Procedure: Higher degree by research – submission and examination of theses

Purpose

This document describes the thesis submission and examination procedures for the Higher Degree by Research (HDR) programs Master of Philosophy, Professional Doctorate, or Doctor of Philosophy.

Procedure

General

1. This document should be read in conjunction with the Research Awards Rule.
2. In cases where a Delegated Authority is also Primary Supervisor for a candidate, the Associate Dean appoints an alternate individual to be a Delegated Authority under the Research Awards Rules for the purposes of that candidate.
3. If at any stage of the submission or examination process an allegation of academic misconduct is raised it is investigated under the Academic Integrity Rule 2021. Advice is available from policy.regs@anu.edu.au.

Pre-Submission of Thesis

Oral Presentation

4. An oral presentation is a required milestone, which is completed satisfactorily prior to the submission of a thesis. For further details, please refer to the Procedure: Higher degree by research – candidature progression.

Notification of Intent to Submit

5. Two months prior to submission, and after consulting their supervisory panel, a candidate should commence the Notification of Intent to Submit (NOI) milestone containing:

1. candidate name;
2. candidate ID;
3. thesis title;
4. date on which the thesis is expected to be submitted;
5. for candidates who commenced prior to 1 July 2024, an indication of whether they are opting in to an oral examination;
6. any necessary adjustments for oral examination; and
7. confirmation from the Primary Supervisor that the candidate has consulted with their panel

6. If the intended submission date changes, the candidate uses the ISIS Manage My Degree eForm to update their intended submission date.

Early Submission

7. A candidate wishing to submit prior to the minimum duration for the program specified in the Research Awards Rule must obtain the approval of the Delegated Authority for early submission, prior to the submission date.

Format - Length

8. The maximum length for a Doctor of Philosophy thesis is 100,000 words and a Master of Philosophy or Professional Doctorate is 60,000 words. This figure is exclusive of footnotes, tables, figures, maps, bibliographies and appendices, but appendices must be limited to material necessary in support of the main argument of the thesis. Footnotes must only be used for reference or clarification purposes and should not contain substantive arguments or information.
9. Prior to notification of intention to submit, the Delegated Authority may approve:

1. A new length for theses in excess of this length;
2. An alternate format for expressing the maximum requirement - such as page count - if words are not an appropriate measure.

Format - Content

10. The first page of the thesis gives its title, the candidate's name in full and the month and year of its submission for examination. It includes the statement:

"A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor [or Master, as appropriate] of Philosophy of The Australian National University."

11. It also includes a copyright notice providing the full legal name of the author, centred at the bottom of the page:

© Copyright by [Candidate’s Full Name] [Year]

All Rights Reserved

12. The second page contains a statement signed by the candidate, indicating the extent to which the thesis is their own original work, if the research is conducted jointly with another person, clearly indicates the nature and extent of the candidate’s contribution to the research, and a word count or equivalent.
13. Acknowledgments are included in the following pages.
14. Third party editorial advice is provided as per the Guideline: Higher Degree by Research - Editing of Theses.
15. When third party editorial advice has been provided the name of the editor and a brief description of the service rendered is printed in the acknowledgements as per the Australian standards for editing practice. If the third party editor's current or former area of academic specialisation is similar to that of the candidate, this is also stated in the acknowledgements. If the candidate uses digital editing tools or generative AI this should be acknowledged, as advised within the Guideline: Higher degree by research – editing of theses.
16. An abstract of 250-500 words is on the page or pages following the acknowledgement. The electronic version of the abstract must use standard text only.
17. A table of contents appears following the abstract.
18. A bibliography of works to which reference has been made is included at the end of the thesis. The bibliographical standards applied are consistent with the discipline.

Thesis in Standard Format

19. A thesis submitted in standard format is of International Standards Organisation (ISO) A4 size (297mm x 210mm), unless the diagrams, tables etc. do not fit appropriately on this size, in which case it may be printed on ISO B4 size (353mm x 250mm).
20. The format of text in a thesis must comply with the following formatting:

1. text is double spaced or one and a half spaced. Single spacing is used only for indented quotations, footnotes and bibliographies.
2. text is in a font that is easy to read, and no smaller than 11 points for text and 9 points for footnote text. For a digital thesis, it is recommended to use Arial or another Sans-Serif font. For more information, please refer to the ANU Style Guide.
3. All margins are with header and footing settings as 2.5cm from the top and bottom:

Thesis by Compilation

21. The format of a thesis by compilation is outlined in the Procedure: Higher degree by research thesis by compilation and thesis by creative works.

