned to the lab, CIHR will extend the stipend by the duration of the leave to a maximum of six months. For further information, please consult the CIHR website. Alberta Innovates also has a provision for parental and other leaves of up to six months for students following an application outlining the purpose of the leave. The support of the University is required. Scholarship holders may receive up to 20 weeks of paid maternity leave and paid paternal leave may also be awarded to scholarship holders when the mother works. The duration of this leave can be up to 20 weeks, less any period of maternity leave taken by the mother. Alberta Innovates will extend the award by the

Revised––August 2011

12

3. Guidelines for the Graduate Program duration of the approved leave on the student’s return. For further information, consult the Alberta Innovates website. NSERC will provide for up to four months paid parental leave for scholarship holders if it is taken within six months of a child’s birth or adoption and provided one’s university permits parental leaves (which the U of A does, as evidenced above). If both parents are NSERC award holders, they may both take leave, but only up to a total of four months. A letter similar to that required by CIHR is required; please consult the NSERC website for details. Unpaid leave of up to three years can be requested of NSERC only for reasons of maternity, child rearing, illness or health-related family responsibilities and only if approved by the university. Students are entitled to all statutory holidays, the closure days between December 24th and December 31st and two weeks of paid vacation. Vacations should be discussed with supervisors a minimum of two weeks in advance as supervisors may request students not take time off during critical periods such as preparation of grants. Any disputes over timing and duration of vacations should be referred to the Graduate Coordinator. Graduate students are entitled to up to two weeks of paid sick leave per year (Sept. 1 – Aug. 31). Students with serious illness or personal matter require an absence of more than two weeks should request an unpaid leave from the department in writing. Extended leaves will require formal leave from the program. Such leaves will extend the time limit for completion of the program and require appropriate documentation. 3.9 Graduate Appeal Committee Students should always consult with the Graduate Coordinator first over issues/decisions that they are concerned about. All decisions regarding the administration of graduate programs within the Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology that impact individual graduate students (excluding funding issues and those issues for which there is a documented U of A appeal process, e.g.; Candidacy Examinations, Thesis Defenses and Course marks) made by the Graduate Training Committee can be appealed to the MMI Graduate Appeal Committee. It is anticipated that matters that could be referred to this committee include, but are not limited to, decisions regarding a M.Sc. to Ph.D. transition (or the time limit for this decision), the timing of a candidacy examination, selection of candidacy exam research proposal topic decisions, or exceptional requests for exemptions from or individual modifications to the Departmental Graduate Program requirements. The Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology Graduate Appeal Committee will consist of: Departmental Chair (Chair of the Committee) Graduate Student Representative of the Graduate Training Committee Chair of the Education Committee Member of the Graduate Training Committee

Revised––August 2011

13

4. Guidelines for Graduate Students and Supervisors The Chair of the MMI Graduate Appeal Committee shall be non-voting unless a deciding vote is required. In the event that one or more of the designated committee members has a perceived conflict of interest, then the Chair of the Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology shall determine the composition of the appeal committee. The committee shall receive written submissions from the student and other interested parties and may elect to hear verbal submission from the interested parties. The Chair of the MMI Graduate Appeal Committee shall ensure that the written facts and any verbal presentations are duly received and discussed by the committee and then elicit a decision on the appeal by the committee by means of a secret ballot. The appeal will be determined to be successful by a simple majority vote. The Chair of the MMI Graduate Appeals Committee shall then minute the results with copies being forwarded to the Graduate Coordinator, Department Chair and the interested parties. The Graduate Coordinator and Graduate Training Committee shall then implement the decision of the committee. 4.1 Qualifications of Graduate Student Supervisors By undertaking supervision of a graduate student supervisors are agreeing to abide by the principles outlined in this document. In the Department of Medical Microbiology & Immunology, the Graduate Training Committee recommends to the Department Chair (a) the suitability of individual Faculty members as graduate student supervisors, and (b) the suitability of individual Faculty members to sit on supervisory committees. The following are general guidelines for the qualifications of graduate student supervisors, which complement the FGSR Guidelines presented in the Graduate Program Manual. 1.

The prospective supervisor should have a successful record of graduate supervision.

2.

The prospective supervisor must have adequate time to supervise each prospective student.

3.

The prospective supervisor must be capable of supervising the number of students proposed.

4.

The prospective supervisor should normally have adequate research funding for the proposed project, of a type that ensures the academic freedom of graduate students.

5.

The prospective supervisor must have the necessary facilities and resources available for graduate student research and provide an appropriate academic environment.

Revised––August 2011

14

4. Guidelines for Graduate Students and Supervisors 6.

For prospective supervisors lacking experience in graduate supervision, a senior experienced supervisor will be appointed by the graduate training committee (with the consent of the proposed supervisor, the co-supervisor, the student and the department chair) to co-supervise the student for one year. The role of the senior co-supervisor is envisioned to be primarily one of a mentor who assists the new supervisor (when needed). Co-supervisors should have graduated at least one PhD student. It should be noted that a co-supervisor is not automatically a co-author on publications associated with the co-supervised student. As for all publications, co-authorship should reflect a significant intellectual contribution to the manuscript.

4.2 Graduate Student Financial Support As outlined in the Financial Assistance section earlier, all supervisors are responsible for the financial support of graduate students under their supervision. It is the student’s responsibility to apply for appropriate external funding and the supervisor’s responsibility to facilitate those applications in a timely fashion. On the rare occasion that a supervisor has to let a student go because of financial exigency, they are not allowed to take on a new student for at least one calendar year. Supervisors must make students aware of their financial situation and their ability to support the student for their graduate career. Students must make supervisors aware of outside commitments such as enrolling in another program or part or full-time employment. 4.3 Graduate Student Supervisory Committee At some point within a year of beginning graduate school, but certainly by the anniversary date, the student and his/her supervisor must convene a meeting of members of the student's supervisory committee. The committee is comprised of the supervisor, who acts as the chair, plus two or more academic members of the University (those who are members of the Faculty of Graduate Studies). At least one of the three should be a member of the Department. In order to keep the number of members of the candidacy examining committee and the thesis defense committee to a minimum, the Department recommends a supervisory committee consisting of the supervisor plus two members for a total of three. The choice of committee members is left to the supervisor and student, but usually members are chosen for expertise in aspects of the student's research project and must be approved by the Department and the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research (FGSR). The supervisory committee meets at least once yearly to review progress made both academically and in the thesis research. Students are required to submit a progress report that includes a review of research progress, courses taken and the grades obtained in these courses. At the meeting the supervisor reviews the student’s record and the student presents

Revised––August 2011

15

4. Guidelines for Graduate Students and Supervisors a review of the relevant background and research progress for the previous year as well as a plan for future research. Future plans, both research and academic, are then considered at the meeting. More details regarding the details of the committee meeting and the potential outcomes are explained below in Section 4.4. Decisions are also made for formal advancements within the program (promotion to provisional PhD status, setting the candidacy exam, approval for setting the thesis defense). As well decisions are made for formal advancements within the program such as changing degree programs, setting the candidacy exam and approval of setting the thesis defense. Students are required to submit an annual progress report at each committee meeting; a copy of that report goes in the student's file and is available to the Graduate Training Committee. The supervisory committee is required to assess the progress of the graduate student at each meeting; if progress is deemed to be unsatisfactory the committee will make specific recommendations (in writing on the committee report form that is signed by all committee members and the student) for remedial action by the student, indicate what assistance the student should seek or obtain from the committee or other sources of assistance, and shall set a date for a subsequent meeting to re-assess student progress. Two unsatisfactory supervisory committee reports will result in consideration of a recommendation for a change in program of the graduate student to the Graduate Training Committee which in turn shall consider a recommendation for a change in the student’s program (change in programs include transition from a Ph.D. to M.Sc. program, or termination of from the Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology graduate program) to the Dean of the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research. All supervisory committee meeting decisions that make specific recommendations concerning a specific graduate student can be appealed to the Graduate Training Committee. The decisions of the Graduate Training Committee can be appealed to the Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology Graduate Appeal Committee which is chaired by the Chair of the Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology (see Graduate Appeal Committee). If a student wishes to elevate from the MSc program to a PhD program (or change from the PhD program to an MSc), he/she must have permission from the supervisory committee to do so. In the case of elevating to the PhD, this decision must be made within the first 18 months of a student entering the program. If the decision is not made by that time a student will be expected to complete an MSc first, although he/she is welcome to enter the PhD program after the conclusion of the MSc. 4.4 Supervisory Committee Meetings It is ultimately the responsibility of the supervisor to ensure that the student has annual supervisory committee meetings. Supervisors should record the events of the meeting using the departmental form “MMI Graduate Student Progress Report” (see Appendix 1). Once the form is complete and signed by the supervisor and committee members, it should be read and signed by the student. Both the student and supervisor should retain a copy of each Revised––August 2011

16

4. Guidelines for Graduate Students and Supervisors committee meeting form while the original is given to the office. This will ensure that both the supervisor and the student have the same interpretation of the events of the meeting. This is particularly important when decisions such as when to write the thesis are made or the progress is deemed unsatisfactory. Filling out the form can save the supervisor and student from potential conflicts later. The student will be made aware at each supervisory committee meeting whether they are making satisfactory or unsatisfactory progress. See the recommendations for supervisory committee meetings below: 1.

Seven days prior to the meeting the student will provide all members of the supervisory committee with a short Progress Report. This report should be approximately four pages in length and deal succinctly with the following issues: a. Background b. Project objectives c. Hypotheses being tested since the last meeting d. Summary of research progress e. Difficulties or issues that have impeded progress (if any) f. Hypotheses to be tested in next 6-12 months g. Append list of courses taken (or being taken) with grade attained h. Copies of title page and abstract of any published papers, submitted manuscripts or abstracts written since last meeting.

2.

The meeting format should generally follow the format described below: a. Brief overview of student’s progress by the supervisor (~5 minutes) b. Student’s presentation of research results (~20 minutes) c. Questions and answers d. Student presentation of hypothesis to be tested in the following 6-12 months e. Discussion of the objectives and proposed approaches f. Student presentation of proposed difficulties g. Discussion of how best to deal with the issues raised above

3.

The objectives of the meeting are: a. Keep committee members apprised of progress b. Assess the project results and progress c. Define problems in the project and in a positive fashion find creative solutions d. Review the project objectives and focus

Immediately following the meeting, in the absence of the student, the committee discusses the student’s progress and completes the evaluation form. The supervisor then meets with the student to go over the committee’s comments. When all parties have signed, the original is given to the office and copies are provided for the student and supervisor.

