Postgraduate Research Regulations

Research degrees at Staffordshire University are governed and awarded by the Graduate School.

Committee (GSC), on behalf of the University’s Academic Board.

The following research degrees are included in these regulations:

• MPhil: Master of Philosophy
• PhD: Doctor of Philosophy
• Professional Doctorate

These regulations include all level 8 qualifications (as defined in the national qualifications framework) with the exclusion of PhD by Published Works.

Candidates and supervisors should also refer to the PGR policies and guidance which are published on the Research Hub and their School PGR handbook or the relevant Professional Doctorate course handbook.

The admissions process for research degrees will be conducted in accordance with the principles set out in the University’s Admissions Policy.

There will normally be up to three entry points per academic year: September, January and April.

In order for a student to be awarded a PhD or other doctoral degree from the University of Staffordshire they must satisfy the examiners that they meet the descriptor for a higher education qualification at level 8 (doctoral degree) on the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications of UK Doctoral Degree Awarding Bodies.

University of Staffordshire Doctoral degrees will be awarded to students who have demonstrated:

• the creation and interpretation of new knowledge, through original research or other advanced scholarship, of a quality to satisfy peer review, extend the forefront of the discipline, and merit publication
• a systematic acquisition and understanding of a substantial body of knowledge which is at the forefront of an academic discipline or area of professional practice
• the general ability to conceptualise, design and implement a project for the generation of new knowledge, applications or understanding at the forefront of the discipline, and to adjust the project design in the light of unforeseen problems
• a detailed understanding of applicable techniques for research and advanced academic enquiry.

Typically, holders of a doctoral degree will be able to:

• make informed judgements on complex issues in specialist fields, often in the absence of complete data, and be able to communicate their ideas and conclusions clearly and effectively to specialist and non-specialist audiences
• continue to undertake pure and/or applied research and development at an advanced level, contributing substantially to the development of new techniques, ideas or approaches.

And holders will have:

• the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring the exercise of personal responsibility and largely autonomous initiative in complex and unpredictable situations, in professional or equivalent environments.

In order for a student to be awarded a Master of Philosophy (MPhil) from the University of Staffordshire they must satisfy the examiners that they meet the descriptor for a higher education qualification at level 7 (doctoral degree) on the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications of UK Doctoral Degree Awarding Bodies.

University of Staffordshire MPhil degrees will be awarded to students who have demonstrated:

• a systematic understanding of knowledge, and a critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, much of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of their academic discipline, field of study or area of professional practice
• a comprehensive understanding of techniques applicable to their own research or advanced scholarship
• originality in the application of knowledge, together with a practical understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline
• conceptual understanding that enables the student:
  • to evaluate critically current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline
  • to evaluate methodologies and develop critiques of them and, where appropriate, to propose new hypotheses.

Typically, holders of the qualification will be able to:

• deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively, make sound judgements in the absence of complete data, and communicate their conclusions clearly to specialist and non-specialist audiences
• demonstrate self-direction and originality in tackling and solving problems, and act autonomously in planning and implementing tasks at a professional or equivalent level
• continue to advance their knowledge and understanding, and to develop new skills to a high level.

And holders will have:

• the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring:
• the exercise of initiative and personal responsibility
• decision-making in complex and unpredictable situations
• the independent learning ability required for continuing professional development.

The entry requirements are as follows, unless otherwise specified (such as in accordance with requirements of an accrediting or professional body):

• MPhil – normally a minimum of 2:1 in undergraduate degree or equivalent professional experience, to be evaluated based on the application form and interview.
• PhD – normally a minimum of 2:1 in undergraduate degree and masters-level qualification or equivalent professional experience, to be evaluated based on the application form, research proposal and interview.

The criteria for evaluating a PhD research proposal will include (but not be restricted to): originality of proposed contribution to knowledge; academic fit with the University, access to research resources either on campus or off-site (particularly relevant to applicants for Distance Learning modes of study), the scale and scope of research to be completed according to the timescales of a PhD.

In addition, applicants for creative arts or practice-based research degrees may also be asked to provide a portfolio to be assessed as part of the selection process.