Thesis in an Alternative Format

22. A thesis is in an alternative format if it consists of, or includes, video recordings, film or other works of visual or sonic arts, computer software, digital material or other non-written material.
23. Candidates intending to submit for examination a thesis in an alternative format must obtain endorsement from their supervisory panel, and approval from the Delegated Authority about the format of their thesis more than 12 months prior to submission, and no later than 6 months prior to submission.

Thesis by Creative Works

24. The submission of a thesis by creative works is undertaken as per the Procedure: Higher degree by research thesis by compilation and thesis by creative works.

Use of Images and Figures under Copyright

25. Use of images and figures must accord with the principles contained in the ANU Library guidance on Copyright for Higher Degree Research students.

Use of Confidential Material

26. Use of confidential information in a thesis is according to the Use of Confidential or Restricted Information Theses procedure.

Prior to Thesis Submission

27. The candidate is required to upload their final thesis to the iThenticate tool in order to generate a Similarity Report. Prior to submission candidates should share their Similarity Report with their Primary Supervisor in order to address any potential academic integrity issues. Once any identified issues are addressed the candidate should generate a final Similarity Report ready for uploading as part of the Thesis Submission eForm process.

Submission Process

28. The candidate is required to upload one electronic copy of their thesis via the Thesis Submission eForm for access by the appointed examiners.
29. The candidate is required to upload an iThenticate Similarity Report (generated via uploading of the final thesis to iThenticate) to the Thesis Submission eForm.

Supervisor’s Endorsement

30. The Primary Supervisor confirms to the Graduate Research Office that the thesis is in the correct format for submission and determines whether to endorse submission of the thesis. Where a Primary Supervisor considers that a thesis will experience difficulty in the examination process, they do not endorse its submission.
31. The supervisor’s endorsement confirms that the thesis title and abstract provided by the candidate are correct.
32. The Primary Supervisor certifies whether to the best of their knowledge the candidate has complied with the University's rules and regulations relating to candidature for the degree.
33. The Primary Supervisor reviews the iThenticate Similarity Report and undertakes a final academic integrity check for potential plagiarism. If satisfied, the Primary Supervisor can endorse the thesis submission certifying to the best of their knowledge that there are no identified academic integrity issues.
34. If the academic integrity check prompts the supervisor to request further amendments to the thesis due to unresolved academic integrity issues, the Primary Supervisor can request further edits to the thesis to be undertaken by the candidate through the eForm. The candidate will then have an opportunity to re-upload another updated Similarity Report and final thesis for Primary Supervisor endorsement.
35. Once the Primary Supervisor endorses the thesis submission, certifying to the best of their knowledge that there are no identified academic integrity issues the Thesis Submission eForm is complete.

Submission without Supervisor’s Endorsement

36. Where a Primary Supervisor does not endorse the submission of a thesis and a candidate still wishes to submit, the Primary Supervisor provides a statement to the Delegated Authority indicating why they do not believe the thesis suitable for submission to examiners.
37. The Delegated Authority will organise for the thesis to be reviewed by a member of academic staff who is not the Primary Supervisor.
38. On receipt of advice from the member of academic staff, the Delegated Authority will:

1. Meet with, and provide advice to, the candidate; and
2. Provide written feedback from the reader including advice on the suitability for submission to the candidate.

39. If the candidate still wishes to submit without the endorsement of their supervisor, the submission and examination process proceeds as per the standard process. The Delegated Authority will recommend examiners on behalf of the Primary Supervisor. Examiners must not be notified that the thesis has been submitted without the endorsement of the supervisor and the University until a final outcome of the examination process is determined by the Associate Dean, and the award of the degree is determined.
40. Where a Primary Supervisor, after discussions with the candidate, does not endorse the submission of a thesis on academic integrity grounds and a candidate still wishes to submit, the Primary Supervisor provides a statement to the Delegated Authority indicating why they do not believe the thesis suitable for submission to examiners. This should include a detailed list of potential academic integrity issues that have not been resolved after requesting these to be addressed and the candidate being provided sufficient time to address the issues.
41. The Delegated Authority will review the recommendations from the Primary Supervisor in undertaking a further academic integrity check to determine any outstanding academic integrity issues.
42. The Delegated Authority will then:

1. Decide if the thesis should proceed to examination if they have determined, to the best of their knowledge, that there are no identified academic issues; or
2. Meet with, and provide advice to, the candidate if they have determined there are remaining identified academic integrity issues; and
3. Provide written feedback outlining any academic integrity issues that are required to be addressed by the candidate prior to submission.