Revised––August 2011

17

4. Guidelines for Graduate Students and Supervisors 4.5 Equality and Respect Supervisors should be reminded that students are fellow academics and should be treated with respect. Students should not be viewed as "a pair of hands" and supervised only on the technical aspects of their project. Students need time to study for courses, serve as teaching assistants, prepare for candidacy exams, write papers and read the literature. They should also be encouraged to participate in activities that enhance their academic experience such as attending seminars, meeting with seminar speakers, participating in the graduate student organization and attending conferences. 4.6 Graduate Student/Supervisor Conflicts Because of the pressures on both supervisors and students, the relationship between them can become strained, particularly if open communication between the two is not maintained. Regular meetings between a graduate student and the supervisor, in addition to the annual supervisory committee meetings, may serve to circumvent a number of potential conflicts. Should problems arise, the first step is to sit down with the student and try to identify the source of the problem and create a solution. If this cannot be done then a supervisory committee meeting must be called and the committee should try to resolve the conflict––either the student or the supervisor may call a meeting. This should be done immediately after it is apparent that a problem exists, before it becomes unresolvable. A member of the Graduate Training Committee may attend this meeting to try to help resolve the conflict. If no decisions can be made, or if a decision is made that is not satisfactory to all those involved, the student and supervisor will then meet with Graduate Training Committee and the Department Chair to resolve the conflict. Students can also seek assistance from Student Counselling Services (www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/counselling/) or the GSA ombudsman (www.gsa.ualberta.ca) 4.7 Expectations of Graduate Students Students should read and follow the U of A Code of Student Behaviour found on the website at: http://www.ualberta.ca/~unisecr/gfcPM.HTM. MMI also expects that: ––Students will treat their colleagues in the laboratory with respect. ––Throughout their residency students will attend departmental activities such as the 601 seminar series, other research seminars, journal clubs and other activities recommended by their supervisors. ––Students will follow all safety regulations imposed by the University and supervisor. ––Students will take responsibility for meeting deadlines.

Revised––August 2011

18

5. Guidelines for the Candidacy Examination 5.1 Candidacy Examination In order to become a PhD candidate the student must pass the candidacy exam. The candidacy exam is comprehensive and addresses the qualifications of the student in terms of their ability to pursue and complete original research at an advanced level. The exam consists of two parts; 1) a written proposal and 2) an oral defense of that proposal. Thesis research is not the subject of examination. The written proposal forms the basis for the majority of the questions. The FGSR Manual provides further details on the timing and the composition of the examining committee (end of section). All arrangements for the candidacy exam should be made by the supervisor or another designated faculty member. The candidacy exam will normally only be scheduled following approval by the student’s supervisory committee documented in a committee meeting report. The supervisory committee meeting determines if the student is ready to take the exam and the general timing for the scheduling of the exam. 5.2 Timing Students are required to take their candidacy exams within the first 30 months of entering the program. They are encouraged to take it within the first 24 months, however if the exam has not been taken at the 24 month mark, it must be scheduled at that time to take place some time within the next 6 months. The length of time that students need to write the proposal and prepare for the exam is decided between the student and the supervisor but is generally no longer than 6 weeks. Once the timing of the exam is set, a candidacy examination committee and the candidacy examination chair is selected, notice of the candidacy examination and examination committee composition is submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research for approval at least 3 weeks prior to the proposed examination date. One week prior to the examination, it is the student’s responsibility to meet with the exam chair to review the format of the exam. 5.3 Selection of Topic and Proposal The written proposal is on a topic that is not directly related to the thesis project or any other projects currently being conducted in the laboratory or included in a grant proposal submitted by the supervisor (or co-supervisor) of the lab where the student is carrying out her/his research. The topic for the proposal is selected by the student; it can be in student’s own general topic area so long as the preceding restrictions are met. After the student is approved to take the exam, his/her topic must be approved by the members of the supervisory committee. The student should submit the desired topic to the supervisory committee for approval before scheduling the exam. These should include a hypothesis and only enough general background for the committee to understand the topic and the kinds of questions being addressed. It should be no longer than one page in 12 point. Committee members are to be reminded that they are just approving the direction of the project and the specific aims and methodologies are not to be approved before the examination. Specific Revised––August 2011

19

5. Guidelines for the Candidacy Examination aims need not be included since these will likely change as the student writes the proposal. If the committee feels that the first topic is either too close to the research going on in the lab or if the hypothesis is too open-ended, the student will be told to either revise the topic or select an entirely new topic. From a student's point of view, discussing the topics at a committee meeting should be of enormous value in that the discussion is the last input the student has from a core component of the examining committee about the topic before the exam itself. However, given that the timing may not allow for the approval to take place at a supervisory committee meeting, the topic can be approved by the committee through electronic discussions. The supervisor cannot provide any input into the content of the proposal but may provide general help with grant writing skills and strategies. Although the supervisor(s) may not provide input into the experimental design of the proposal, students are encouraged to discuss their proposal with experts in the field. Once a topic has been selected, the student will write a grant proposal consisting of a summary and a detailed research plan and should roughly follow CIHR guidelines, with the exception that it should be double-spaced. The proposal (about 20 pages, not including figures and references, double-spaced) should include a literature survey, hypothesis, rationale, and experimental design and significance. The proposal should be realistic and should be able to be carried out by 3 people over three years (a budget need not be included). A short section on future directions should also be included. CIHR guidelines are available from your supervisor or online. The proposal should be submitted to members of the examining committee at least 2 weeks before the exam. 5.4 The Examination Committee The candidacy exam committee consists of the supervisory committee plus two academic members of the University, at least one of which should be from outside the Department. The Chair of the Department nominates the extra-supervisory members of the candidacy committee (usually those recommended by the supervisory committee) by forwarding their names to the Faculty of Graduate Studies. To provide uniformity and continuity, all candidacy exams are chaired by the Departmental designated chair (or in the case of availability or timing issues, one of the two alternative designated chairs) who moderates discussion, keeps minutes of the exam, generally aids the student in completing a fair exam and files a report concerning the outcome of the examination. Since the chair is not a member of the examination committee, s/he does not vote. If not already a member of the examination committee, the Chair of the Department may participate in the exam as a non-voting member. The Dean or Associate Dean of the FGSR or the Dean’s designate may attend and participate fully in the examination, but any other persons must have

Revised––August 2011

20

5. Guidelines for the Candidacy Examination

permission of the Dean to attend the examination. The exam lasts from 2 to 5 hours, at which time a decision is made by the voting members of the committee. 5.5 The Examination At the beginning of the exam, the chair introduces the student and explains to the student and committee how the exam will be run, specifying the sequence of the events, the number of rounds of questioning (generally two), the order of questioning (generally starting with the external examination committee member, followed by the departmental examination committee member who is not a member of the supervisory committee and followed by the committee members and finally the student’s supervisor), and length of time of each examiner has for each questioning in each round. The candidate will then be asked to leave the room and the committee will review his/her undergraduate background and graduate coursework. (Note: There is no substantial input from the supervisor at this time—the discussion of the student’s research progress to date will occur at the conclusion of the exam). The student is then asked to re-join the committee and the examination begins. The role of the examination chair is to moderate the examination, ensure a fair examination process, chair the discussion of the exam after the student has left the committee to its adjudication, and then record and report the results of the examination to the student and to the department. To start off the examination, the student will present a 10-15 min. summary of the proposal. The first round of questioning (about 15 min. per examiner) is usually related to the proposal. The subsequent round(s) of questioning can be related to the proposal or be more comprehensive in nature. With this type of exam, essentially all of the questions are often related in some way to the proposal. However, examiners are also invited to ask questions that they feel should be in the student's knowledge base. With this type of questioning, examiners are not trying to determine if the students are able to recite information but rather if they are able think "on their feet" calling upon their knowledge base when necessary. Students will not be given subject areas to study but are expected to be able to answer more general questions in their research area. The goal of the examination is to determine if the student is able to identify important questions, generate hypotheses, propose experiments to test the hypotheses and interpret data. A certain amount of basic knowledge is required to do this effectively, but one need not be encyclopedic in their background information. This means that to prepare for the examination, one should not memorize the contents of textbooks, but instead read primary research papers and understand why experiments were done, what experiments might be done to better answer the question and what the next step might be.

Revised––August 2011

21

5. Guidelines for the Candidacy Examination 5.6 Evaluation of the Examination At the conclusion of the examination the candidate will be asked to leave the room while the examiners discuss the following questions in the context of the candidate’s thesis research progress. The following are some of the expectations that should be met for students to proceed as PhD candidates. 1)

The student should be able to identify an important question and formulate a testable hypothesis.

2)

The students should have the ability to assess published data. The student should have based their proposal on solid data and not a single, poorly controlled paper. The student should be able to assess the quality of published data referred to in their proposal.

3)

The student should be familiar with the references that they cite in their proposal. For references to methods, as well as unreferenced methods, the student should be aware of the technical requirements, strengths and weaknesses, and be able to defend the selection of method(s) in comparison to alternatives. Students should be aware that they should never cite a reference that they have never read.

4)

The student should demonstrate experimental design capability. The majority of the experiments that the student proposes should be feasible and lead to interpretable results. The experiments should also address the proposed hypothesis and extend the knowledge of the field.

5)

The student should be able to analyze data. They should also be able to predict possible outcomes of experiments and identify possible interpretations of these experiments.

6)

The student should understand basic concepts in their field and display good breadth of knowledge.

7)

The student should have effective communication skills.

8)

Examiners always try to find the extent of the student's knowledge to determine if the student is able to "think on their feet". It is understood that the student will not know all of the answers to the questions, but they should be able to make predictions based on what they know about other related systems.

Students who are deficient in some areas but demonstrate excellence in other areas should be provided with specific recommendations for areas of improvement.