• Professional Doctorates - normally a minimum of 2:1 in undergraduate degree and masters-level qualification or equivalent professional experience, to be evaluated based on the application form and interview.
• For international students, the University normally requires a minimum IELTS score of 6.5 overall. Some disciplines may require a higher IELTS score in line with professional and regulatory requirements. Normally, no discipline will accept an overall score below 6.5, with a minimum of 6.0 in no more than one component. Some International students are also required to meet UKVI requirements for the appropriate study visa. A valid ATAS certificate (where required) must be secured as a prerequisite to enrolment.

The process and timescales for appeals against admissions decisions for research degrees will be conducted in accordance with the principles set out in the University’s Admissions Policy.

The appeal letter should be sent to the Director of Research and PGR who will determine whether there are grounds for the application to be re-considered.

The fees for research degrees are published on the University’s website.Failure to pay the required fees may result in a candidate’s withdrawal from their course. Details are provided in the University’s Tuition Fee Policy.

All research degree candidates must enrol with the University before they begin their studies. All candidates must re-enrol annually with the University when requested to do so. Upon enrolment (and annual re-enrolment), candidates will be advised of, and asked to acknowledge, any regulation changes.

The following periods of registration apply:

Table 1: Periods of registration

The registration periods in table 1 may be varied where this is a requirement of a relevant accrediting or professional body.

Candidates are expected to have completed their research, submitted their thesis and undertaken their viva examination within the maximum registration period for their award.

Normally, the maximum registration period permitted by the University as outlined in table 1, includes any period of approved absence.

In exceptional circumstances (such as maternity/ parental leave or a period of serious ill health), and with appropriate evidence, the university may pause a candidate’s period of registration during a break of study, thereby extending the maximum period of registration.

All breaks in study must have prior consent of the university.  Other than in the case of maternity/paternity leave or a period of ill health, applications for a break of study will require the submission, by the candidate of a detailed plan for completion within the maximum period of registration.  The feasibility of this plan must be confirmed by the supervisory team.  Applications for a break of study will be approved by the PGR Awards Board. When returning from a break in study, candidates will have the opportunity to review and revise their research plan with their supervisor.

Candidates may wish to change their mode of study from full-time to part-time (or vice versa).

Candidates must have prior consent from their supervisor before changing their mode of study and have agreed a realistic plan to complete their studies in a timely manner. The request and detailed plan will be submitted by the candidate and will be approved by the PGR Awards Board. Where relevant, approval of changes in mode of study should include consultation between the supervisor and the candidate’s employing organisation.

A candidate’s registration period will be recalculated to reflect their new mode of study. For example: If a candidate commenced their PhD studies full-time and, after 30 months, applied to change to part-time, the remaining 6 months of their full-time registration period will be re-calculated pro- rata (to 12 months) to reflect the change in study mode. The deadline for the submission of the candidate’s thesis/ portfolio will be recalculated accordingly.

Some professional doctorate candidates may be exempt from studying one or more taught modules because they have demonstrated prior learning in accordance with the University’s RPL procedure. In some cases, these candidates may have a shorter period of registration as calculated pro-rata in accordance with table 1, above.

Candidates will normally have a supervisory team comprising a principal supervisor and second supervisor (who will normally both be employees of university).  An external supervisor from a relevant professional setting or academic partner may also be appointed to the supervisory team.

All supervisors who are employees of the university are expected to have completed the University’s supervision training and to continue to update their supervisory practice by attending supervisory CPD sessions.

The principal supervisor should normally have either supervised to successful completion a minimum of one postgraduate research degree at the level they are intending to supervise. An employee of the University who does not meet this requirement may exceptionally, with approval of the Head of Department and School Associate Dean for Research and Innovation, be appointed as a Principal Supervisor.

Supervision meetings are intended to support the development of the researcher and research project (or other work associated with the portfolio), identify developmental needs (e.g. training or resources) and to ensure the research project and doctorate progresses appropriately.

Supervision meetings should be held regularly, and the University expects that normally an average of 10 meetings per annum will be held for full-time candidates These meetings may be held either face-to-face or virtually. For part-time candidates, the University expects supervision meetings to be held regularly and on average five per annum will be held. PSRB requirements for some professional doctorates may specify more regular contact. It is the candidate’s responsibility to keep a record of each supervisory meeting and to ensure that this is signed-off by the supervisory team and uploaded to the student record system.

For candidates who require a visa to study in the UK, the regularity of supervisory contact must be in accordance with UKVI requirements.