43. If the Delegated Authority determines there are remaining identified academic integrity issues in 42 (b, c), the Delegated Authority can return the Thesis Submission eForm to the candidate for amendment or close the form. A new Thesis Submission eForm is then made available to the candidate to enable resubmission once the potential academic integrity issues have been addressed by the candidate as outlined by the Delegated Authority.

Appointment of Examiners

44. The Nomination of Examiners form is completed once a candidate provides a notification of intent to submit but before they submit their thesis.
45. A candidate is entitled to suggest potential examiners to their supervisor, and to provide the names of persons that they would prefer not to examine the thesis. A candidate is not entitled to be informed of whether their suggestions have been followed in the appointment of the examiners.
46. Supervisors confirm the expected availability of examiners prior to completing the Nomination of Examiners form.
47. A minimum of two external expert examiners who have international standing are appointed by the Associate Dean on the recommendation of the Delegated Authority.
48. Three or more examiners may be appointed to provide the necessary breadth of expertise for the research topic.
49. Examiners are of international standing in a discipline relevant to the thesis research with some experience in examining theses. International standing may be demonstrated through a number of means including but not limited to:

1. Publication record;
2. Employment record;
3. Contribution to the field; and
4. Peer regard and esteem measures.

50. If an examiner agrees to their nomination, they are informed of any changes to the proposed submission date by the Graduate Research Office. An alternate examiner is appointed by the Associate Dean if the initial examiner is no longer available due to a change in submission date.
51. An additional examiner may be appointed by the Associate Dean on the recommendation of the Delegated Authority subsequent to the initial appointment:

1. to resolve disagreements in the thesis examination process; or
2. where an examiner’s report has not been received for an extended period of time. The examiner has been withdrawn and has been notified by GRO.

52. In determining the award of the degree, all examiners reports received are considered.

Conflict of Interest

53. Any examiner conflict of interest or potential conflict of interest must be declared to the Associate Dean by anyone who becomes aware of it, and may include but is not limited to:

1. Involvement with the project on which the thesis is presented;
2. Collaboration with the candidate or members of the supervisory panel within the last five years;
3. A close personal relationship with the candidate or members of the supervisory panel;
4. A financial or personal prestige interest in the outcomes of the research;
5. Ethical, personal, political or religious views that may be in conflict with the thesis or marking process; or
6. Ownership of or employment with an organisation directly affected by the research.

54. On receiving notification of an actual or potential conflict of interest the Associate Dean discusses the potential conflict with relevant parties, which must include the Delegated Authority, and also includes (but is not limited to):

1. The supervisory panel including Primary Supervisor and chair of panel; and/or
2. The examiner.

55. On the basis of those discussions, the Associate Dean determines whether:

1. A prima facie conflict of interest exists and so excludes the relevant examiner from the examination process; or
2. That no prima facie conflict of interest exists and allows the examiner to continue in their role.

56. If it is unclear whether a conflict of interest exists, the relevant examiner is to be excluded from the examination process
57. The rationale for any determination is recorded on the candidate file.

Examination Process without oral examination

58. Candidates who began their candidature before July 2024 are entitled to undergo thesis examination without an oral examination, though they may opt in to oral examination at the Notice of Intent to submit stage. If a candidate opts in, the oral examination process detailed from paragraphs 80-110 of this procedure should be followed.
59. Examiners of Theses submitted in standard format or as a thesis by compilation, are provided a copy of the thesis and the University guidelines for Examination of HDR Theses, and are requested to examine the thesis and return a report within two months for a non-oral examination.
60. Once a candidate has submitted their thesis for examination:

1. An examiner must not knowingly communicate about the research, the thesis or the process of examination directly with the candidate, the candidate’s supervisory panel or other examiners until the thesis has been approved for award;
2. A candidate must not knowingly communicate directly with an examiner about the research, the thesis or the process of examination until the thesis has been approved for award;
3. Supervisors must not knowingly communicate about the research, the thesis or the process of examination with examiners until the thesis has been approved for award;
4. Examiners must not knowingly disclose the content of a thesis to an external party until a thesis has been approved for award, subject to paragraph 52;
5. Examiners are able to ask for clarification of any material in the thesis through the Graduate Research Office who will seek advice subject to paragraph 53.