Revised––August 2011

22

5. Guidelines for the Candidacy Examination Following the discussion of the student’s performance, the chair will poll the examiners by secret ballot to arrive at an initial outcome for the examination. This serves as a starting point for discussion. The ballots are then destroyed. In the event that the examining committee cannot reach consensus concerning the outcome of the examination, the chair will then conduct a second written ballot to decide the outcome. Normally, if all but one member of the committee agrees on a decision, the decision shall be that of the majority. In accordance with Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research regulations, if there are two or more dissenting votes, the matter is referred to the Associate Dean of the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research for determination of the appropriate course of action. If the examining committee considers the student's performance to have been satisfactory, it will recommend that the student be passed, in which case his/her status is changed from "Provisional Candidate for the Ph.D. Degree" to "Candidate for the Ph.D. Degree". The Chair of the Candidacy Examination Committee will submit a report on the examination to Graduate Coordinator and/or the Chair of the Department. In the event that the student passes the examination the Graduate Coordinator and/or the Department Chair submits a Report of Completion of Candidacy or Final Oral Examination form to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research to change the student’s category from provisional candidate to candidate for doctoral degree. The Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research will then act on the departmental request. In the event that the student is deemed to have conditionally passed the Candidacy Examination, the Chair of the Candidacy Examination will submit the report to the Graduate Coordinator and the Department Chair and inform them in writing as to the basis for the decision, specific requirements, timeframe, the approval mechanism and the supervision and assistance the student will receive. Following a review of the Candidacy Examination Chair’s report, the report will be submitted in writing to the Associate Dean of the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research. The department will hold the Report of Completion of Candidacy or Final Oral Examination form until the committee agrees that the conditions have been met. In the event that the student is deemed to have failed the Candidacy Examination, the Chair of the Candidacy Examination will submit the report to the Graduate Coordinator and the Department Chair and inform them in writing as to the basis for the decision. The Graduate Coordinator, the Chair of the Department, and the student’s supervisor in consultation with the Graduate Training Committee will establish the Department’s recommendation concerning the student’s program. The Departmental recommendation concerning the student’s program will be submitted in writing to the Associate Dean of the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research and the student. Normally, the Associate Dean will then meet with the student and departmental representatives before acting upon

Revised––August 2011

23

5. Guidelines for the Candidacy Examination any departmental recommendation. A decision that affects the student’s academic standing (i.e., required to withdraw or transfer to a master’s program) can be appealed. The following options are to be considered by the examining committee when the outcome of a candidacy exam is ‘fail’. The student can be given the opportunity to repeat the Candidacy exam, if his or her performance and work to date indicate the ability to perform at the doctoral level. If a repeat Candidacy exam is recommended (and approved by FGSR), the student must be informed of his/her exam deficiencies by the exam committee Chair and the second exam must be scheduled no later than three to six second months from the date of the first candidacy exam. In the event the student fails the exam, the examining committee should recommend either that 1) There be a Change of Category to a MSc. program (assuming the student has shown the potential to successfully complete such a program) or 2) The doctoral program be terminated. Following the deliberations, the candidate is invited back into the room and the Chair informs the candidate of the outcome of the examination. In the event that there are conditions or concerns raised by the examination committee, these concerns and/or will be communicated clearly to the student. Then following the examination, the Examination Chair will file the appropriate report on the examination with the department.

Revised––August 2011

24

6. Guidelines for the Final Examination and Thesis Defense 6.1 The Final Examination and Thesis Defense When a student has completed the research project and has a body of publishable data, the student should, after approval by the supervisory committee, begin writing the thesis. Students are strongly encouraged to have at least one publication or the data equivalent to one publication before the completion of a MSc and generally three publications before completion of the PhD. At a minimum, one of these PhD publications should be a firstauthor paper in press prior to the final examination. Students who are completing their theses may be provided with up to three months support for MSc students and up to six for PhD students during the period when they are writing up; supervisors are not obligated to provide any financial support beyond this. The Faculty of Graduate Studies (FGSR) suggests that you write the thesis in one of two formats, traditional or paper-based, but FGSR requires both types to have a general structural format (structure of the thesis, paper, margins etc). These structural features will be checked by FGSR when you hand in your thesis and guidelines are available from FGSR. In addition, the MMI Department has a few other guidelines for both thesis formats that are more specific to this field. (1) We don’t allow ‘data not shown’ to appear in the thesis. If a fact is important enough to cite data, the data should be shown for reviewers to examine. If it was not shown in a published form of the work it can be included as an appendix so as not to require unnecessary revision of the document. (2) The methods section of a paper-based thesis might have to be expanded to include all experimental protocols. (3) Since a result is often the efforts of several people, we would like to know who did what. This information should be added to the first page of a results chapter. (4) We would like a full bibliography with all names listed. The Department encourages publications but recommends, essentially, a traditional thesis: one with an introduction, a hypothesis and approach chapter, a methods chapter, results chapters (with or without and introduction and a discussion) and a discussion and future directions chapter. If written in this manner, examiners will know that much of the writing is the students and it allows easy evaluation, by external examiners, of the work carried out. It is more efficient in terms of paper because all the methods and all bibliographies are united and can be easily found. The time line for convening the final examination committee meeting is important to consider: for a PhD thesis, a lead time of two months before the exam date should be allowed for the Faculty of Graduate Studies to approve of a prospective External Reader or Examiner (who is nominated by the Department Chair usually upon the recommendation of the supervisor). There is no external reader or examiner from outside of the University for a MSc thesis. The thesis should be distributed to the supervisory committee six weeks before the final exam so that revisions can be made before it is sent to the External Examiner (four weeks before the exam). Before the thesis is forwarded to the External Examiner, supervisory committee members must submit in writing (see Appendix 1 for form) that the thesis is of adequate substance to warrant a final.

Revised––August 2011

25

6. Guidelines for the Final Examination and Thesis Defense examination; no date is to be set with FGSR until committee approval is received. The interpretation endorsed by the Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology is that the thesis is of a textual quality equivalent to that of a manuscript being submitted for publication to a high quality journal and that the committee members are comfortable with the scientific content of the thesis (i.e., the signature on the departmental form attests that the committee members do not feel that major changes to the content of the thesis are necessary, thus a committee member would not sign a form approving the thesis if (s)he felt a chapter should be deleted or if (s)he felt that additional data was required). If the committee does not unanimously approve the thesis, the graduate student may appeal that decision to the Graduate Training Committee. The student should be aware of deadlines to be met for submitting the final document to the Faculty of Graduate Studies for spring or fall convocations. According to FGSR policy, the final PhD examining committee will consist of the supervisory committee, to which at least two members are added for a minimum total of five. For a MSc examining committee the minimum number of examiners is three. At least one member must be from another department and be at "arms length" from the thesis project or the supervisor's projects. The second extra supervisory member can be an External Examiner (from outside the University), or if an External Reader is chosen (an external examiner who does not attend the exam, but who submits comments to the committee), any other faculty member recognized by the Faculty of Graduate Studies. The External Examiner or Reader is initially identified by the student and supervisor. Supervisory committee members should then be consulted. The supervisor contacts the potential examiner to determine whether they would be prepared to act as an examiner for this thesis and determine approximate dates for the thesis defense. It is important that there is no direct contact between the student and External Examiner or Reader between the time that the External is identified and the defense. The Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology then nominates the potential External Examiner or Reader to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research who approve the nomination and defense date. The nomination requires a CV of the potential examiner that documents the examiner’s research competence and experience in supervising graduate students at the Ph.D. level. A lead time of two months before the exam date should be allowed for the Faculty of Graduate Studies to approve a prospective External Reader or Examiner. The department must submit to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research at least 3 weeks prior to the defense date a Notice of Approval of Oral Examination Committee form. The final exam is chaired by a departmental designate who is not a member of the examination committee and who is present to moderate discussion and record the minutes of the exam. Since the chair of the examination is not a member of the Examination Committee, s/he does not vote. If not already a member of the examination committee, the Chair of the Department may be a non-voting participant. The Dean of FGSR may appoint a pro Dean who acts as the Dean's representative and is a full voting member of the examining committee. The main function of a pro Dean is to assure the proper conduct of the examination.

Revised––August 2011

26

6. Guidelines for the Final Examination and Thesis Defense A candidate is required to present a public seminar based on the thesis, usually just prior to the final exam. Members of the examining committee must attend the public seminar and any member of the University community is free to attend the seminar and question the candidate on any aspect of the presented research during the question period following the seminar. The chair of the examination will moderate the question period so that it does not result in the discussion of material that is more appropriate for the examination. The presentation plus questions for a PhD seminar is generally approximately one hour long. Members of the examining committee (including the supervisor) must refrain from questions and comments during the presentation and question period. Immediately after the seminar, the examining committee convenes for the examination which usually lasts two or more hours. Exam questions usually are concerned, but not exclusively so, with the thesis. The questions are set to enable the committee to form an opinion on the quality of the candidate's thesis work as well as his/her capability to comprehend its significance in the context of the field. Thus, both the document and the candidate are being examined. The supervisor usually does not participate in the questioning in the final exam. The committee can approve the thesis, approve the thesis with minor modification, adjourn, or reject the thesis. All modifications have to be completed within six months of the original examination date. 6.2 Teleconferencing and Attendance of Examiners at Thesis defenses All examiners must be present at the thesis defense (for both the M.Sc. and Ph.D. defenses) and if they are unable to attend the defense, the defense cannot proceed and must be deferred until such time as all examiners can be present. The presence of all examiners “in person” is however not necessary if prior arrangements are made to allow an examiner (frequently the External Examiner in the case of Ph.D. defenses) to participate in the defense through either teleconferencing or videoconferencing. Departmental experience with teleconferencing during thesis defenses is reasonably positive recognizing that the teleconferencing examiner does not have the opportunity to visually inspect diagrams or documents that are produced during the examination. However, it is generally recognized that the active participation of an examiner during the thesis defense is preferable to the function of an External Reader and the ability to be more flexible in scheduling defense dates can be a significant factor. 6.3 Results of Thesis Examinations The committee can approve the thesis, approve the thesis with minor modification, adjourn the defense to a later date, or fail the thesis and defense. The thesis defense is adjourned in the case where the required revisions to a thesis are major (more research is required or a major re-structuring or re-stating of the thesis is required), the committee is dissatisfied with the candidate’s oral presentation and defense (even if the thesis is Revised––August 2011

27

6. Guidelines for the Final Examination and Thesis Defense acceptable with or without minor revisions) or there were exceptional circumstances such as a medical emergency during the examination. Normally, if all but one member of the committee agree on a decision, the decision shall be that of the majority. The dissenting committee member does not have to sign the thesis. If the defense is adjourned or the thesis is failed, or there are two or more dissenting votes, the Chair will provide the reasons in writing to the candidate, the Graduate Training Committee, Chair of the Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, and to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research. The guidelines established by the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research will then be followed. In the event that the defense is adjourned the examination must be re-convened within 6 months and a final decision made by the Examination Committee. In all cases where the candidate encounters significant difficulties in the thesis defense, the situation will be reviewed closely by the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research. The Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research will consult with the Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology and the candidate before a final outcome is determined by the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research. The final decision can be appealed through Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research procedures. (See following pages from the FGSR manual for further information).

Revised––August 2011

28

Graduate Program Manual: Section 8 SUPERVISION, ORAL EXAMINATIONS, AND PROGRAM COMPLETION FGSR Council Policy The Dean, with advice from the Department, is given delegated authority by FGSR Council to rule on applications for admission and on the membership of supervisory committees. (FGSR Council, 1957/03/28) Eligibility Criteria for Supervisors and Committee Members As minimum criteria, supervisors and committee members must: •

normally be full-time faculty

•

be active in the general area of the student's research

•

have a tenured (or tenure track) faculty appointment (including soft tenure track faculty appointments such as University Research Fellows and Heritage Scholars) in a department relevant to the field

•

hold a degree equivalent to or higher than that for which the student is a candidate. (This would always be the case for newly appointed faculty, but certain recognized and well-established exceptions should be respected.)