Candidates for Professional Doctorate programmes will be allocated a supervision team at or before the point at which they commence the individual research stage of their programme. On programmes with specific PSRB requirements, the supervision arrangements may vary from those above as specified in the relevant Course Handbook.

The candidate and supervisory team should regularly discuss and agree any training and development which is required to develop the candidate’s knowledge and expertise to progress the research and complete the thesis, as well as support the candidate’s wider professional development as a researcher.  Plans for how this will be achieved should be recorded in a Personal Development Plan (PDP) which is reviewed annually.

For PhD students the candidate’s training and development needs will be assessed by the supervisors and supervisee, based on the research project and the candidate’s prior experience. Professional Doctorate students will normally have a set programme of teaching and assignments to meet the course competencies, so the PDP will only normally consider any additional training needs which are required during the research phase.

Candidates and supervisors can select appropriate training from opportunities offered by the University, as well as relevant external training opportunities such as those offered by professional bodies.  Candidates will also need to complete any mandatory training required in relation to e.g. health and safety, research ethics and research governance.

All research degree candidates will undergo regular reviews of their progress throughout their studies.  Details of the different mechanisms used to monitor progress are detailed in the Policy for Postgraduate Engagement and Progress Monitoring.

Formal Progress Reviews

Research degree candidates are required to participate in formal progress review processes.  The purpose of these is to provide an independent evaluation that the candidate has sufficient understanding of the subject area and is making satisfactory progress in line with the expectations in the Policy for Postgraduate Engagement and Progress Monitoring.

The number and timing of the independent progress reviews required depends on the candidate’s programme and mode of study. 

MPhil Progress Review

MPhil candidates will have one formal independent review either at 5 months (full-time) or ten months (part-time) registration.  

The possible outcomes of the review are:

• Continue with registration and write up for submission
• Resubmission (2 months full-time, 4 months part-time)
• Withdrawal

Candidates will only have one opportunity for resubmission.

Possible outcomes of the resubmission are:

• Continue with registration and write up for submission
• Withdrawal

An MPhil student who has made satisfactory progress at the time of their original progress review may, with the consent of their supervisors, apply to the School Academic Committee to transfer to a PhD pathway. If this transfer is approved, the PhD Early Progress Review is waived.

PhD Progress Reviews

PhD candidates will have two formal reviews. An Early Progress Review will be conducted at 10 months (full-time), 20 months (part-time) registration.  A Final Progress Review will be conducted at 30 months (full time), 60 months (part-time).

Early Progress Review

The possible outcomes of this review are:

• Continue with PhD registration
• Resubmission (2 months full-time, 4 months part-time)
• Withdrawal with the option to re-register as an MPhil candidate
• Withdrawal

Candidates will only have one opportunity for resubmission.

Possible outcomes of the resubmission are:

• Continue with PhD registration
• Transfer to MPhil registration
• Withdrawal

Final Progress Review

 The possible outcomes of this review are:

• Continue with registration and write up for submission
• Resubmission (2 months full-time, 4 months part-time)
• Write up for submission of an MPhil
• Withdrawal

Candidates will only have one opportunity for resubmission

Possible outcomes of the resubmission are:

• Continue with registration and write up for submission
• Write up for submission of an MPhil
• Withdrawal

Professional Doctorate Progress Reviews

For Professional Doctorates, progress is primarily assessed at the end of taught modules with one formal review during the research stage. However, programmes with specific PSRB requirements may employ a different pattern of regular reviews as described in the Course Handbook.

Unless required otherwise by a PSRB, Professional Doctorate candidates will normally undertake a single progress review at 30 months (full-time) or 60 months (part-time). Some professional/regulated professional doctorates may have different timescales, which are detailed in the programme specification.

The possible outcomes of this review are:

• Continue with registration and write up for submission
• Resubmission (2 months full-time, 4 months part-time)
• Withdrawal*

Candidates will only have one opportunity for resubmission

Possible outcomes of the resubmission are:

• Continue with registration and write up for submission
• Withdrawal*

*In the case of a recommendation of withdrawal, candidate may be eligible for a lower award for completion of the taught element of the programme where this is detailed in the programme specification.

Appeals

Any appeals against the outcomes of a progress review will be considered in accordance with the research degree appeals process (see appeals section below).

