Confirmation Review

The first year of your PhD will be considered a probationary year, after which time you are required to undergo a Confirmation Review which will confirm your registration as a PhD student. The confirmation review is intended to confirm whether or not you and your research project have the potential for successful research at doctoral level and completion within a maximum of four years, of which the last year is considered a writing-up phase.

The purpose of the confirmation review is to ensure:

• Satisfactory progress has been made on the EDS

• Your training needs have been identified in the Training Needs Analysis

• The research project has potential for successful completion within the allotted time

• You are capable of carrying out work in the proposed research plan

• An adequate amount and quality of progress has been made during the first year

You must submit the following documents 

• Data Management Plan (DMP)

• Training Needs Analysis (TNA) form

• Confirmation Review Report 

• Submit your Confirmation Review Report to Turnitin

You will then be required to undergo an oral examination with two independent members of EEE academic staff.

How to submit to Turnitin:

• Login to MUSE

• Click on Blackboard (in MyServices or in the all services menu)

• Under Organisations you will see PGR Turnitin Submission Point - COM/EEE, click on the link to this

• Click on the EEE Confirmation Review Submissions folder

• Click on FINAL Confirmation Review Report Turnitin Submission to enter details and upload file

• Email a copy of the Turnitin receipt to eee-pgr-support@sheffield.ac.uk

How to submit your CR documents and Turnitin receipt:

Email your documents attached to an email to eee-pgr-support@sheffield.ac.uk

Your Confirmation Review report must be submitted by the end of month 10 (counting from your registration start date).  A PGR Student Support Officer will then arrange the viva examination for the confirmation review at the next set of reviews.

In the case of a failed first attempt, the outcome report to Faculty will be to 'defer' the student until they have undertaken a second attempt. This second attempt must occur within 6 months of failing the first confirmation review.

Please note that a delayed submission of the report does not justify another delayed submission of the second report. If students fail their second attempt, no further attempts are permitted and the student is transferred to MPhil registration.

EEE reserves the right to perform spot checks on plagiarism.  A plagiarised confirmation report will be treated like a failed attempt, i.e. if it concerns the first submission, the student will have a second attempt; if it concerns the second submission then no further attempt will be permitted and PhD studies will terminate.

The Confirmation Review (CR) is one of the most important PGR progression milestones for EEE PGR students. The CR consists of a Report submitted by the PGR student and an in-person CR viva based on the submitted Report. 

To pass the CR milestone, we expect the PGR student has demonstrated that 

• the proposed work is novel - hence a relevant literature review

• the student has sufficient technical ability - hence brief inclusion of any early results

• the student will complete in the fee paying period - hence a realistic  project plan

The CR Report is a vital part of the CR process. Drafting a coherent and informative CR report is not only beneficial to the CR process, but also an important learning opportunity for our PGR students to develop skills in writing substantial technical reports. The latter should directly help in drafting PhD theses in the future. Below is the EEE School guidance for PGR students and their supervisors to prepare a good CR report.  

Typical CR report length

A typical CR report will have 20 - 27 pages in length (excluding references), with no more than 15,000 words and no more than 20 figures in total. The total page length, i.e. including title page, abstract, table of contents, references, appendices etc, should be < 40 pages. 

Typical chapters in a CR report

A confirmation review report should include the following chapters:

Introduction (2- 4 pages)

This should provide the context and convey the importance of the research problem(s) of your PhD project. Particular attention should be paid to the impact the research will make to the scientific community and, where relevant, to the wider society. The entire chapter (the text, figures and tables) should be accessible for non-experts (i.e. engineers from other sub-disciplines). 

Reserve detailed literature review and background information for the next chapter.

Literature Review and Background Theory (6-8 pages) 

The literature review should cover three aspects: (i) identify relevant prior work, (ii) identify a research niche (a gap or flaws in prior work) in the research topic. 

At the end of the literature review, outline the purpose and the scope of your PhD project. This should be concise, containing perhaps a couple of sentences (at most a short paragraph). 

When citing relevant prior work, you should present critical evaluation of the prior work, in terms of their research methodologies or approaches. 