•

demonstrate continuing scholarly or creative activity of an original nature

Because of diverse interpretations of the term "scholarly or creative activity", the Faculty will always find it necessary to rely on sound and informed judgment of chairs and graduate coordinators to ensure adherence to minimum faculty criteria. The determination of "scholarly or creative activity" assumes a continuing peer review process that, at least indirectly, is included annually at the appropriate Faculty Salaries and Promotions Committee. The following list summarizes criteria used by various faculties to describe scholarly or creative activity: •

publication of research papers in refereed journals

•

publication of research papers in journals acceptable to the discipline

•

publication of books and/or monographs

•

publication of research findings in conference proceedings

•

publication and/or performance of new compositions or plays

•

exhibition of new artistic works

•

peer recognition of outstanding professional practice

•

invitations to speak at conferences or at other institutions

•

editorial or refereeing responsibilities for journals

Revised––August 2011

29

•

invitations to serve as external examiner for the PhD

•

presentations at professional society meetings or workshops

•

invitations to review grant proposals or manuscripts

•

invitations to referee requests for promotions to full professor in recognized institutions

•

additional criteria approved by the Dean, FGSR may be added by individual departments, and should be included in departmental graduate handbooks.

"Grey" Areas— Individual Categories Eligible for Supervisors and Committee Members There are several potentially "grey" areas relating to eligibility for graduate supervision and committee membership, including such categories as retired professors, professors from departments not offering a graduate program, clinical appointees, adjunct professors from outside the University, sessionals, faculty service officers (FSOs), postdoctoral fellows (PDFs), research associates, and experts from outside the University. For approval of the following categories the department shall formally apply to the Dean, FGSR: •

retired professors or professors emeriti

•

professors from departments not offering a graduate program

•

clinical appointees

•

adjunct professors who do not hold academic appointments at the University of Alberta

The request for supervision or committee membership approval should include a memo indicating the reasons for, and the benefits of, having such a colleague as co-supervisor or on the proposed supervisory or examining committee, and the proposed individual’s current CV. If approved the colleague will remain eligible for appointment to new committees for three years. Appointments will only be made of those individuals expected to be able to remain on the committee until completion of the student's degree program. Should there be a change in the relationship between the home department and the approved appointee, the department should assess the implications and inform the Dean, FGSR. In all cases colleagues from the following groups should be active in a scholarly or creative way as demonstrated by satisfying an appropriate set of criteria from among those listed previously. Retired Professors or Professors Emeriti may serve as co-supervisor or as a supervisory committee member after the initial decanal approval outlined above. The other cosupervisor should be from the student's home department. They may serve as examining Revised––August 2011

30

committee members in the same manner as continuing academic staff. The Dean may waive the approval mechanism where circumstances warrant. (FGSR Council, 1992/05/29) Request for supervisors who have taken early retirement will be dealt with by the ViceDean, FGSR on a case-by-case basis but the guiding principle will be that staff who take early retirement can continue to supervise the graduate students they already have as long as the chair of the department approves. Professors from Departments not offering a graduate program may serve as cosupervisors or as members of supervisory or examining committees after initial decanal approval. Clinical Appointees may serve as co-supervisors or as members of supervisory or examining committees after initial decanal approval. They may sit on examining committees as fully enfranchised members but additional to the normal complement of University examiners. It is imperative that clinical appointees serving as co-supervisors or on supervisory committees be readily accessible to the student for the duration of the program. They may be "internal-externals" only if they come from units with doctoral programs. Adjunct Professors who do not hold academic appointments at the University of Alberta may serve as co-supervisors or as members of supervisory or examining committees after initial decanal approval. They may serve on candidacy or final examining committees as fully enfranchised members but additional to the normal complement of University examiners. They may not serve as the "internal/external" committee member. Additional categories: Experts from outside the University may, if approved by the Vice-Dean on an ad hoc basis, serve on examining committees as fully enfranchised members but additional to the normal complement of University examiners. The FGSR interpretation is that this category includes First Nations’ Elders where appropriate, given the academic and cultural context of the student’s research program. Departments must indicate why this individual is considered an Elder and justify his/her inclusion on the committee as an Elder. For off-campus experts, there should be an indication of the means by which meaningful interaction can be maintained. Adjunct Professors from inside the University may serve as supervisors, co-supervisors or as members of supervisory or examining committees in the department where they hold the adjunct appointment, but they are not to serve as the "internal-external" committee member. They are not required to be extra to the committee. Initial decanal approval is not required. Sessionals, Research Associates, FSO's, and PDF's are eligible to serve on committees, if recommended by a Chair and approved by the Dean. The request for committee membership approval should include a note indicating the reasons for, and the benefits of, having such a colleague on the committee, and the proposed individual’s current CV.

Revised––August 2011

31

If approved, the colleague will remain eligible for appointment to new committees for three years. (FGSR Council 1989/09/15; editorial updates 2002/03; 2009/02) Internal/External Examiners Normally, at least one member of a thesis-based master’s final, doctoral candidacy, or doctoral final examining committee should be from an academic unit external to the unit in which the degree program is being offered. This member is referred to as the “internal/external” examiner. This provision allows for a broader perspective to be considered with respect to both the student’s performance and to the examination process. The internal/external should be an experienced supervisor of graduate students and should have some knowledge of the student’s research area. The FGSR recognizes that for some departments, the recruitment of well-qualified internal/external examiners may be difficult. Therefore, such departments may apply to the Dean, FGSR for a partial or full exemption from the internal/external examiner policy. Such applications must include: demonstration of the difficulty in finding qualified internal/externals, clear criteria for determining which cases are to be exempt, and criteria to be used for the selection of internal examiners who will provide a perspective equivalent to an internal/external. The Dean, FGSR may approve the exemption for five years or may require review of the exemption after a specified time interval. An existing exemption will be automatically reviewed following any departmental restructuring. (FGSR Council 2000/05/17) Conflict of Interest Guidelines for Supervisors and Committee Members Relationships between examiners and candidates should be academic. Any personal relationships that alter or affect this academic relationship may constitute a conflict of interest (eg, familial or intimate relationship, business relationship). Examining members should also not be in a close personal relationship with the supervisor. Whenever a conflict of interest arises, examining members should withdraw from the committee. In accordance with existing policy, the FGSR has the authority to approve or not approve supervisory and examining committees. (FGSR Council, 1994/09/30) The key relationships are: the supervisor to the student; the supervisor to the other committee members; and the student to the committee members. There must be no conflict of interest in these relationships, as defined by the guidelines above. For example, spouses can serve as committee members or as co-supervisors on the same committee, but not as supervisor and committee member. Relationships between graduate program coordinators and the staff and students in their program(s) should be academic. Any personal relationships that alter or affect this academic relationship may constitute a conflict of interest (eg, familial or intimate relationship, business relationship). In addition, a conflict of interest may arise when graduate program coordinators make decisions concerning students that they supervise. In accord with GFC policy, any possible conflict of interest should be disclosed. Persons

Revised––August 2011

32

may not act as graduate program coordinators for matters in which they have a conflict of interest. (FGSR Council, 2001/11/09) Teleconferencing Guidelines for Examinations The term 'teleconferencing' is used here generically to include all forms of distance conference facilitation including telephone, video and electronic communication. Departments may wish to use teleconferencing for one or more of the examiners (including the external). It is recommended that no more than two participants use teleconferencing. Teleconferencing may be used for master’s or doctoral examinations. Examiners participating in examinations by this means are considered to be in attendance. Although candidates are expected to be present for their candidacy or final oral examinations, videoconferencing or teleconferencing may be used in exceptional circumstances. To ensure the integrity of the examination, a candidate who is at a remote location must be in the presence of a proctor for the duration of the examination. It is recommended that if the candidate is the remote participant, no remote committee members be used. Arrangements for teleconferencing including the name of the proctor, when applicable, must be submitted for approval to the FGSR with the Notice of Approval of Final Oral Examining Committee form. (FGSR Council 1997/05/23; editorial updates 2002/03) Arrangements for video conference examinations should be made through the Examinations and Timetabling Division, Registrar's Office. Apart from any charges for use of facilities at the remote location that are the responsibility of the department, there are no additional fees associated with video conference graduate examinations. Appointment of the Supervisor Every student in a program leading to a graduate degree is required to have a supervisor. The department which recommends an applicant for admission to a graduate program is responsible for providing supervision in an area in which it has competent supervisors, and in which the applicant has expressed an interest in studying. Implicit in the recommendation for admission is the following: on the applicant's part, that there has been an indication of at least a general area of interest and, preferably, provision of some form of proposal, particularly if the program is at the doctoral level; on the department's part, that the application has been completely reviewed, the area of interest examined, academic expectations and potential performance considered, and that the department agrees to meet its obligation to provide appropriate supervision for the applicant in the specified area. It is expected that every effort will be made to arrive at a mutually agreeable arrangement for supervision between the student and department. Students are normally involved in the process of the selection of their supervisor although this process varies depending upon the department. When the department is making arrangements for the formal approval of supervisors, supervisory committees, and examining committees by the FGSR, or for the scheduling of meetings and examinations, the student shall be consulted Revised––August 2011

33

and kept closely informed, although the student shall not be asked to conduct such activities. The final authority for the approval of supervision rests with the Dean, FGSR. It is recommended that department chairs monitor and review the performance of supervisors. With demonstration of continuing effective supervision, consideration should be given for reduced classroom teaching. (FGSR Council 1989/09/15) Co-supervision In some cases, departments may recommend co-supervision. Co-supervisors must also meet the criteria outlined in the "Eligibility Criteria for Supervisors and Committee Members". There should normally be no more than one co-supervisor. A co-supervisor from another university can be considered provided that a request (with the proposed co-supervisor’s CV) is put forward to the Vice-Dean, FGSR who may approve the appointment as a special case. (FGSR Executive, 1995/09/22). There should be an indication of the means by which meaningful interaction can be maintained. Time Line for Appointment Ideally, the supervisor should be appointed as soon as the student arrives to begin the program. If this is not possible, an interim supervisor or advisor may be appointed. The permanent supervisor must be appointed within the first 12 months of the student's program. Departments shall recommend and submit the names of supervisors to the FGSR on either the Approval of Supervisor--Master's form or the Approval of Supervisor and Supervisory Committee--Doctoral form. The forms are available on the FGSR website at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca (Degree Requirements & Supervision). Preparation of Departmental Guidelines Departments are responsible for preparing a set of guidelines for supervisors and students. Guidelines should deal with the selection and functioning of supervisors and should outline the joint responsibilities of faculty members and graduate students. Avenues of appeal open to students who feel they are receiving unsatisfactory supervision should also be specified. Guidelines for the Supervisor See “The Supervisor—Guidelines”, "Section 1: Areas of Responsibilities Related to Graduate Programs". Research Ethics and Supervision of Students Supervisors are reminded that required approvals under the University Standards for the Protection of Human Research Participants (see University Calendar, section 20.6) apply to students. Individuals who do not maintain their registration are not considered to be students and their Research Ethics Board approval to conduct their research ceases at the time of failure to register. Resolving Conflicts in Supervisor-Student Relationships The relationship between students and supervisors is normally close and long-lasting. At times, conflicts may arise between a student and the supervisor. In such cases, the first step must be to try to resolve the conflict or misunderstanding informally. This is more likely to be successful if attended to as early as possible.