61. Communications are subject to any approvals under the Procedure: Higher degree by research - use of confidential or restricted information in theses.
62. The Associate Dean may, at the request of an examiner, nominate a person other than a member of the Supervisory Panel to provide further information about the thesis or, in the case of joint work, the candidate's contribution to the thesis. The Associate Dean or the nominee may seek advice from the Supervisory Panel.
63. Examiners make one of the following four recommendations after completing the examination of the thesis:

1. that the candidate be granted the award; or
2. that the candidate be granted the award subject to corrections or revisions required by the examiners in the thesis to be made to the satisfaction of the Delegated Authority in the electronic copy intended for deposit with the University Library; or
3. that the candidate be permitted to submit a revised thesis for re-examination; or
4. that the candidate be failed.

64. The Graduate Research Office notifies the College when all examiners’ reports have been submitted or otherwise accounted for.
65. The Associate Dean approves the recommendation, or an alternative outcome.
66. On receipt of the outcome of the examination of revise and resubmit, or that the candidate be failed, the candidate may apply to the Delegated Authority for a transfer from the Doctor of Philosophy to the Master of Philosophy. The Associate Dean determines that a candidate be re-examined by resubmission of thesis, or that the candidate not be awarded the Doctor of Philosophy.
67. For a thesis by compilation, corrections and revisions normally refer to corrections and revisions to the thesis introduction, conclusion, or linking text, and not to the papers themselves where they have been published, or accepted for publication.
68. For a thesis by compilation, papers published or accepted for publication during the examination process should be included in the final version of the thesis.
69. Revision and resubmission of a thesis may occur once only for the same degree program.
70. The candidate is given a time limit of one year from the time of notification in which to revise the thesis and submit it for re-examination. A maximum extension of one further year may be granted by the Delegated Authority.
71. When a revised thesis is resubmitted for examination, it should not include a separate written response to the original examiners comments.
72. Access to examiner’s reports is restricted to the:

• Associate Dean;
• Delegated Authority;
• Head of the relevant academic area;
• Supervisor(s);
• Any members of a Committee appointed by the Delegated Authority to consider conflicting examiner’s reports;
• ANU committees considering the award of prizes for excellence in theses, and;
• Other ANU delegates who require access to the examiner reports for other processes such as academic integrity.

73. Where a thesis contains confidential material, or a candidate explicitly requests, the Graduate Research Office will take all reasonable steps to ensure that theses are not retained by the examiners.
74. After consideration of the examiners' reports, the Delegated Authority recommends to the relevant Associate Dean:

1. that the candidate be granted the award unconditionally; or
2. that the candidate be awarded the degree subject to the student making specified corrections to the satisfaction of the Delegated Authority ; or
3. that the candidate be re-examined by resubmission of thesis or re-examination of coursework or both;
4. that the candidate be failed.

75. If there is no clear recommendation on the award of the degree arising from the examiner’s reports, the Delegated Authority works towards a recommendation drawing on the Higher Degree by Research: Examiners’ Reports Recommendations Guideline. Potential actions may include but are not limited to:

1. the appointment of an additional examiner;
2. the appointment of a Committee comprising the Delegated Authority and two additional staff of the University with relevant expertise, not including the primary supervisor to consider the original reports received;
3. consultation with the supervisor who may advise on the reports, however not provide a recommendation on the outcome; or
4. requiring an oral examination.

76. Before a Delegated Authority recommends that a candidate be failed where all examiners’ reports have not recommended a fail, the Guideline: Higher degree by research -examiners’ reports recommendations on divergent reports should be followed.
77. A decision may be based on fewer examiners' reports than initially solicited, but no fewer than two, only if the Delegated Authority has made the decision and GRO have removed the examiner.
78. Examiners who recommend revision and resubmission of a thesis:

1. Specify what is required of the candidate before re-examination, on the understanding that anonymous examiners' reports, in full or in part, will be made available to the candidate by the Graduate Research Office ; and
2. Indicate, subject to availability, whether or not they are willing to re-examine the thesis.

