Information for examiners
On this page, examiners will find information and guidance relating to the examination process for research degrees.
Overview of the Examination Process
Section 12 of the Policy on Research Degrees covers the examination in detail, and colleagues are encouraged to familiarise themselves with this document.
The examination process itself starts with the postgraduate researcher (PGR) submitting their notification of intention to submit, which is the prompt for the School to nominate the examiners. More information on this process can be found on the PGR-facing pages.
In the expanable section below you will find a diagram giving an overview of the full examination process. Below this you will find more detailed information about each of the various steps in the process.
- Expand this section see an overview of the various steps in the examination process
-
Appointment of Examiners
Examiners are formally appointed by the Research Degrees Progression and Award Board (RDPAB), acting on behalf of Senate. Unless a PGR is or has been a member of academic staff (grade 7 or above), at least one internal and one external examiner will be appointed. Additional examiners may be appointed where appropriate, for example where the topic of the thesis is such that it cannot be adequately covered by a single internal or external examiner. Where three examiners are appointed, normally two will be external.
The viva date should not be set until the appointment of the examiners has been confirmed.
- Examiner Appointment form
-
The main supervisor should fill out the Appointment of examiners form and submit it to the Director for PGRs for consideration.
- Eligibility
-
All examiners must:
- not have played a role in the supervision of the PGR under examination
- possess a research degree or equivalent experience, have appropriate levels of expertise in the relevant research area, and be able to demonstrate that they are research active
- be impartial and not have any known conflict of interest which might impinge on their role; potential conflicts of interest must be considered and declared at the point of nomination
At least one of the examiners should have experience in research degree examination. If the proposed internal examiner has not conducted a research degree examination at the ÅÝܽ¶ÌÊÓƵ, they should be briefed on the conduct of the viva and the University’s examination procedures by a member of faculty, experienced in research examination at ÅÝܽ¶ÌÊÓƵ, and who has not played a role in supervising the PGR.
Internal examiners will normally be members of the University’s Education and Research staff, other than the PGR’s supervisor(s). RDPAB has the authority to decide who qualifies as an internal examiner.
External examiners will normally be members of the academic staff of another higher education institution in the United Kingdom, or be of comparable academic or professional standing. The Policy on Research Degrees details the maximum number of times an external examiner may be used in a given period, and when former staff or students may be appointed to the role of external examiner.
Additional guidance on the appointment of examiners is available in the following document: Guidance on the Appointment of Examiners [PDF 149.84KB]
- Independent Chairs
-
The University reserves the right to require an independent chair in certain cases (e.g. where there are two external examiners, or an academic appeal is upheld and a re-examination takes place with the same examiners). Where appointed, the independent chair must be a member of current academic staff, normally in the relevant School (although not necessarily an expert on the subject of the thesis) other than the PGR’s supervisor(s). The role of the chair is to ensure that the examination is conducted according to the University’s regulations and policies.
- Contact with the PGR
-
Once the examiners have been formally appointed and the internal examiner has advised the PGR of the viva date, no further contact between the examiners and the PGR is permitted, as this may invalidate the examination. Instead, contact must be via the Examinations and Assessment team (researchexams@sussex.ac.uk) or the supervisor.
Thesis submission
PGRs are required to present and submit their theses as per the instructions on the Preparing and submitting your thesis page. Theses should be submitted a PDFs, and thet will be shared with the examiners in this form.
Examiners' independent reports
Before the viva is held, each examiner is asked to submit an independent report on the thesis. Examiners must not confer on the writing of these reports as they must be truly independent. The report should be completed using the version of the Independent Report form applicable to the thesis under examination (see below). The independent report - which should be returned to the Examinations and Assessment team within eight weeks of receipt of the thesis - should explain concisely the scope of the thesis, its merits and any shortcomings to be addressed in the viva. On receipt of all independent reports, the Examinations and Assessment team will send examiners the independent reports of their fellow examiners.