Revised––August 2011

34

The supervisor and student should discuss the problem together. The supervisor should document the discussions and keep a record of any agreements made. In the event of a conflict the graduate coordinator should be notified as early as possible. It is the responsibility of the graduate coordinator to arrange for consultation and mediation. The graduate coordinator or the parties involved may request advice and/or mediation assistance from FGSR and/or other appropriate services, eg, Student Ombudservice or the Office of Safe Disclosure and Human Rights. The student and supervisor shall not be required to participate in informal resolution against their wishes if either party’s behaviour towards the other warrants a formal complaint under the Code of Student Behaviour, Discrimination & Harassment Policy, or other University policy. If informal resolution is unsuccessful or inappropriate, and the graduate coordinator determines that the supervisor-student relationship is beyond repair, the department will attempt in good faith to work with the student to find alternative supervision within the department, and will keep the FGSR apprised of these efforts. Where the supervisor has been providing funding to the student, the funding should continue for a period of at least 30 days from the date on which the graduate coordinator determines that the supervisor-student relationship is beyond repair. If the best arrangements of the department and the FGSR fail to meet the expectations of the student, the student may choose to withdraw without prejudice. If the student refuses to accept the supervision provided, then the student is not fulfilling the academic requirement of having a supervisor and shall, on academic grounds, be required to withdraw. See Section 7: Termination of a Student’s Program. Changing a Supervisor or a Supervisory Committee The department recommends changes of supervisor and/or revisions to the supervisory committee by completing and submitting to the FGSR either the Approval of Supervisor-Master's form or the Approval of Supervisor and Supervisory Committee--Doctoral form. Supervisor on Leave It is the responsibility of supervisors to make adequate provision for supervision of their graduate students during their leave. Therefore, staff members who intend to take leave during a period (exceeding two months) in which they have graduate students under their supervision shall submit to their department and to the graduate student(s) involved a written statement describing the arrangements which have been made to provide satisfactory supervision during the period of leave. The supervisor shall nominate a member of the department who should be a member of the supervisory committee to be empowered to act on behalf of the supervisor in matters pertaining to the graduate student(s). Please note that the FGSR has no funds available for supervisors on leave to attend the final examination. Agreements with the University of Calgary The University of Calgary and the University of Alberta have agreements on graduate student supervision for the following: Revised––August 2011

35

•

an academic staff member from one university may serve as a co-supervisor for a graduate student at the other university

•

an academic staff member from one university may serve as a member of the supervisory committee of a graduate student from the other university

The FGSR has interpreted this agreement to include members of examining committees. The terms of the agreements include the following: •

The appointee shall be counted as a regular member of the supervisory committee internal to the student's home department unless it is agreed at the outset that the member will be treated as coming from another department.

•

The appointment should not be made unless a satisfactory level of interaction can be maintained between the appointee and the graduate student, and between the appointee and the other supervisory committee members. It is the responsibility of the chair of the student's home department to define a satisfactory level of interaction and to ascertain that this can be maintained throughout the student's program.

•

If additional expenses will be incurred because of the appointment it is the responsibility of the chair of the student's home department, in consultation with the appointee, to make satisfactory arrangements for meeting these additional expenses. Otherwise, the appointment should not be made.

•

Co-supervisors and supervisory committee members will be bound by the procedures and policies of the student's home institution, which shall be made known to the committee member in writing prior to approval. (FGSR Council, 1990/02/16, 1990/10/19)

Examining Committees and Examinations Attendance at Examinations It is essential that all examiners attend the oral examination. Examination dates should not be scheduled when any examiner will be absent. If the department has some warning that the supervisor or an examiner cannot attend the examination, the examination must be postponed and re-scheduled or the committee member must be changed. In cases of emergency where there is little or no notice of the absence of a committee member (ie, sudden illness), the situation will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Departments should contact the Vice-Dean, FGSR to respond to the situation immediately. Attendance of Pro Dean at Examinations A pro dean, the Dean's representative, is a full voting member when attending a final oral examination. However, pro deans often see their role as assuring the proper conduct of the examination, and only intercede actively if they detect a procedural problem. The pro dean has a special responsibility to comment on process. The questioning provided by a pro dean, who might not be an expert in the field, should normally be general in character. This type of questioning often helps to put the student at ease. If the examination is very good, or if problems are encountered, the pro dean is asked to submit a brief report to the Dean. Revised––August 2011

36

When an external examiner is present, the pro dean serves as an ambassador from the Dean to greet the individual and receive comments on the quality of the examination. Pro deans are not required to have expertise in the discipline, but should have considerable experience with doctoral final oral examinations. Thesis-based Master’s Program Supervision and Examinations Master’s Supervisory Committee Master’s candidates must have a supervisor (see “Appointment of a Supervisor”). It is not an FGSR requirement to have a supervisory committee; however some departments may require them. Master's Examining Committee Composition Before nominating the supervisor or examining committee, ensure that eligibility criteria, conflict of interest, and teleconferencing guidelines have been met. Minimum three faculty member examiners: •

At least one from outside the department (see “Internal/External Examiners”).

•

Roles of the three faculty members can be in almost any combination. Examples: co-supervisors; a co-supervisor who is also the internal-external; supervisor from outside the department.

•

Must be chaired by a faculty member from inside the department

•

All members must attend the examination, which includes members participating through teleconferencing (see “Attendance at Examinations”).

It is the responsibility of the supervisor to ensure that: •

proper arrangements are made for the candidate's examination

•

the exam is scheduled and held in accordance with FGSR regulations

•

the candidate is not required to make these arrangements

In the absence of the supervisor, these responsibilities shall be carried out by the graduate coordinator or designate. It is the responsibility of the department to keep committee members informed of meetings of the committee and details of examinations. Master's Time Lines and Approval of the Final Oral Examining Committee At least three weeks prior to the final oral examination, it is the responsibility of the department to: •

recommend names of all members of the final oral examining committee and forward them to the FGSR for approval on a Notice and Approval of a Master’s Final Oral Examining Committee form. The form is available at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca (Exams & Convocation).

•

notify the examiners of the examination date

•

supply examiners with a copy of the thesis so that they may have adequate time to appraise the thesis

Revised––August 2011

37

Changing a Final Examining Committee The department recommends revisions to the final examining committee by completing a Notice and Approval of a Master’s Final Oral Examining Committee form and submitting it to the FGSR. Master’s Examination The committee will review the thesis and conduct an oral examination designed to test the candidate's knowledge of the thesis subject and of related fields. The language used to conduct the final oral examination shall be English. However, the committee may petition the Dean, FGSR, and on receiving written approval, may conduct the examination in a language other than English. Attendance at a Master’s examination Except for the Dean, FGSR (or Vice-Dean or Associate Dean or pro dean), who may participate fully in the examination, persons other than the examiners may attend only with the approval of the Dean, FGSR, or the chair of the committee. Visitors may not participate in the committee's discussion concerning its decision on the student's performance and must withdraw before such discussion commences (see “Attendance at Examinations” and “Attendance of Pro Dean at Examinations”). Decision of the Master's Final Examination Committee The decision of the examining committee will be based both on the content of the thesis and on the candidate's ability to defend it. Normally, if all but one member of the committee agree on a decision, the decision shall be that of the majority. The dissenting committee member does not have to sign. If two or more dissenting votes are recorded, the department will refer the matter to the Vice-Dean, FGSR, who will determine an appropriate course of action. One of the following outcomes of the final oral examination is appropriate: •

Pass

•

Pass subject to revisions

•

Adjourned

•

Fail

There is no provision for a final oral examination to be "passed subject to major revisions". Pass: If the student passes the examination, the department shall complete a Thesis Approval/Program Completion form and submit it to the FGSR. The form is available on the FGSR website at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca (Exams & Convocation). Pass subject to revisions: The student has satisfactorily defended the thesis but the revisions to the thesis are sufficiently minor that it will not require a reconvening of the examining committee. The department shall complete a Thesis Approval/Program Completion form and submit it to the FGSR indicating "pass subject to revisions". It is expected that the student will make the changes in time to submit the thesis to the FGSR on or before the deadline for the next convocation. These changes should be checked and approved by the committee chair or supervisor, who does not sign until the required changes are satisfactorily completed. Other committee members may also wish to Revised––August 2011

38

withhold their signature until they can verify that their required revisions have been made to their satisfaction. Adjourned: The final oral examination should be adjourned in the following situations: •

The revisions to the thesis are sufficiently substantial (if further research or experimentation or major reworking of sections are required, or if the committee is not satisfied with the general presentation of the thesis) that it will require a reconvening of the examining committee. The committee should not propose that the candidate has passed, rather the committee shall adjourn the examination.

•

The committee is dissatisfied with the candidate's oral presentation and defence of the thesis, even if the thesis itself is acceptable with or without minor revisions.

•

Compelling, extraordinary circumstances such as a sudden medical emergency during the examination.

If the examination is adjourned, the committee should: •

Specify in writing to the student, with as much precision as possible, the nature of the deficiencies and, in the case of revisions to the thesis, the extent of the revisions required. Where the oral defence is unsatisfactory, it may be necessary to arrange some discussion periods with the candidate prior to reconvening the examination.

•

Decide upon a date to reconvene. If the date of the reconvened oral examination depends upon the completion of a research task or a series of discussions, it should be made clear which committee members will decide on the appropriate date to reconvene. The final date set for reconvening shall be no later than six months from the date of the examination. A final decision of the examining committee must be made within six months of the initial examination. (FGSR Council, 1988/04/15)

•

Make it clear to the student what will be required by way of approval before the examination is reconvened (eg, approval of the committee chair or supervisor, approval of the entire committee, or of select members of the committee).

•

Specify the supervision and assistance the student may expect from the committee members in meeting the necessary revisions.

•

Advise the Vice-Dean, FGSR in writing of the adjournment and the conditions.

•

When the date is set for the adjourned final oral examination, the department will notify the FGSR. Normally the Dean, Vice-Dean, Associate Dean or Pro Dean attends the examination.