79. Anonymous reports must be made available in full or in part to the candidate after deletion of any section of a report an examiner has specified may not be made available to the candidate or which may identify the examiner.

Process for Oral Examinations

80. Candidates whose candidature began on or after 1 July 2024 are subject to mandatory oral examination.
81. Candidates whose candidature began prior to 1 July 2024 may request to undertake an oral examination at the Notification of Intent to submit (NOI), after discussion with their primary supervisor and with the approval of the Delegated Authority.
82. Additionally, for candidates who began prior to 1 July 2024 and have not elected to undertake an oral examination, the Delegated Authority may determine that a candidate undertakes an oral examination as part of the thesis examination process in a number of circumstances, including:

1. where an examiner recommends revision and resubmission of the thesis or failure, in order to give all parties maximum opportunity to explore the body of work submitted for examination;
2. where the Delegated Authority intends to recommend a result of fail though not all examiners’ reports have recommended a fail.
3. where the candidate is undertaking an approved Dual Award program which requires an oral examination.

83. If an oral examination is required according to paragraph 82 a-c above, the Graduate Research Office contacts the candidate and arranges oral examinations.
84. For Joint or Dual Award PhD degrees (81-C above), the examination process is set out in the agreement between the ANU and the partner institution, in accordance with the Policy: Joint and dual award PhD degree and Procedure: Joint and dual award PhD degree.
85. Oral Examinations are held online by default. Arrangements for attendance by examiners are coordinated by the Graduate Research Office.
86. If an in-person oral examination is to be scheduled the Delegated Authority must have:

1. agreed to financial support for the examiners’ travel and accommodation; and
2. have secured the relevant budget-holder’s approval for expenditure of funds.

Oral Examination Chair

87. Oral examinations will be convened by an Oral Examination Chair. This is a senior academic from the University who has not participated in the candidature under examination, and who has undergone the Oral Examination Chair training. Their role is to moderate the discussion and ensure that the oral examination is carried out with procedural fairness and with academic collegiality.
88. The Oral Examination Chair is appointed by the Delegated Authority and performs the role of the Delegated Authority for the purpose of the examination.
89. The Oral Examination Chair will:

1. share the topics for discussion drawn from the individual examiners’ reports with the examiners at least two days prior to the Oral Examination;
2. moderate the Oral Examination meeting;
3. complete the Oral Examination Report that contains the recommendation from the examination panel to the Associate Dean Higher Degree Research of the College.

Timing and organisation of the Oral Examination

90. The Graduate Research Office will set the date of the oral examination and communicate with the candidate, examiners and Oral Examination Chair.
91. It is expected that the process from submission to oral examination will take around eight weeks, and no more than ten weeks.
92. Once a thesis is submitted, GRO will distribute the thesis to the nominated examiners.
93. Thesis examiners will each prepare an interim examiner’s report on the thesis within 6 weeks of receiving the thesis. GRO will provide these to the Oral Examination Chair. This report will include

1. A written report on the thesis
2. The Quality of Work form
3. A list of questions or areas for discussion at the Oral Examination
4. A recommendation on whether the Oral examination should proceed or the thesis should be failed or substantially revised.

94. GRO will provide the written reports section (93a above) of the examiners’ interim reports to the candidate.

Conduct of the Oral Examination

95. The Oral Examination will be held as a virtual meeting, unless the conditions at paragraph 86 are satisfied, and will include the candidate, the examiners and the Oral Examination Chair, and may include a support person invited by the candidate as per paragraph 99, or another person as detailed in paragraph 100.
96. All examiners must attend the oral examination. In the event of an unavoidable absence the examination may be rescheduled, or the other examiner may consent to represent the absent examiner.
97. During the oral examination a candidate should have access to a copy of the thesis paginated in the same way as the thesis submitted for examination.
98. The oral examination is undertaken on the substance of the candidate's thesis and on the candidate’s knowledge of its subject background.
99. The persons present are the candidate, the examiner(s) and the Oral Examination Chair. The candidate may request a support person to attend as an observer only. The support person may be the candidate’s supervisor. The support person must not participate in the examination.
100. The university may ask for an observer to be present. They will not be visible to the candidate or the examiners.
101. The oral examination will last for one to two hours including up to 30 minutes for the examiners to deliberate and decide on the recommended outcome and any required corrections or revisions.
102. There are four phases to the Oral Examination meeting. These are:

