Master/Doctorate in Professional Studies Regulations 2014/15

Master/Doctorate in Professional Studies Regulations

2014/15

Alternative formats of this document

This publicationcanbeprovidedinalternative formatssuchaslarge print,Braille,tape andondisk tosuit specificneeds. Please forwardyourrequest totheDocumentationand Learning Materials Manager at the Institute forWork BasedLearning or the Academic Registry of Middlesex University.

Telephone02084116772 or 020 8411 2629

Email or

Tolistentothis document

1Downloadacopyofthis handbookfromtheDPS pagesinOasisplus and on the RBO intranet site

2OpenupthePDF fileofthe handbook inAdobeReader

3Fromthetopmenubar,selectView

4FromtheViewmenu,selectReadoutloud

5Selectyourpreferredoptionfromthis menutocontrolhow thedocument is read toyou.

NoteTochangethespeedandtoneofyourcomputer’s voice,gototheEaseof access centrein yourcontrolpanelandselectyourpreferredsettings.

Contents

Section1

Standards oftheMProfandDProf

1.1Master ofProfessionalStudies(MProf)

1.2Doctor ofProfessionalStudies(DProf)

Section2

2.1Assessment ofpart1 of theprogramme

2.1.1MProf/DProfassessmentboard

2.1.2Middlesex University SVP assessment board

2.1.3 Collaborative SVP assessment board

3.1Principles

3.2Applicationforregistrationforpart2 (projectmodule/s)

3.4Registration

3.5Supervisionand academicsupport

3.6Submissionofproject outcome(s)forexamination

3.7Examinations of final project/s: general

3.8Examination procedures

3.9Candidate’sresponsibilitiesinthe examination process

3.10 Examinersand chair

3.11 Firstexamination

3.12 Re-examination

3.12.1Re-examination

3.12.2Projectre-examination

3.12.3ProgrammeAssessmentBoard decision

3.12.4Appointment of an additional external examiner

3.12.5Panelofenquiry

3.13 Theproject

3.13.1Project submission

3.13.3 Format requirements

3.13.4Lodging aresearch project(s)

3.13.5 Reviewofan examination decision

Appendix1

Definitionofprojectsize

Appendix2

Presentationofprojects

Appendix3

Appendix4

Electronicrepositoryform

Appendix5

Universityappeal regulationsandprocedures

2010/11 (Revised)

Appendix6

Complaintsandgrievanceprocedures (Revised)

6.1Introduction

6.2Basic principlesthegeneralstudent complaints procedures

6.3Procedures

6.3.1 Informalstage 1

6.3.2 Informalstage2

6.3.3Formalstage

6.3.4 Appeal

6.3.5Complaintspanel

6.4Officeof theIndependentAdjudicator forHigherEducation

6.5Notes

6.5.1Interpretation

Section1

Standards oftheMProfandDProf

1.1Master ofProfessionalStudies(MProf)

ThestandardoftheMProfis that expected ofa candidatewhohasengaged inWork BasedLearning,fromtaught andproject sources,relating toorganisationalchangeand/or professionaldevelopment.The candidateis requiredtoproduceasubstantive project report andtoorally present anddefendthereport.

The candidatemust have demonstrated:

  • asystematicunderstandingofknowledge,andacriticalawareness ofcurrent issues, muchofwhichis atorinformedby theforefrontoftheirareaofprofessionalpractice
  • researchanddevelopmentcapability andprojectmanagement skills applicabletothe professionalareaoftheirstudy
  • conceptualunderstanding that enables the candidateto:
  • evaluate critically,current professionalknowledgeintheir areaofstudy
  • evaluate methodologiesanddevelopcritiquesofthemand,whereappropriate,topropose new approaches.

1.2Doctor ofProfessionalStudies(DProf)

The standardoftheDProfis that expectedofa candidate whohasengaged inadvanced Work BasedLearning,from taught andmajorproject sources,whichhas thepotentialto achieve majororganisationalchange and/orexcellence inprofessionalpractice resulting inoriginalwork worthyofpublicationincompleteorabridgedform. Thecandidate must have shownevidence ofability toundertake self-managedand/orcollaborative research andproject development and must have orally defendedtheproduct ofthe study tothe satisfactionofthe assessors.