Fail: If the final examination committee agrees that the student has failed, the committee chair shall provide the reasons for this recommendation and the department's recommendation for the student's program in writing to the Vice-Dean, FGSR and to the student. The Vice-Dean, FGSR will arrange to meet with the candidate and with department representatives before acting upon any department recommendation. A Revised––August 2011

39

decision of the FGSR which affects a student's academic standing (ie, required to withdraw) is appealable. Signatures on the Master's Thesis Note: In March 2009, the FGSR implemented a new Thesis Approval/Program Completion form, replacing signature pages in the thesis. The same guidelines below apply. Many departments adhere to the following guidelines in having members of the examining committee sign the thesis signature page: Pass: Thesis is approved as is. Examining committee members sign the signature page immediately. (If one of the examiners fails the student but the student passes, that examiner does not have to sign the thesis.) Pass subject to revisions: Members wishing to do so may sign immediately. The committee chair or supervisor withholds signature until the thesis is amended satisfactorily and all other committee members have signed. If problems arise in the amendment process, the chair or supervisor may wish to solicit opinions from the other committee members. Adjourned: No member of the committee signs the signature page. Fail: No member of the committee signs the signature page. In cases where the Chair is not a member of the examining committee, the Chair’s name does not appear on the thesis signature page, nor does the Chair sign it. Time Limit for Submission of Theses to FGSR Following completion of the final oral examination at which the thesis is passed or passed subject to revisions, the candidate shall make the appropriate revisions where necessary and submit the approved thesis to the FGSR within six months of the date of the final oral examination. Departments may impose earlier deadlines for submitting revisions. If the thesis is not submitted to the FGSR within the six-month time limit, the candidate will be considered to have withdrawn from the program. After this time, the candidate must apply and be re-admitted to the FGSR and register again before the thesis can be accepted. If the final oral examination is adjourned, the six-month time limit will take effect from the date of completion of the examination where the thesis was passed with or without revisions. (FGSR Council, 1988/04/15) In order to convocate, students must submit their thesis to the FGSR for approval before the deadline dates set out in the Academic Schedule of the Calendar. Students must also ensure that they are registered in Thesis in their last registration prior to convocation (see "Thesis Requirements"). Course-based Master’s Programs Supervision Every student in a course-based program is required to have a supervisor or advisor. The student is responsible for successfully completing all course work and the capping exercise. Where the capping exercise involves a project, the student is responsible for Revised––August 2011

40

producing a typed report of the project or some other finished product to be retained by the department. It is the responsibility of the department to: •

verify that all courses and the capping exercise have been successfully completed

•

submit to the FGSR a Report of Completion for Course-based Master's Degree form. The form is available on the FGSR website at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca (Exams & Convocation). Where applicable, this form is accompanied by a Grade Change form, changing the Project grade from Incomplete to Credit. Code and print this form on the Special Exams/Grade Change panel group in OASIS (SA).

The completed forms must be received by the FGSR before the candidate's name is placed on the convocation list. Departments must adhere to the deadlines found in the Academic Schedule of the Calendar for submitting the forms to the FGSR. Failure to meet these deadlines will result in a delay in awarding the degree. Postgraduate Diploma Programs Supervision Every student should have a supervisor or advisor. It is the responsibility of the department to ensure that all requirements for the postgraduate diploma are met before approving a student for graduation. The department submits to the FGSR a Report of Completion of Postgraduate Diploma form. The form is available on the FGSR website at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca (Exams & Convocation). The completed forms must be received by the FGSR before the candidate's name is placed on the convocation list. Departments must adhere to the deadlines found in the Academic Schedule of the Calendar. Failure to meet these deadline dates may result in a delay in awarding the postgraduate diploma. Postgraduate Diploma Programs Supervision Every student should have a supervisor or advisor. It is the responsibility of the department to ensure that all requirements for the postgraduate diploma are met before approving a student for graduation. The department submits to the FGSR a Report of Completion of Postgraduate Diploma form. The form is available on the FGSR website at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca (Exams & Convocation). The completed forms must be received by the FGSR before the candidate's name is placed on the convocation list. Departments must adhere to the deadlines found in the Academic Schedule of the Calendar. Failure to meet these deadline dates may result in a delay in awarding the postgraduate diploma. Doctoral Program Supervision See the Overview of FGSR Timelines for more information.

Revised––August 2011

41

Doctoral Supervisory Committee Composition Each doctoral student's program shall be under the direction of a supervisory committee approved by the FGSR based on recommendations from the department. Before nominating the supervisory committee, ensure that eligibility criteria, conflict of interest, and teleconferencing guidelines have been met. Minimum three faculty members: •

Where appropriate, one or more committee members may be from a department other than the student's home department.

•

The chair of the committee shall be the supervisor.

•

If there is co-supervision for a doctoral student, the supervisory committee may consist of the two co-supervisors and one additional member.

It is expected that every effort will be made to arrive at a mutually agreeable arrangement for members of the supervisory committee between the student and department. Students are normally involved in the process of the selection of their supervisor although this process varies depending upon the department. However, when arrangements are being made for their formal approval of supervisors, supervisory committees, and examining committees by the FGSR, or the scheduling of meetings and examinations, the student shall be consulted and kept closely informed although the student shall not be asked to conduct such activities. The final authority rests with the Dean, FGSR. The department should ensure that the members of a supervisory committee are sufficiently competent and experienced to serve at the required level. In forming a supervisory committee, the department should consider the rank and experience of the prospective members, their publications and other demonstrations of competence in the field of specialization, and the prospective members' experience in graduate supervision (see "Eligibility Criteria for Supervisors and Committee Members"). Time Line for Appointment The department chair shall recommend the names of the supervisory committee members no later than the end of the first year of the student's doctoral program, and well in advance of the candidacy examination. The recommendations are forwarded to the FGSR on the Approval of Supervisor and Supervisory Committee--Doctoral form. The form is available on the FGSR website at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca (Degree Requirements & Supervision). Time Line for Committee Review Once a supervisory committee has been appointed, it shall be reviewed annually by the department. Responsibilities of the Committee The committee shall arrange for the necessary examinations and for adjudication of the thesis. The committee shall have a formal regular meeting with the student at least once a year.

Revised––August 2011

42

Doctoral Program Candidacy Examination Doctoral Candidacy Committee Composition Before nominating the candidacy examining committee, ensure that eligibility criteria, conflict of interest, and teleconferencing guidelines have been met. Minimum five faculty member examiners: •

The supervisory committee and normally the addition of two other faculty members

•

At least one must be from outside the department (see “Internal/External Examiners”).

•

Must have a minimum of two arm's length members who come new to the examination

•

Must be chaired by a faculty member who is not the supervisor (or co-supervisor) but is a member of the student's home department. If the chair is not a member of the examining committee (FGSR encourages this arrangement), the chair does not vote.

•

All members must attend the examination (see “Attendance at Examinations” and "Teleconferencing Guidelines for Examinations").

•

Roles of members (except the chair) can be in any combination. Examples: cosupervisor; a co-supervisor from outside the department; supervisor from outside the department; arm's length member from inside or outside the department; etc.

Doctoral Candidacy Time Lines and Approval of the Candidacy Examining Committee It is the responsibility of the department to nominate the additional members of the candidacy examining committee by completing the Notice and Approval of Doctoral Candidacy Examining Committee form and submitting it to the FGSR for approval. The form is available on the FGSR website at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca (Exams & Convocation). The notice must be received by the FGSR at least three weeks in advance of the examination. It is the responsibility of the supervisor to ensure that: •

proper arrangements are made for the candidate's examination

•

the candidate is not required to make any of these arrangements

In the absence of the supervisor, the department graduate coordinator or designate shall be responsible for these arrangements. Changing a Candidacy Examining Committee The department recommends revisions to the doctoral candidacy examining committee by resubmitting a Notice and Approval of a Doctoral Candidacy Examining Committee form to the FGSR. Revised––August 2011

43

Establishing Candidacy Examination Procedures Each department offering a doctoral degree is responsible for establishing detailed examination procedures for the candidacy. These procedures should be made available to faculty members and students in the department and to the Dean, FGSR. (FGSR Council, 1985/03/15) The candidacy examination is an oral examination; some departments may also require that students take comprehensive written examinations prior to the candidacy examination. The candidacy examination must be passed no less than six months prior to taking the final oral examination. The candidacy examination is normally held within two years of the commencement of the program at a time when most, if not all, of the course work is completed and the thesis is started or well defined. Students must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the examining committee that they possess: •

an adequate knowledge of the discipline and of the subject matter relevant to the thesis; and

•

the ability to pursue and complete original research at an advanced level.

During the candidacy examination only minor attention should be given to the data collection. The examination should determine whether the student is adequately prepared to continue as a doctoral student. The language used to conduct the candidacy examination shall be English. However, the committee may petition the Dean, FGSR, and on receiving written approval, may conduct the examination in a language other than English. Responsibilities of the Chair The examination shall be chaired by a faculty member who is not the supervisor but is a member of the student's home department. Each department shall establish a mechanism by which individuals are assigned this responsibility. The chair is responsible for moderating the discussion and directing questions and may participate in the questioning. If the chair is not a member of the committee, the chair does not vote. It is the chair's responsibility to ensure that departmental and FGSR regulations relating to the candidacy and examinations are followed. (FGSR Council, 1989/06/19) Attendance at Candidacy Examinations Except for the Dean, (or Vice-Dean or Associate Dean or the pro dean) FGSR, who may participate fully in the examination, persons other than the examiners may attend only with the permission of the Dean, FGSR, or the chair of the committee. Visitors may not participate in the committee's discussion concerning its decision on the student's performance and must withdraw before such discussion commences (see “Attendance at Examinations” and “Attendance of Pro Dean at Examinations”). Decision of the Candidacy Committee Normally, if all but one member of the committee agree on a decision, the decision shall be that of the majority. If two or more dissenting votes are recorded, the department will refer the matter to the Vice-Dean, FGSR, who will determine an appropriate course of action. One of the following outcomes of the candidacy is appropriate: Revised––August 2011

44

•

Pass

•

Conditional pass

•

Fail

Note that these possible outcomes are different for the final oral examination. Pass: If the student passes the candidacy examination, the department shall complete the Report of Completion of Candidacy Examination form and submit it to the FGSR. The form is available on the FGSR website at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca (Exams & Convocation). Upon receipt of the form, the FGSR will add a comment of "Doctoral Candidacy Examination Completed" to the student record, which will be reflected on the student's transcript. Conditional Pass: If the candidacy examining committee agrees to a conditional pass for the student, the chair of the examining committee shall provide in writing to the ViceDean, FGSR and the student: •

the reasons for this recommendation

•

details of the conditions

•

timeframe for the student to meet the conditions

•

the approval mechanism for meeting the conditions, ie, approval of the committee chair or supervisor, or approval of the entire committee, or select members of the committee

•

the supervision and assistance the student can be expected to receive from committee members

Once the examining committee has agreed that the conditions have been met, the department shall complete the Report of Completion of Candidacy Examination form and submit it to the FGSR. Upon receipt of the form, the FGSR will add a comment of "Doctoral Candidacy Examination Completed" to the student record, which will be reflected on the student's transcript. Fail: If the candidacy examining committee agrees that the student has failed, the committee chair shall provide the reasons for this recommendation and the department’s recommendation for the student’s program in writing to the Vice-Dean, FGSR and to the student. For failed candidacy examinations, the Vice-Dean, FGSR, normally arranges to meet with the student and with department representatives before acting upon any department recommendation. A decision of the FGSR which affects a student's academic standing (ie, required to withdraw or transfer to a master's program) is appealable. The following options are to be considered by the examining committee when the outcome of a student’s candidacy exam is “fail:”

