Formal reviews of progress

All PhD postgraduate researchers are subject to formal reviews of progress. You, your supervisor(s) and your Progression Panel document your progress review in SkillsForge.

The purpose of formal reviews of progress is to ensure that you are making satisfactory progress with your research project and other elements of your PhD programme. A formal review of progress should give you a clear sense of the progress you are making on your degree but the decision of a progression panel does not serve as a prediction for the outcome of the final examination. 

Formal reviews of progress take place on an annual basis, towards the end of each year of enrolment, for full-time PhD postgraduate researchers, and on a biennial basis for part-time PhD postgraduate researchers. Formal reviews of progress are not required for entry into a continuation period, where this is permitted. 

Procedure

In a formal review of progress, you will be assessed against University progression criteria which set out the threshold requirements for progression to the next year (or equivalent period for part-time postgraduate researchers). The assessment is undertaken by a progression panel, which is independent of your supervisor(s) to gain an external perspective on the progress that you are making, and to ensure that your relationship with your supervisor remains focused on your development as a researcher. 

The progression panel will consider your evidence and the supervisor’s report at a progress review meeting. Based on these elements, the progression panel will make a decision as to whether you have met, exceeded or not met the relevant University progression criteria as well as a recommendation regarding your progression.

You have a maximum of two opportunities to meet the relevant University progression criteria at each formal review of progress. If you have not met the relevant University progression criteria after two attempts you will have failed the progression point and will be transferred to an alternative programme or your enrolment will be terminated.

Your progression panel

In the Department of Health Sciences, the Departmental Education Committee monitors and administers all aspects of the research degrees progression policy. In particular, they will: 

• approve membership of all progression panels (usually consist of 3-4 members of staff including TAP members and an independent Chair) 

• assign Chairs of all progression panels 

• oversee progression panels decisions 

• report to the Research Committee outcomes of progression 

You will normally be notified of your progression panel during the term prior to the panel meeting. 

University progression criteria and evidence 

Please see the Policy on Research Degrees for the University progression criteria.

Departmental Progression Criteria and Evidence (Local)

First formal review of progress

• • • • • Presentation (10 minutes). This will include background to research undertaken, a description of the methods used, or those likely to be used, and the aims and objectives. 

        • Written piece of work (4,000-6,000 words). This would articulate the research question, demonstrate knowledge of the field, and could  be a literature review. 

        • Review of training completed. Modules and associated marks do not form part of the progression requirements. Advice on modules that might be beneficial to the student should form part of the TAP process.

        • Timetable for second year. This will need to identify key milestones against which progress can be assessed.

        • Progression report from supervisor. 

Second formal review of progress

• • • • • Presentation (20 minutes). This will include refining the research question and the original contribution to the field, results of research [e.g. data management; ethics; clarity on methods] and plans for the final year. It is expected that the student will demonstrate a significant understanding of the research area and methodologies. 

        • Written report appropriate to thesis (6,000-8,000 words). This will vary depending on the type of thesis being produced, and may include one of the following: systematic review, ethics protocol, description of trial protocol, or preliminary results chapter, or, especially for candidates considering a journal style thesis, a manuscript (submitted, in-press or published). This will demonstrate the student’s ability to write in an appropriate academic format for peer-review.

        • Review of training completed. Modules and associated marks do not form part of the progression requirements. Advice on modules that might be beneficial to the student should form part of the TAP process.

        • Timetable for third year. This will need to identify key milestones against which progress can be assessed.

        • Progression report from supervisor

Progress review meeting

The second TAP meeting each year will be adapted to include the annual progression review meeting, so that in addition to making a formal decision about progression, the progression panel will work with you to deliver the developmental aspect of the TAP and to complete the TAP form.

During the progression meeting you will give a presentation, followed by a question and answer session, receive feedback on your written report, discuss your training (completed/future) and describe your plans for the following year.

All written work should be submitted (on SkillsForge) 10 days prior to the date of the progression meeting.

Your supervisor(s) will not be part of the decision making panel but will be expected to submit a report in advance of the progression meeting which will be considered by the panel in determining if you have achieved the required standard to progress to the next phase.

Exceptional circumstances

If you have any exceptional circumstances that may impact on a formal review of progress then you should contact your supervisor as soon as possible to discuss your options.