The candidate must have demonstratedthe:

  • generalability toconceptualise,designandimplementa projectofuse for the generationofnew knowledge,applicationsorunderstanding whichis at theforefront oftheprofessionalarea,andtoadjust the projectdesigninthelightofunforeseen problems oropportunities
  • potentialusefulness ofthe project tospecificaudience(s)
  • creationandinterpretationofnew knowledge,throughoriginalresearchorother advancedscholarship,ofaquality tosatisfy peerreview,toextendtheforefrontofthe professionalarea,andmerit publication
  • advanced researchanddevelopment capability andadvancedproject management skills whichhave beenappliedto theirprofessionalareaoftheirstudy
  • advancedconceptualunderstanding,oftenofan interdisciplinary nature,that enables the candidatetoevaluate:
  • critically,current advancedprofessionalknowledgeintheirareaof study
  • methodologies,epistemologies,anddevelopadvancedcritiquesofthemand, whereappropriate,topropose new approaches.

The assessment criteria forlevels7and8areincluded intherelevantprogramme handbook,andareagreedat validation

Section2

Introduction

TheMProf/DProfframework (including specialist validatedpathway (SVP) variants) comprises twoparts.

Assessmentofpart1isatlevel7againstthespecificlearningoutcomesofpart1modules. Part 2oftheprogrammeisproject activity which,forthedegreeofMProf,is assessed at level 7(masters level) andwhich,forthedegree ofDProf,is assessed at level8 (doctoral level). Bothparts oftheprogramme areconstructed withinamodularframework whichis credit-rated.[1]

AllmodulesarevalidatedinaccordancewiththeUniversity'svalidationproceduresand gradesforallmodulesare determinedby theprogramme assessmentboard. Details ofthe part 1 modulesaregivenin each of the programmes handbooks.

TheawardofMProf, DProf or SVP degree is madeby theUniversity'sResearchDegrees Boardfollowing examiners’ recommendations fromtheprogramme assessmentboard orSVP school research degree committee/assessmentboardasappropriate.

2.1Assessment ofpart1 of theprogramme

Assessmentis conductedinaccordancewiththelearningoutcomesandmethodof assessmentapprovedfor themoduleconcerned,anddetailedinthemodule handbook fortheMProf/DProfprogrammeor thehandbookfor theSVP. TheUniversity regulations fortaught programmesapply. Submissionofcoursework is tothe School/IWBLofficefor MProf/DProf,orasspecifiedintherelevant SVPprogramme handbook. Allpart 1 assessments aresubject tointernalmoderationandexternalexaminerscrutiny. Assessment decisions at themodulelevelaremade by theprogramme assessmentboard orSVPassessmentboard.

2.1.1MProf/DProfassessmentboard

Membershipoftheboardcomprises:

  • chair:academicdirectoroftheMProf/DProfprogrammeornominee
  • externalexaminerfor thescheme
  • director of programmes
  • internalexaminers:allmoduleleader
  • secretary:MProf/DProfprogrammeadministrationmanager.

The board's termsofreferenceareto:

  • determinethegradeawardedtoeachcandidateinrespectofallmodulesinthe scheme
  • makerecommendations totheResearch Degrees Board in respect of final awards
  • receive the decisions of the Accreditation Panel (RAL decisions)
  • determineentitlement todefer/reassessment.

2.1.2Middlesex University SVP assessment board

Membershipoftheboardcomprises:

  • Chair: appropriate School Deputy Dean(ornominee) or the Head of Research and Research Degrees of the IWBL (or nominee)
  • externalexaminerfor theprogramme
  • internalexaminers:allmoduleleaders
  • Secretary:tobe determinedby theSchoolDeputy Dean or Head of Research and Research Degrees of the IWBL
  • The board's termsofreferenceareto:
  • determinethegradeawardedtoeachcandidateinrespectofallmodulesinthe programme[2]

makerecommendations totheResearchDegrees Boardinrespectoffinalawards[3]

  • receive the decisions of the Accreditation Panel (RAL decisions)
  • determineentitlement todefer/reassessment.