1. Candidate statement: the candidate provides a statement in the form of a presentation about their research, highlighting the motivation for and contribution of their research. This stage should last about 10 minutes.
2. Questions and discussion: the examiners ask questions about the thesis based on the agenda agreed prior with the Examination Chair. Examiners may ask questions that are not on the agenda. The timing will be moderated by the Oral Examination Chair. This stage should last between about 40 minutes to one hour.
3. Examination panel deliberation: At the conclusion of discussion, the candidate will exit the meeting while the examiners deliberate. The Oral Examination Chair records the required corrections and the agreed decision of the examiners into the final report. The examiners agree on the quality indicators and whether the thesis should be recommended for consideration for the Crawford Prize.
4. Recommendation discussion: The candidate is readmitted to the meeting where they are informed of the recommendation of the examiners. The candidate has the opportunity to discuss any recommended changes with the examination panel. If the panel cannot reach a consensus, the Chair proceeds as per paragraph 107.

103. At the conclusion of the oral examination meeting, the Oral Examination Chair forwards the report including recommendation to the Associate Dean (HDR) of the College.
104. The report will be in a standardised format allowing the following outcomes:

1. Award the degree after typographical corrections are made.
2. Award the degree after specified corrections to be made within a given number of months to the satisfaction of the Delegated Authority;
3. Revise and resubmit for examination with another oral examination; or
4. Not award the degree.

105. If the thesis requires corrections, the report from the Oral Examination will include a list of specified corrections agreed by the examiners.
106. The report will also include a recommendation for the thesis to be considered for the Crawford prize if appropriate.
107. If a result cannot be agreed, the report should indicate this and be forwarded to the Associate Dean HDR to determine the next steps. In this circumstance, the Oral Examination Chair informs the candidate that the decision is withheld and the Guideline: Higher degree by research -examiners’ reports recommendations on divergent reports should be followed.
108. Reports must be made available in full or in part to the candidate after deletion of any section of a report an examiner has specified may not be made available to the candidate.
109. Examiners' recommendations on the outcome of the oral examination undertaken according to paragraph 82 a-c of this Procedure are not communicated to the candidate, either during or after the examination. On completion of the examination process, examiners' recommendations and a report on the examination as a whole are submitted in confidence by the Oral Examination Chair to the Delegated Authority. On receipt of the outcome of the examination process, the candidate is provided with an anonymous report.

Written examination

110. If further examination is required according to paragraph 82 a-c of this Procedure the Delegated Authority can require the candidate to take a written examination, instead of or in addition to an oral examination set by the examiners of the thesis, covering the field, which an oral examination would have covered.
111. The Graduate Research Office will make arrangements for scheduling and invigilation of a written examination.
112. The Graduate Research Office sends the candidate's answers to a written examination to the examiners of the thesis who take them into account in the preparation of their reports.

Thesis Deposit and Open Access

113. On approval of the thesis, the candidate submits an electronic copy of the thesis to ANU Digital Thesis Collections.
114. The thesis will be openly available in accordance with University policy on open access unless the University Library has been requested to restrict the availability of the thesis in line with any approvals under the Procedure Higher degree by research - use of confidential or restricted information in theses and Policy Intellectual Property and Procedure: Student intellectual property.
115. For deposit of the digital version of the thesis the candidate provides the thesis in a single file, or alternatively:

1. Any files in the original file format used to create the final version of the thesis (including still images, video, sound etc.).
2. Separate files for any confidential material or, if the confidential material is throughout the whole thesis, a separate file for the whole thesis.
3. A pdf of all text portions of the printed thesis (excluding any confidential material).
4. A list of all files - and software they were created with - that are contained in the package.

116. In the small number of cases where the thesis format will not be able to be presented this way, the candidate should contact the Library for assistance.
117. A department may agree with a candidate to the deposit of a further copy of the thesis in the departmental library.
118. Unless subject to any copyright requirements as part of a thesis by compilation, candidates retain the copyright of their thesis and make such use of it as they wish.