Background Theory should contain information that the readers require in order to understand results to be presented later or results to be obtained in Year 2 onwards.  

Methods and Results in Year 1 (8-10 pages) 

Please start this chapter with a subsection titled ‘Methods’ or ‘Problem Statements’, depending on the sub-disciplines. Accordingly, use this subsection for  experimental details (setups and conditions used), simulation model details or mathematical methods used to obtain the results to be presented later in this chapter. 

(Note that this subsection will be expanded to become a standalone chapter in your PhD thesis.)

Whilst the main research output for a PhD is largely achieved in Years 2 & 3, this chapter should indicate progress towards the PhD goal and of your potential to successfully complete the PhD programme. You can also include evidence that you are developing the skills you need to complete the research successfully. 

PhD project plan (4-5 pages)

Refer to the purpose and the scope of your PhD project already outlined in Chap. 2, present your project plan for the remaining years. The Project Plan should identify likely work packages with deliverables (e.g. journal manuscripts); resources required; risk register with risks and mitigations to the project. 

The text in this chapter should refer to a Gantt chart (expected to take up an entire A4 page), which shows the approximate timelines from the end of Year 1 to the end of your fee-paying period. It should also highlight potential journal manuscripts and relevant conferences, as well as time allocated for both.

References (optional chapter) 

References can be either at the end of each chapter or at the end of the report. 

Whichever the case, do insert your references in the main text so that they are tracked automatically. This can be readily achieved whether using Word or LaTeX. If using Word, you are advised to use ‘Insert endnotes’ and ‘Cross-reference’ functions in Word. Combine these with the export function of a reference management software.

Appendix (optional chapter) 

Place any relevant supporting materials here.

The Confirmation Review viva should take place in person.

The assessment will start with a short presentation (maximum 8 minute) by the student candidate, followed by 30 - 40 minutes of questions and answers with the panel members. The review panel will comprise 2 academic members of staff who have not had any association with your research project. The presentation should give a brief overview of the research field and also of the research undertaken in your first year. This will be followed by a discussion between you and the assessors who will typically ask both broad and specific questions related to the student's research and research training.

The EEE PGR Student Support Officer will organise the viva for you and confirm these details with you.

Outcome of the Confirmation Review

Following the confirmation review the possible outcomes are:

• Pass - confirmation of doctoral status

• Resubmit (without viva) - your result is pending until you have provided the necessary amendments to your original confirmation review. You will not need to undertake another viva.

• Resubmit (with viva) - your result is pending and a second attempt is permitted - this is to take place within 6 months of the first meeting date. This can be either submission of an improved report or both, a new report with a second viva exam

• Fail - student is transferred to MPhil programme (this normally only occurs following a second attempt)

Following Faculty approval of the Department's recommendation that registration should remain as PhD, you will receive formal notification in the form of a certified copy of the confirmation review form detailing the revised registration period and time limit. If you do not pass the confirmation review, you will be permitted to resubmit your report and undergo a second and final review which must be completed in a maximum of 6 months following the date of the first meeting. If you fail this, your registration will automatically be transferred to MPhil.

*Any student who fails their confirmation review and is transferred to MPhil will have their time limit reduced to 3 years in line with the MPhil time limit.

None or Late Submission of Confirmation Report

Prior to your submission date (end of month 9) you will be informed of a date of your confirmation review meeting. It is essential therefore that you submit your report by month 9 to allow assessors adequate time to review the report in advance of the meeting. If your report is not submitted by the deadline your meeting will be cancelled and you will have failed your first attempt. You will then be granted a second and final attempt which must be submitted within 6 months. If you fail to submit by the revised deadline you will automatically be transferred to MPhil registration.

You may appeal against an unfavourable decision. In the first instance, a case should be made to the Postgraduate Tutor. If there is a conflict of interest then the case is referred to the Head of School or to an independent senior academic member of the School. You are also encouraged to contact Research & Innovation Services for guidance. More details can be found on the University of Sheffield Complaint and Appeals Procedure web page.