2.1.3 Collaborative SVP assessment board

Membership of the board comprises:

  • Chair: School Deputy Dean or Head of Research and Research Degrees of the IWBL (or nominee) ;
  • external examiner for the programme;
  • internal examiners: all module leaders;
  • link tutors;
  • Secretary: to be determined by collaborative partner.

For collaborative provision the internal examiners may be from the partner institution.

The board's termsofreferenceareto:

  • determinethegradeawardedtoeachcandidateinrespectofeachmoduleinthe programme
  • makerecommendations totheUniversity ResearchandResearchDegrees Committee inrespectoffinalawards
  • receive the decisions of the Accreditation Panel (RAL decisions)
  • determineentitlement todefer/reassessment.

Candidateshavetheright toself-deferassessment once. Ifamoduleis failed,candidates haveonere-sit asofright.Theprogramme assessmentboardmayagree asecondresit in exceptionalcircumstances.

University regulations governingappealsagainst programme assessmentboarddecisions andconsiderationofattempts togainunfairadvantageapply topart 1oftheprogramme. Specificmoduleassessmentrequirements shallbeasdetailedintheapprovedhandbook fortheprogramme.

1 Middlesex University ©2014

Master/Doctorate in Professional Studies Regulations 2014/15

Section3

Programmeregulations

3.1Principles

3.1.1MiddlesexUniversity shallawardthe degree ofMasterofProfessionalStudies (MProf), DoctorofProfessionalStudies(DProf),orSVPvariant toa candidatewho successfully completesbothparts 1and2oftheirprogramme.

3.1.2FortheMProfandDProf,projects maybeproposed inany fieldofprofessional activity subject totherequirement that theproject(s) satisfy theoverallstandard oftheawardandconstituteavalidandcoherentprogrammewhichis approved by theMProf/DProfprogrammeapprovalpanel.

3.1.3FortheSVPvariant,theproject proposed must beinafieldofprofessionalactivity appropriateto theSVPconcerned subject to therequirement that theproject(s) satisfy theoverallstandardoftheawardandconstituteavalidandcoherent programmewhichis approved by theSVP programme approvalpanel.

3.1.4Part 2oftheprogrammeshallconsist ofeitheroneortwoproject modules. In cases wherea candidateundertakes twoprojects, thelink betweenthemshallbe made clearatprogrammeapproval. Candidatesshallbe permitted sequential examinationofthetwoprojects.

3.1.5Thescopeoftheproject(s) shallbe determined aspart oftheprogramme approvalprocess. The focusoftheproject(s) shallbetaken intoaccount by the programmeapprovalpanel.

3.1.6The project(s) mayinvolve collaborativeactivity reflecting theorganisational significanceofthe programme.Thereshallbeeitherateamofmasters and/or doctoralcandidatesengaged inasingleprojector theteamleaderoftheproject alonemaybethecandidate.Ineithercase,eachcandidateshallidentify, distinguishandjustify theircontributionto theproject.

3.1.7 A project shallresult inanoutcomeorproduct whichrelates toorganisational change and/orprofessionaldevelopmentorprofessionalexcellence.Such outcomesorproducts shallincludereports,books,manuals,audio-visualmaterial asagreedby the programmeapprovalpanel. Projects forthe degreeofDProf(or SVPequivalent) shallcomplyfully withthelevel-8descriptors. Those forthedegree ofMProf(orSVPequivalent) shallcomply fully withthelevel-7descriptors.

3.2Applicationforregistrationforpart2 (projectmodule/s)

Nocandidatefor theawardofeitherMProforDProf(orSVPvariants)shallprogress to part 2oftheprogrammeuntiltheyhave passedallpart1taught modules.

Part 1oftheprogrammeincludes the module Planning a PractitionerResearch Programme (orSVPequivalent),thegateway to part 2. Thereshallbenoexemptionfrom this module.