Normally, the doctorate should be completed and submitted within the specified 36-month registration period (72 months for part-time candidates) as per table 1. For Professional Doctorate candidates, completion comprises the submission of the thesis/portfolio and the successful completion of all taught modules.

For PhD and Professional Doctorate candidates who have completed all the primary research activities associated with their doctorate (ie data collection, experimentation, analysis) the University will normally allow an additional ‘writing up’ period up to the maximum period of registration shown in table 1 of no more than 12 months (full-time programme) or 24 months (part-time programme).  The ‘writing up’ period is for candidates to complete the final stages of their doctorate and includes the writing, submission and viva examination and cannot be used to conduct primary research.

To enter the ‘writing up’ period a candidate must have completed the minimum registration period for their award and successfully passed their final progress review (including any amendments.

At the Final Progress Review, reviewer(s) of PhD and Professional Doctorates will confirm one of the following:

• That the candidate is likely to submit their thesis within the prescribed minimum registration period of 36 months (full-time) or 72 months (part-time).  In such cases it is considered that the candidate does not require a ‘writing up’ period at the end of their minimum registration period, but they remain eligible for one.
• That the candidate has already or will have completed all the primary research associated with their doctorate by the end of the minimum registration period of 36 months (full-time) or 72 months (part time).  In such cases the candidate will be eligible to enter the ‘writing up’ period at the end of their minimum registration period.
• That the candidate will not have completed all the primary research associated with their doctorate by the end of the minimum registration period of 36 months (full-time) or 72 months (part-time).  In such cases the candidate will need to apply for an extension to normal registration and will not be eligible to enter the ‘writing up’ period until the primary research is completed.

Candidates who are eligible for the ‘writing up’ period will be required to pay a registration fee as determined by the University.   Candidates who are not eligible to enter the ‘writing up’ period either because they have not yet completed their primary research or passed their final progress review will continue to be liable for the full registration fee up until the point that these milestones are achieved.

There is no provision for a writing up period for MPhil candidates.

The examination of a research degree comprises two parts:

1. The submission of a thesis/ portfolio
2. The successful defence of that thesis/ portfolio in an oral examination (commonly called the viva or viva voce)

The procedure by which the candidate should notify the university of their intention to submit the thesis is detailed in the University’s Policy on Doctoral Examination Process. It is the candidate’s responsibility to ensure that the thesis/portfolio format is in accordance with the requirements of the University as outlined in the guidance on Format and Submission of the Doctoral Thesis and the Policy on PhD/Doctorate by Publication (where applicable).

After a candidate submits their thesis/ portfolio, Registry Services will arrange the viva examination.

Appointment of Examiners

Each research degree candidate will be examined by at least two, and not normally more than three, examiners. One of these examiners will be internal (i.e. an employee of the University) and the other(s) will be external (i.e. an employee of another University). Where the research degree candidate is also employed as a member of staff at the University, there must be two external examiners and no internal.

An internal examiner must be an employee of the University and must not be, or have ever been, part of the candidate’s supervisory team.

An external examiner(s) should normally hold, or within the last two years have held an academic appointment in another higher education institution or be a professional/practitioner with expertise in the relevant subject area.

Due to the requirements of professional or accrediting bodies, examination teams for some Professional Doctorate programmes may have additional requirements for examiners (such as accreditation from professional bodies e.g. HCPC or BPS). Where appropriate, these will be detailed in course handbooks.

External examiners must be independent from the University, the candidate and the supervisory team.  The University’s Policy on Doctoral Examination Process identifies areas of potential conflicts of interest which prohibit the appointment of examiners.

Examiners shall be recommended by the candidate’s supervisors and approved by the PGR Award Board. The Board shall satisfy itself that the examination team as a whole has an appropriate subject expertise and experience. Examination teams must have, between them, a minimum of three previous examinations at the level to be examined.

Examination teams should normally be appointed at least six months before submission, and no later than the final progress review. The University will determine the fees and expenses of external examiners.

Appointment of the Independent Chair

All examinations will be overseen by an independent chair who is appointed from an approved list.  The Chair will not be from the same department as the student and must not have had any prior connection with the project or student.

Independent Chairs are experienced researchers who have completed the relevant training.