Depending on whether an examination is the PGR's first attempt or (following a revise and resubmit outcome) second attempt, the relevant forms can be located in the expanable sections below:
- First attempt independent report forms
-
PhD and MPhil Independent Report Form Word version / PDF version
Professional Doctorate Independent Report Form Word version / PDF version
- Second attempt independent report forms (for use following a revise and resubmit outcome)
-
PhD and MPhil Revise and Re-submit Independent Report Form Word version / PDF version
Professional Doctorate Revise and Re-submit Independent Report Form Word version / PDF version
The viva
The viva allows the examiners the opportunity to explore and to satisfy themselves that: the PGR's thesis represents a substantial original contribution to knowledge or understanding (for PhD candidates), or represents a recognisable original contribution to knowledge or understanding (for MPhil candidates); that there is evidence of training in, and the application of, appropriate research methods; that the work is the PGR's own (or, if done in collaboration, that their share in the research is adequate); and that the mode of presentation is satisfactory. The viva also allows the PGR the opportunity to respond to any shortcomings identified by the examiners.
In accordance with UK norms, vivas at Sussex are 'closed'; with only the PGR and their examiners present. At the PGR's request, and with the consent of the examiners, the supervisor or another member of academic or professional support staff approved by the School's Director for PGRs may be present at the viva as a silent observer. In some circumstances, an Independent Chair may be appointed to oversee the examination process (see above).
- Timing and attendance
-
The viva should normally be held within three months of the submission of the PGR's thesis. The internal examiner is responsible for making the arrangements, including agreeing a mutually convenient time for all parties. If a PGR does not engage in this correspondence, or does not attend at the agreed time without good reason, they will not have fulfilled the requirements of the award, and they will therefore automatically fail their degree. If circumstances arise which mean that a PGR cannot attend their viva, they should inform their internal examiner and the Examinations and Assessment team (researchexams@sussex.ac.uk) as soon as possible.
- Examiners' pre-meeting
-
Before the viva, the examiners should hold a pre-meeting to discuss the following:
- Who will serve as chair and what will this entail
- Who will introduce the participants, and explain the structure of the viva to the PGR
- Who will introduce the purposes of the viva to the PGR and what they will say
- The examiners' initial views of the thesis
- How long the viva is expected to last and a schedule for breaks
- Recognising that the unfolding direction of the discussion may itself suggest appropriate lines of questioning, what specific questions each examiner may want to ask
It is generally helpful to provide some positive feedback at the beginning of the examination to help the PGR to feel at ease and to allow them to give their best performance.
If, during the course of the viva, the discussion moves away from the examination purpose to a broader review of the PGRs’s work (e.g. to publication options), then this should clearly be signalled in advance and the PGR should be informed that the discussion does not form part of the assessment.
- Environment
-
Care should be taken to make the PGR feel at ease at the viva. The appropriateness and layout of the examination room should therefore be given careful thought (for example, the room should be separate and quiet, and consideration should be given to the positioning of the candidate in order that they may be put at ease), and provision should be made for short breaks/refreshments, etc, as required, particularly for longer vivas. The below offers a checklist of factors to consider:
- Seating and table space is sufficient and comfortable
- A clock/watch is in view
- Fresh water and glasses are available
- The ventilation/heating is adequate
- The examiners have their notes and other examination paperwork
- Paper and pen/pencil are available
- A ‘Do not disturb’ sign has been put on the door to the examination room
- Any telephones are unplugged
- All mobile phones switched off
- Remote vivas
-
The viva may be conducted remotely via video-conferencing. These arrangements must be approved in advance using the Remote Viva Request Form [DOCX 34.03KB]. Appendix 3 of the Policy on Research Degrees lays out the Policy on Remote Viva Voce Examinations, and the Examinations and Assessment team (researchexams@sussex.ac.uk) can also provide advice.
Criteria for the award of research degrees
The degrees of PhD and MPhil are all obtained by research and are assessed through the submission of a thesis (or equivalent) and an oral examination (the viva voce or ‘viva’). The degree of PhD is a Doctoral degree (level 8 of The Framework for Higher Education Qualifications in Degree-Awarding Bodies in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (FHEQ)). The degree of MPhil is a Master’s degree (level 7 of the FHEQ). The below descriptors constitute the criteria for these awards, and reflect the expectations of the FHEQ.