3.3Planning a PractitionerResearch Programme (orSVP

equivalent)

The candidateshall:

  • submit three copiesoftheirlearningagreement (modulecoursework)tothe Academic Registry whichshallcopy it tothe module leaderand programme adviserforassessment as soonaspossible aftersubmissionandatleast 10 days priortotheprogramme approvalpanel
  • beassessedby means ofapresentationandoralquestioningby theprogramme approvalpanel.Thepresentationshallnormally be20minutesinlength,andthis shall be followedby questioninganddiscussionwiththe candidate normally alsoof20 minutes'duration.

The programme approvalpanelshall:

  • always be chairedby theAcademicDirectoroftheMProf/DProfprogramme(or nominee). ThereshallalsobeaSecretary tothepanel
  • normally meet at the endoftheassessment periodofbothsemesters. Additional meetings shallbe at the discretionofthe chair
  • consider whetherornot the candidate’s programme constitutesanapprovedpathway tothe indicatedaward(MProf, DProforSVP).

When consideringaprogrammeproposal,thepanel shallbesatisfiedthat:

  • potentialoftheprogrammesatisfiesthelevel7assessment criteria(level-7descriptors) fortheMProfprogramme (orSVPvariant) andlevel-8assessment criteria(level-8 descriptors) fortheDProfprogramme(orSVPvariant)
  • proposedprogramme is coherent andthat thereis a rationale fortheinclusionofany accreditedlearning
  • proposed programmeis feasible
  • candidate’s employer/sponsorhasgiven its agreement,asappropriate
  • leveloftheawardsought andtheproposedtitle(thefieldofstudy)areappropriate
  • there is a rationale foranycollaborationinthe proposedprogramme
  • relevant issuessuchasethics,health,andsafety have beentaken intoaccount
  • assessors,inadditionto writtenreport,willcompletean Ethics Commentsformonthe ethicalaspects ofthe programme plan.

Followingcompletionoftheassessment,the panelmaydecide/recommend that the programme:

  • constitutesanapprovedpathway (i.e. thatregistrationforpart2bepermitted)
  • constitutesan approvedpathway subject tominoramendments(i.e. that registration forpart 2be allowed subject toappropriate amendmentsgainingapprovalby the chair withinaspecifiedperiodoftime)
  • doesnot constitute anapprovedpathway,andshouldbereworkedandresubmittedto a subsequent meetingofthepanel. Inthis case,there shallbe only one resubmission asofright.

Panelmembers shalleachcompleteanassessment sheet whilethepanelis insession. Assessmentsheets ofallpanelmembers shallberetainedby the secretary togetherwith themasterrecordofdecisions takenby thepanel.

Candidatesshallbeinformedinwritingoftheoutcomeoftheirpanelassessment. The notificationlettershallbewrittenby thechairinconsultationwiththecandidate’s academicadviserandshallincludeastatement oftheoutcomeinrespectofa recommendation.

3.4Registration

3.4.1 Approvalby theprogrammeapprovalpanelshallpermit a candidatetoprogress topart 2oftheprogramme.Theproject modulesavailableare describedinthe appropriateprogrammehandbookandallareassessed at level7 (forthedegree ofMProf) andat level8 (forthe degree ofDProf).

Candidatesshallchooseoneortwoofthesemodules. The numberofcreditpoints that a candidate requiresforpart 2shalldependonthe qualificationsought (MProf, DProforSVP)and,forDProfandSVPdoctorateonly,whetherthe candidate haslevel8recognitionandaccreditationoflearning(RAL).Thenumber ofcredits requiredfromproject modulesshallbeasstated intherelevant handbook.

Whereateamofcandidatescollaboratesinoneproject,thelengthoftheproject outcomeshallnormally beincreased by 50percent andshallbesubject tospecific approvalby theprogrammeapprovalpanel.

3.4.2 Theregistrationofprojects ofcandidatesontheprogrammeshallsatisfy thelevel 7descriptors forMProf(andSVPvariant)candidatesandthelevel-8descriptors forDProf(andSVPvariant)candidates.