Full details of the role and responsibilities of the Independent Chair is detailed in the University’s Policy

The Viva

A candidate’s principal supervisor may attend the viva examination, with the permission of the candidate, but must not contribute to the examination in any way, unless specifically asked a question through the chair.

The purpose of the viva examination is to assesses whether the thesis is of sufficient standard to merit the award of the degree for which it is submitted including:

• For the examiners to satisfy themselves that the research and its description in the thesis/portfolio is the candidate’s own work.
• To provide the candidate with the opportunity to clarify any ambiguities that the examiners have after assessing the written thesis/portfolio.
• To enable the candidate to demonstrate that they meet any aspects of the doctoral degree criteria which haven’t yet been achieved through the written thesis/portfolio.

The outcomes of the research degree examination are:

• Direct Award
• Minor corrections
• Major corrections
• Major corrections with a second oral examination
• Award of an MPhil (PhD candidates only)
• Award of an MRes (Professional Doctorate candidates only  - where this is approved exit award for the taught element of the programme.
• No Award

The descriptors for each of these outcomes and the normal time frames associated with any correction period are contained in the University’s Policy on Doctoral Examination Process.

Examiner's Reports

Prior to the oral examination, the examiners are expected to read and independently assess the thesis/portfolio against the University of Staffordshire criteria for the award of a research degree.  

In making their assessment the examiners should consider the quantity, quality and standard of research that might reasonably be expected to be completed within the timeframe of the award. The examiners should submit their independent pre-viva report at least 5 working days before the viva.

Following the examination the examiners should complete a joint report on the examination and their recommended outcome. The joint report should be submitted as soon as possible following the examination (and within a maximum of one week).  The joint report should detail any amendments that the candidate is required to make.  The examiners’ preliminary independent reports and joint report must together provide sufficiently detailed comments to enable the University to satisfy itself that the criteria for the award of the degree have been met.

The recommendation of the examiners is subject to the approval of the PGR Award Board.

Where the examiners are unable to agree on a joint report and recommendation, they must submit separate reports giving justification for their recommendation.  The PGR Award Board will consider and discuss the separate reports to determine whether a final outcome can be agreed.  If this is not possible, the Board may appoint a new external examiner who will re-examine the thesis and candidate.

Submission of Amended Thesis

Candidates are expected to undertake any amendments and revise their thesis within the expected timeframe detailed in the University’s Policy on the Doctoral Examination Process.  In exceptional circumstances they may request an extension to this timeframe.

Should a candidate fail to submit the revised thesis within the agreed timeframe without having sought an extension, or responded to communications from the university, they will assume to have withdrawn.

All submissions/re-submissions must be made via Registry Services.

Upon submission of the revised thesis, the examiner(s) nominated by examination team will review the changes made. If satisfied that all required corrections have been made, the examiner(s) will recommend to the university that the degree can be awarded.

Where in the examiner(s) view the amendments are incomplete or the required changes to the re-submitted thesis still do not demonstrate the doctoral outcomes, the candidate will be given one further opportunity to address this.

The examiners cannot ask the candidate to undertake any new changes or further work which was not part of the original amendments.

Following notification of the award of their degree, the candidate must submit one electronic copy of the final version of the thesis/ portfolio to Registry Services. Candidates should also submit their completed British Library Electronic Thesis Online System (Ethos) form and a copyright declaration form.  The final thesis will also be lodged in the University’s Open Access online repository.

Candidates may, in exceptional circumstances, apply (before or at the time of the submission of the thesis for examination) for access to the thesis to be delayed, restricted or embargoed. The maximum length of delay that can be requested is normally 12 months, except in exceptional circumstances.  Further information is contained in the Policy on Restricting Access to a Research Degree Thesis.

An academic appeal is defined here as an appeal against the outcome of a progress review or a viva examination. Any other concerns (e.g. regarding supervision or resources) should be progressed as a student complaint.

For an appeal against the decision of a progress review, or against the decision of the final examiners, the grounds for appeal will be:

a) Your results have been affected by the University not following its own assessment procedure.  Academic use their knowledge and expertise to assess your work. This is academic judgement. You cannot appeal because in your opinion this judgment is wrong.

b) You had exceptional circumstances which you could not reasonably apply for, or evidence, using the Exceptional Circumstances Procedure. 

For information on both complaints and appeals please refer to the Complaints and Appeals Procedure.