- Descriptor for the award of the degrees of PhD
-
The degrees of PhD (including iPhDs) are awarded to PGRs who have demonstrated all the following, as per the FHEQ:
- 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;
- 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 the qualification 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 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.
A PhD thesis (or equivalent) must contain a substantial original contribution to knowledge.
- Descriptor for the award of the degree of MPhil
-
The degrees of MPhil are awarded to PGRs who have demonstrated all of the following, as per the FHEQ:
- 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 available 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 PGR:
- to evaluate critically current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline; and
- 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 nonspecialist 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 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; and
- the independent learning ability required for continuing professional development
An MPhil thesis (or equivalent) is expected to display a comprehensive knowledge of some part or aspect of the field of study, and a recognisable original contribution to knowledge or understanding.
- Papers-style theses
-
PGRs may incorporate, as an integral part of the thesis, any of their work published or submitted for publication before the submission of the thesis, provided that the greater proportion of the work for the thesis has been carried out after registration for the degree and under supervision. Where a PGR submits a ‘papers-style’ thesis, they are required to include a declaration confirming their contribution to each paper, especially in cases where the co-author is a supervisor.
When examining a thesis of this kind, examiners should:
- be aware that the criteria for assessing the thesis are the same as for any other thesis, and include viva performance (i.e. the PGR should be able give a satisfactory defence of the thesis in the viva);
- be aware that successful peer review and the publication of papers do not guarantee a pass outcome in an examination for the award of the relevant research degree;
- pay particular attention to consistency or otherwise in the quality of those parts of the thesis which have not been submitted for publication (e.g. linking chapters).
Examination outcomes
Examiners may indicate to the PGR the provisional outcome of the viva and the extent of any necessary revisions to the thesis being recommended. However, such indications are not definitive and the final outcome will not be formally communicated to the PGR by the Examinations and Assessment team until the Joint Report (see above) has been reviewed by the RDPAB and, in the case of a recommendation for the award of a degree, ratified by Senate.
Should any clarification be required about the required corrections/revisions, the communication should take place via the main supervisor. The examiners must not have any direct communication with the PGR during any period permitted for corrections or revisions; specifically, they must not advise the PGR whether the extent of the changes made is likely to be satisfactory or not, or whether the PGR’s work is ready for re-examination.
- Outcomes following first (original) submission
-
If the examiners agree that the requirements for the relevant research degree have been satisfied they may recommend:
- Unconditional Pass: that the degree should be awarded unconditionally. A very small number of minor typographical errors, which can be corrected immediately but do not require checking by the examiners, are permitted.
- Pass with Minor Corrections: that the degree should be awarded subject to minor corrections to the thesis, to be completed within three months (for full-time PGRs) or six months (for part-time PGRs) of you receiving the list of corrections, to the satisfaction of the internal examiner. Minor corrections include spelling/typing errors, textual errors, reordering of material, correction of citations, and correction of figures, tables and diagrams, and the addition of a small number of paragraphs for clarification or qualification.
- Pass with Major Corrections: that the degree should be awarded subject to major corrections to the thesis, to be completed within six months (for full-time PGRs) or 12 months (for part-time PGRs) of you receiving the list of corrections, to the satisfaction of the internal examiner. In addition to the types of minor correction noted above, major corrections may include more substantial addition of paragraphs, including the incorporation of some new material, reordering and restructuring of chapters, or some additional data analyses.
If the examiners agree that the requirements for the relevant research degree concerned have not yet been satisfied, they may recommend:
- Revise and Resubmit: that you are permitted a period not exceeding 12 months (for full-time PGRs) or 24 months (for part-time PGRs) from the date on which you received notification of the revisions to be made, in which to thoroughly revise your thesis for resubmission, using the guidance set out in the examiners’ joint report. Fees will be payable for the additional year: /study/fees-funding/tuition-fees. You will normally be given only one opportunity to revise and resubmit your thesis.