Revised––August 2011

45

•

Repeat the Candidacy

If the student’s candidacy exam performance was inadequate but the student’s performance and work completed to date indicate that the student has the potential to perform at the doctoral level, the examining committee should consider the possibility of recommending that the student be given an opportunity to repeat the candidacy exam. If the recommendation of a repeat candidacy is formulated by the examining committee and approved by the FGSR, the student is to be notified in writing of his/her exam deficiencies by the chair of the examining committee. The second candidacy exam is to be scheduled no later than three to six months from the date of the first candidacy. In the event that the student fails the second candidacy, the examining committee shall recommend one of the next two options. •

Change of Category to a Master’s Program

If the student’s candidacy exam performance was inadequate and the student’s performance and work completed to date indicates that the student has the potential to complete a master’s program, the examining committee should consider the possibility of recommending a change of category to a master’s program or postgraduate diploma program. •

Termination of the Doctoral Program

If the student’s performance was inadequate and the work completed during the program is considered inadequate, the examining committee should recommend termination of the student’s program. (See “Termination of a Student’s Program,” "Section 7: Administration of Graduate Programs") (FGSR Council, 1998/11/13) Final Doctoral Examination Preliminary Acceptance of the Thesis Before the thesis is forwarded to the external examiner, PhD supervisory committee members shall declare in writing to the supervisor either that the thesis is of adequate substance (and quality) to warrant that the student proceed to the final examination or that the thesis is unsatisfactory and the student should not be allowed to proceed to the final oral examination. (FGSR Council, 1989/06/19) The purpose of this process is to ensure the thesis is vetted by the supervisor and all supervisory committee members and to verify that it is of sufficient substance and quality to proceed to the defence. This process is critical to protect and uphold the reputation of the department and the University of Alberta for excellence in graduate programs. It is also critical to ensure that External Examiners and other additional members of the examining committee are not asked to invest time reading a thesis that is substandard. Departments may choose to prepare a "Preliminary Acceptance of Thesis" signature sheet for their own records. Inviting the External Examiner or Reader It is the responsibility of the department chair to nominate an external examiner or reader and to submit the name to the FGSR for approval. This should be done on a Request to Revised––August 2011

46

Invite External Reader or Examiner for the Final Doctoral Oral Examination form prepared by the department normally at least two months in advance of the examination date (FGSR Council, 1989/06/19). The form is available on the FGSR website at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca (Exams & Convocation). The submission must include a brief CV of the external examiner and a short statement regarding the external's qualifications. The FGSR is particularly interested in the external examiner's current scholarly publications and research activities and experience with graduate student education. The external shall be a recognized authority in the special field of research of the candidate's thesis, and will be an experienced supervisor of doctoral students. The proposed external examiner must be in a position to review the thesis objectively and to provide a critical analysis of the work and the presentation. It is therefore essential that the external examiner not have a current or previous association with the student, the supervisor, or the department that would hinder this type of objective analysis. For example, a proposed examiner who has recently been associated with the student as a research collaborator or co-author would not be eligible. Also, a proposed external examiner must not have had recent association with the doctoral candidate's supervisor (as a former student, supervisor, or close collaborator, for instance). Supervisors who are in doubt about the eligibility of a potential external examiner should call the Vice-Dean, FGSR to review the case before approaching the external. Under normal circumstances the same person will not be used as an external examiner at the University of Alberta if that examiner has served in the same capacity at this University within the preceding two years. (FGSR Council, 1989/06/19). The FGSR interprets this to mean the same external examiner cannot be used in the same department within two years; this does not preclude an examiner serving in another department (2004/11/01). Once the external has been approved by the FGSR, the Vice-Dean, FGSR, will officially invite the external, with a copy of the letter of invitation to the department. The external shall receive the thesis at least four weeks before the final oral examination. (FGSR Council, 1989/06/19) The external should not be contacting the supervisor directly regarding the thesis or making arrangements related to the examination. FGSR Travel Funds for External Examiners The Dean, FGSR, has limited funding available for external examiners if graduate coordinators provide a compelling rationale why it would be particularly important to have an external examiner in attendance. Departments should complete and submit a Request for Funds for External Examiner Travel form. See Doctoral Candidacy & Final Oral Exams. In certain special circumstances where the Vice-Dean, FGSR determines that the external examiner must be present at the examination, the FGSR will fund external examiner travel.

Revised––August 2011

47

Final Doctoral Examining Committee Composition Before nominating the final doctoral examining committee, ensure that eligibility criteria, conflict of interest, and teleconferencing guidelines have been met. Minimum five faculty member examiners: •

The supervisory committee and (normally) the addition of at least two other faculty members

•

At least one University of Alberta member must be from outside the department (see “Internal/External Examiners”).

•

One member must be an external examiner/reader from outside the University

•

In addition to the external, the committee must have a minimum of one additional arm's length member who comes new to the examination (but may have served on the candidacy examining committee). The FGSR encourages departments to nominate for this function a University staff member who comes to the finished thesis having read none of its earlier drafts. In this way the student benefits from an outside perspective without any of the possible biases of the supervisor and supervisory committee members.

•

Must be chaired by a faculty member who is not the supervisor (or co-supervisor) but is a member of the student's home department. If this chair is not a member of the examining committee (FGSR encourages this arrangement), the chair does not vote.

•

Must have a minimum of five members in attendance at the examination, which includes members participating through teleconferencing (see “Attendance at Examinations”). If an external reader is used, there still needs to be five members in attendance at the examination.

•

Roles of members (except the chair) can be in almost any combination. Examples: co-supervisors; a co-supervisor from outside the department; supervisor from outside the department; arm's length member from inside or outside the department, etc.

Approval of the Final Doctoral Examining Committee The department will recommend names of all members of the final oral examining committee and forward them to the FGSR for approval on a Notice and Approval of Doctoral Final Oral Examining Committee form. The form is available at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca (Exams & Convocation). This form must be submitted to the FGSR at least three weeks before the date of the final oral examination. Changing a Doctoral Final Oral Examining Committee The department recommends revisions to the final examining committee by completing a Notice and Approval of Doctoral Final Oral Examining Committee form and submitting it to the FGSR.

Revised––August 2011

48

Report of the External Reader In the letter of invitation sent to the external reader by the FGSR, the external reader is requested to provide to the graduate coordinator in the department and the FGSR, at least one week in advance of the examination, a written evaluation of the thesis, including the following items: •

a statement that the thesis is acceptable for the doctoral degree,

•

either a brief, written commentary on the scope, structure, methodology, and findings of the thesis, which can be read to the candidate for response, or

•

a list of clear, direct, contextualized questions (preferably no more than five) for the candidate to address during the examination,

•

a list of minor corrections (if any).

The chair of the examining committee will present the external's report and questions to the student for the first time during the examination and the committee will evaluate the student's answers as part of the examination. (FGSR Council, 1990/02/16) When an External Examiner Attends the Oral If the department and supervisor have the resources to bring an external to the campus for the examination, the FGSR encourages them to do so. In these cases, departments should indicate on the Request to Invite External Reader or Examiner for the Final Doctoral Oral Examination form that the external will be in attendance. Once the external examiner is approved by the Vice-Dean, FGSR, a letter of invitation will be mailed to the external asking that the thesis be temporarily placed in one of the following categories: •

the thesis is acceptable with minor or no revisions;

•

the external wishes to reserve judgment until after the examination; or

•

the thesis is unacceptable without major revisions. If the thesis is judged by the external to fall into the last category, the external is asked to contact the ViceDean, FGSR immediately, since the final examination may have to be postponed.

The external examiner will also be asked to make travel arrangements in consultation with the department. All travel expenses involved are the responsibility of the department. Report of the External Examiner In the letter of invitation sent to the attending external examiner by the FGSR, the external is requested to prepare and send to the graduate coordinator, at least one week in advance of the examination, a brief written commentary (approximately two to three pages) on the structure, methodology, quality, significance and findings of the thesis for the reference of both the candidate and supervisor. The commentary should not be given to the student prior to the examination. (FGSR Council, 2004/06/04)

Revised––August 2011

49

Establishing Doctoral Examination Procedures Each department offering a doctoral degree is required to establish detailed examination procedures for final oral examinations. These procedures should be made available to faculty members and students in the department and to the Dean, FGSR. (FGSR Council, 1985/03/15) The examining committee shall conduct a final oral examination, based largely on the thesis. It is the responsibility of the supervisor to ensure that: •

proper arrangements are made for the candidate's examination

•

the examination is scheduled and held in accordance with FGSR regulations

•

the candidate is not required to make these arrangements

In the absence of the supervisor, these responsibilities shall be borne by the departmental graduate coordinator or designate. The department must notify the examining committee members of the examination date and should supply them with a copy of the thesis at least three weeks in advance (four weeks for the external), so that they may have adequate time to appraise the thesis. The language used to conduct the examination shall be English. However, the committee may petition the Dean, FGSR, and on receiving written approval, may conduct the examination in a language other than English. The following recommendations/guidelines may be useful for departments in establishing such procedures. •

Ensure that the examination is held in an appropriate venue. Several times observers have remarked that an examination room was too small or uncomfortable.

•

It is customary for the candidate to leave the room while procedures are determined and explained (ie, the order of questioning, the length of time allocated per question, the number of rounds, etc). It has been found that a CV provided by the candidate is often helpful (for example, to help an external examiner write a subsequent letter of reference); a quick review of the student's progress through the program is also useful.

•

Ensure that the chair, student and all examiners have a final draft of the thesis at the examination.

•

The candidate should make a brief presentation about the thesis, usually from five to 20 minutes long. This functions to calm the candidate's nerves and to remind the examiners about important aspects of the thesis. Candidates should never play host or hostess, serving tea, etc.

•

It is generally agreed that the most time should be allotted to the internal/external member and the external examiner (if present) and the least to the supervisor. In

Revised––August 2011

50

this way new and challenging questions are asked in place of reiteration of questioning already utilized to develop the candidate and enhance the research. Examiners should avoid arguing among themselves and excluding the candidate. They should not lecture but should ask detailed questions about the thesis and occasional broad, disciplinary questions, testing for evidence of education, not just training. Typographical and stylistic errors should not take up examination time. •

At the close of the examination, before the student is asked to withdraw, it is often beneficial to ask the candidate if there are any final comments. When a positive conclusion is obvious, some time should be spent on discussing the future of the thesis and the research area.

•

For the adjudication, no final verdict should be rendered without each examiner having given an opinion. It is customary for two opinions to be sought: (1) on the acceptability of the thesis; and (2) on the acceptability of the defence.

•

In announcing the decision, some observers feel that the best result is achieved if the announcement is made in front of all the examiners, not outside the room by the chair.