If the PGR is given the opportunity to revise and resubmit their thesis, the same examiners will be asked to consider the revised thesis and to submit further independent and joint reports in due course. On reading the revised thesis the examiners will be in a position to decide whether a second viva examination is required. Where a second viva is required, it should take place within three months of the submission of the revised thesis, and the PGR must be given at least three weeks’ notice.
- Unconditional Pass: that the degree should be awarded unconditionally. A very small number of minor typographical errors, which can be corrected immediately but do not require checking by the examiners, are permitted.
- Outcomes following a resubmission
-
If the examiners agree that the requirements for the relevant research degree have been satisfied they may recommend an Unconditional Pass, a Pass with Minor Corrections, or a Pass with Major Corrections as above.
If the examiners agree that the requirements for the relevant research degree have not been satisfied they may recommend:
- (in the case of PhD candidates, only) that the degree of MPhil should be awarded with no corrections to the thesis;
- (in the case of PhD candidates, only) that the degree of MPhil should be awarded subject to minor corrections to the thesis, to be completed within three months (for full-time PGRs) or six months (for part-time PGRs) of you receiving the list of corrections, to the satisfaction of the internal examiner;
- (in the case of PhD candidates, only) that the degree of MPhil should be awarded subject to major corrections to the thesis, to be completed within six months (for full-time PGRs) or 12 months (for part-time PGRs) of you receiving the list of corrections, to the satisfaction of the internal examiner;
- that no degree should be awarded.
- (in the case of PhD candidates, only) that the degree of MPhil should be awarded with no corrections to the thesis;
Examiners' Joint report
It is the responsibility of the internal examiner to ensure that the examiners complete, sign, and submit the Joint Report form to the Examinations and Assessment team within two weeks of the viva. Where possible, the report should be completed on the day of the viva. The Joint Report should provide sufficient detail to permit the RDPAB to assess whether the basis for the examiners’ decision is sound and, where a corrections or revisions outcome is recommended, the required changes should be included in the report. If an examiner has marked a copy of the thesis (hard copy or digital) with typographical errors which should be corrected, the copy of the thesis may be given to the PGR after the viva.
If the examiners wish to make additional suggestions which do not relate directly to the examination outcome (e.g. in relation to potential future publications), these must be listed separately from the Joint Report and will not form part of the corrections or revisions against which the PGR’s corrected/revised thesis will be subsequently assessed. Examiners may not require additional corrections or revisions following (re-)submission of the thesis.
Depending on whether an examination is the PGR's first attempt or (following a revise and resubmit outcome) second attempt, the relevant forms can be located in the expanable sections below:
- First attempt Joint Report forms
-
PhD Joint Report Form Word version / PDF version
MPhil Joint Report Form Word version / PDF version
Professional Doctorate Joint Report Form Word version / PDF version
- Second attempt Joint Report forms (for use following a revise and resubmit outcome)
-
PhD Revise and Re-submit Joint Report Form Word version / PDF version
MPhil Revise and Re-submit Joint Report Form Word version / PDF version
Professional Doctorate Revise and Re-submit Joint Report Form Word version / PDF version
The role of the RDPAB
In addition to formally appointing the examiners (see above), the RDPAB considers the recommendations made by examiners on the outcome of the viva. The RDPAB will then make a recommendation to Senate on the award of the degree, and the Examinations and Assessment team will communicate the result to the PGR and explain what they need to do next and by when.
Normally, RDPAB will consider the examiners' recommendation within two weeks of receipt of the Joint Report. If there is a disparity between the recommendation made by the examiners and the content of the examiners’ reports, RDPAB may seek clarification from the examiners on the basis for their recommendation.
Further information
Examiners should contact the Examinations and Assessment team (telephone 01273 876550; email researchexams@sussex.ac.uk) with any queries about the examination process.
For example, if examiners are unexpectedly unable to attend the viva examination, if there is a disagreement between the examiners on the outcome of the examination, or if any of the examiners suspect plagiarism, the Examinations and Assessment team will be able to advise on the correct procedures.