Responsibilities of the Chair The final oral examination shall be chaired by a faculty member who is not the supervisor but is a member of the student's home department. Each department shall establish a mechanism by which individuals are assigned this responsibility. The chair is responsible for moderating the discussion and directing questions and may participate in the questioning. If the chair is not a member of the committee, the chair does not vote or sign the thesis. It is the chair's responsibility to ensure that departmental and FGSR regulations relating to the final oral examination are followed. (FGSR Council, 1989/06/19) Attendance at Doctoral Examinations Faculty members of the student's major department as well as members of FGSR Council (or their alternates) have the right to attend doctoral examinations but should notify the chair of the examining committee. Other persons may attend the defence only with special permission of the Dean, FGSR, or the chair of the examining committee. Except for the Dean, FGSR, (or Vice-Dean or Associate Dean or pro dean) who may participate fully in the examination, persons who are not members of the examining committee: (a) may participate in the questioning only by permission of the chair of the committee; (b) are not permitted to participate in the discussion of the student's performance and must withdraw before such discussion commences (see “Attendance at Examinations” and “Attendance of Pro Dean at Examinations”). Decision of the Final Doctoral Examining Committee The decision of the examining committee will be based both on the content of the thesis and on the candidate's ability to defend it. Normally, if all but one member of the committee agrees on a decision, the decision shall be that of the majority, except when the one dissenting vote is that of the external examiner. If this happens, it must be reported to the Vice-Dean, FGSR, who will determine an appropriate course of action. If Revised––August 2011

51

two or more dissenting votes are recorded, the department will refer the matter to the Vice-Dean, FGSR, who will determine an appropriate course of action. One of the following outcomes of the final oral examination is appropriate: •

Pass

•

Pass subject to revisions

•

Adjourned

•

Fail

There is no provision for a final oral examination to be “passed subject to major revisions”. Pass: If the student passes the examination, the department shall complete a Thesis Approval/Program Completion form and submit it to the FGSR. The form is available on the FGSR website at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca (Exams & Convocation). Pass subject to revisions: The student has satisfactorily defended the thesis but the revisions to the thesis are sufficiently minor that it will not require a reconvening of the examining committee. The department shall complete a Thesis Approval/Program Completion form and submit it to the FGSR indicating “pass subject to revisions”. It is expected that the student will make the changes in time to submit the thesis to the FGSR on or before the deadline for the next convocation. These changes should be checked and approved by the committee chair or supervisor, who does not sign until the required changes are satisfactorily completed. Other committee members may also wish to withhold their signature until they can verify that their required revisions have been made to their satisfaction. Adjourned: The final oral examination should be adjourned in the following situations: •

The revisions to the thesis are sufficiently substantial (if further research or experimentation or major reworking of sections are required, or if the committee is not satisfied with the general presentation of the thesis) that it will require a reconvening of the examining committee. The committee should not propose that the candidate has passed, rather the committee shall adjourn the examination.

•

The committee is dissatisfied with the candidate’s oral presentation and defence of the thesis, even if the thesis itself is acceptable with or without minor revisions.

•

Compelling, extraordinary circumstances such as a sudden medical emergency during the examination.

If the examination is adjourned, the committee should •

Specify in writing to the student, with as much precision as possible, the nature of the deficiencies and, in the case of revisions to the thesis, the extent of the revisions required. Where the oral defence is unsatisfactory, it may be necessary to arrange some discussion periods with the candidate prior to reconvening the examination.

Revised––August 2011

52

•

Decide upon a date to reconvene. If the date of the reconvened oral examination depends upon the completion of a research task or a series of discussions, it should be made clear which committee members will decide on the appropriate date to reconvene. The final date set for reconvening shall be no later than six months from the date of the examination. A final decision of the examining committee must be made within six months of the initial examination. (FGSR Council, 1988/04/15)

•

Make it clear to the student what will be required by way of approval before the examination is reconvened (eg, approval of the committee chair or supervisor, approval of the entire committee, or of select members of the committee).

•

Specify the supervision and assistance the student may expect from the committee members in meeting the necessary revisions.

•

Advise the Vice-Dean, FGSR in writing of the adjournment and the conditions (in the points above).

•

When the date is set for the adjourned final oral examination, the department will notify the FGSR. Normally the Dean, Vice-Dean, Associate Dean or Pro Dean attends the examination.

Fail: If the final examination committee agrees that the student has failed, the committee chair shall provide the reasons for this recommendation and the department’s decision for the student’s program in writing to the Vice-Dean, FGSR and to the student. For failed examinations, the Vice-Dean, FGSR, will arrange to meet with the candidate and with department representatives before acting upon any department recommendation. A decision of the FGSR which affects the student's academic standing (ie, required to withdraw or transfer to a master's program) is appealable. Signatures on the Doctoral Thesis Note: In March 2009, the FGSR implemented a new Thesis Approval/Program Completion form, replacing signature pages in the thesis. The same guidelines below apply. Many departments adhere to the following guidelines in having members of the examining committee sign the thesis signature page. Pass: Thesis is approved as is. Examining committee members sign the signature page immediately. (If one of the examiners fails the student but the student passes, that examiner does not have to sign the thesis.) The following guidelines may be followed for external readers, under the assumption that the external reader has indicated general acceptance of the thesis: •

When the external does not attend the final oral examination, and the student has passed the final oral examination (with the assent of the external), the external examiner's name and institution will be typed on the signature page, and the chair of the examining committee will initial the external's signature line. All other examining committee members will sign the signature page.

Revised––August 2011

53

•

When the external examiner attends the final oral examination, the external shall sign the thesis along with the other committee members.

Pass subject to revisions: Members who wish to do so sign immediately. The committee chair or supervisor withholds the signature until the thesis is amended satisfactorily and all other committee members have signed. If problems arise in the amendment process, the chair or supervisor may wish to solicit opinions from the other committee members. Adjourned: No member of the committee signs the signature page. Fail: No member of the committee signs the signature page. Time Limit for Submission of Doctoral Theses to FGSR Following completion of the final oral examination at which the thesis is passed or passed subject to revisions, the candidate shall make the appropriate revisions where necessary and submit the approved thesis to the FGSR within six months of the date of the final oral examination. Departments may impose earlier deadlines for submitting revisions. If the thesis is not submitted to the FGSR within the six-month time limit, the candidate will be considered to have withdrawn from the program. After this time, the candidate must apply and be re-admitted to the FGSR and register again before the thesis can be accepted. If the final oral examination is adjourned, the six-month time limit will take effect from the date of completion of the examination where the thesis was passed with or without revisions. (FGSR Council, 1988/04/15) In order to convocate, all doctoral students must submit their thesis to the FGSR for approval before the deadline dates set out in the Academic Schedule of the Calendar. Students must also ensure that they are registered in Thesis in their last registration prior to convocation (see "Thesis Requirements"). Thesis Requirements Regulations and Outline of Responsibilities All students in a thesis degree program shall present and defend a thesis embodying the results of their research. The topic of the thesis must have been approved by the student’s supervisor. For students in a master's degree program, the thesis should reveal that the student is able to work in a scholarly manner and is acquainted with the principal works published on the subject of the thesis. As far as possible, it should be an original contribution. A doctoral thesis must embody the results of original investigations and analyses and be of such quality as to merit publication, meeting the standards of reputable scholarly publications. It must constitute a substantial contribution to the knowledge in the student's field of study. The thesis should normally be written in English. In some departments, students may be permitted to write their thesis in a language other than English, provided that language has been approved for use by the supervisory committee, the department, and the ViceDean (or designate), FGSR. Theses written in a language other than English must have two abstracts, one in the language of the thesis, and the other in English. Revised––August 2011

54

It is the responsibility of both the student and the supervisor to be aware of any specific requirements of the student's department with respect to the student's thesis. To ensure eligibility for the earliest convocation following completion of the thesis, each student must complete and have the thesis approved by the FGSR before the deadline date set by FGSR. Deadlines for submission of theses are found on the FGSR website www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca/degreesuperv/thesis/submissiondeadlines.htm Students must also ensure that they are registered in Thesis in their last registration prior to convocation. (See “Registering in THESIS at the End of Program”, "Section 6: Program Planning and Registration".) Thesis format specifications are available at www.gradstudies.ualberta.ca/degreesuperv/ Following completion of the final oral examination at which the thesis is approved (or approved subject to minor revisions), the student shall make the appropriate revisions where necessary and submit the approved thesis to the FGSR within six months of the date of the final oral examination. Departments may impose earlier deadlines for submitting revisions. If the thesis is not submitted to the FGSR within the six-month time limit, the student will be considered to have withdrawn from the program. Only in exceptional circumstances, upon the recommendation of the department, will FGSR approve an extension to this period. After this time, the student must apply and be re-admitted to the FGSR before the thesis can be submitted and approved. Policy on Public Access to Thesis Results A thesis should be made freely available to the public as soon as it has been successfully defended and submitted to FGSR. It is the responsibility of the supervisor and the supervisory committee to inform the student of public access to thesis results. Restricting Access to the Publication of a Thesis It is university policy that a thesis be made freely available to the public as soon as it has been successfully defended. A general policy of “open access” is also embraced by TriCouncil and other funding agencies. However, it is recognized that circumstances may arise that justify restricting access to a thesis for a specified period of time initially up to a maximum of one year (also known as an embargo period). The likely circumstances for restricting access to a thesis are: •

Contractual, where a contract with a company, funding agency or sponsor requires that the research conducted for the thesis must remain confidential for a specified period of time;

•

Patent Pending, where a patent application has been lodged by the student, or by another on the student’s behalf, relating to a discovery or novel method in a thesis;

•

Publication Pending, where a student has a contract with a publisher indicating that the publisher regards the electronic availability of a thesis as a prior publication and will reject any work based on a publicly available thesis, or for a student who has not yet obtained a publishing contract, where a student can show

Revised––August 2011

55

that the practice of the likely publishers in his or her discipline is to consider the electronic availability of a thesis as a prior publication; and •

Ethical Confidentiality, where a thesis requires an embargo period in order for additional steps to be taken to remove information from the thesis where electronic access to the thesis without amendment could endanger the physical or mental health or the safety of people.

Students wanting to restrict public access to their theses for a temporary period of time must submit a written request with supporting documentation. The request must be made at the time of submission of the thesis to FGSR, for a period of up to one year. A Request to Restrict Access to a Thesis form can be found in the Forms Cabinet on the FGSR website. At the end of an approved embargo period, the thesis will become accessible. An accessible thesis can be located by a Google search or other internet search engine. It is a student’s responsibility to contact the Dean of FGSR if there are any extenuating circumstances that warrant an extension to the original embargo period. With respect to the use or inclusion of copyright works within a thesis, readers of this manual are reminded that university policy requires compliance with copyright law. (FGSR Council, 2011/01/19)

Revised––August 2011

56