3.4.3 Theminimumandmaximumproject sizesshallbeasspecifiedintheappropriate appendix1oftheseregulations.

3.4.4A candidatemaybe permitted toundertaketwoprojects provided theyare approvedby the programmeapprovalpanelaspart ofacoherent programme.

3.4.5A candidate forboththeMProfandDProfmayundertakethe part 2modulesona full-orpart-time basis. Theavailablemodesofstudy foran SVPwillbeasspecified intheappropriate programme handbook.

3.4.6Theoutcomeorproduct ofthe project shallbewritten inEnglishunless the programmeapprovalpanelhasapprovedits presentationinanotherlanguage.

3.4.7Whereacandidateor theorganisationwishes theoutcomeorproduct toremain confidentialforaperiodoftimeaftercompletionofthework,applicationforthis shallbemadetotheprogrammeapprovalpanelat least three months beforethe formalsubmissiondateapproved by theprogrammeapprovalpanel. The panel shallnormally approvean applicationforconfidentiality inordertoenablea patent applicationtobelodged ortoprotectcommercially orpolitically sensitive material. Whilethe normalmaximum periodofconfidentiality is twoyears,in exceptionalcircumstances,the programmeapprovalpanelmayapprovealonger period. Whereashorterperiodwouldbeadequate,theprogrammeapproval panelwillnot automatically grant confidentiality fortwoyears.

3.4.8Whereacandidateis prevented by illhealthorothergoodcause from

making progress withtheproject, theregistrationmaybesuspended by theprogramme approvalpanelinits discretion,normally fornotmore thanoneyearat atime.It shallbethecandidate’s responsibility toinformthe programmeadministration managerofany circumstances,medicalorotherwise,whichmayaffecttheir progress withtheproject. Thecandidateshallbenotified inwritingby the programmeadministrationmanagerofthedecisionoftheprogrammeapproval panelinrespect ofthere-negotiated timescale for the project.

3.4.9A candidateshallsubmit theoutcomeorproductoftheirproject asdirectedinthe appropriateprogrammehandbook by thedeadlinespecifiedontheinformation sheet given tocandidates. Theprogrammeapprovalpanelmayexceptionally extenda candidate’s periodofregistrationnormally fornot morethanoneyear. It shallbethecandidate’s responsibility tosendawritten request forextensionof timetothe chairoftheprogrammeapprovalpanel. Any extensiongranted shall be notified tothe candidateinwritingby programmeadministrationmanager.

3.4.10 The programmeAssessment Board/School Research Degree Committeeworking throughthe programme administrationmanagershallmonitorannually the progress ofevery candidate registered forpart2oftheprogrammetoestablishinsofarasisreasonably possibleontheinformationavailablethat goodprogress is beingmadeandthat supervision,support andfacilitiesareadequate.Uponreceiptofmonitoring reports from academic advisers and candidates,the programmeassessment board shall takeappropriateaction.This mayinclude changes tothe candidate’s team (suchasan additionalacademic consultant),a changefromMProftoDProf orfromDProfto MProf(orSVPequivalents),orthe undertakingofanadditional moduleor,inexceptionalcases,that the candidate berequiredtowithdraw.

3.4.11 Incases wherethe programmeassessment boarddecides that a candidate’s progress is unsatisfactory andthat withdrawalis required,thecandidateshallbe informedofthis fact,inwriting,by thechairofthe programmeassessment board. The candidateshallbegivenareasonabletimescale (notnormallyless than four months) forimprovements tobemade.Wheretheseimprovements are not made by thestated date,the candidateshallbeinformedinwritingby theprogramme assessment board/school research degree committee that a decisionhasbeenmadetoendtheregistration.

3.4.12 A candidatemayusethe complaints and grievance proceduresforresearch

students incases wheretheybelievethat the decisiontoterminatethe registrationis unjustified. Theseproceduresareincludedinthis regulations handbook.

3.4.13 Whereacandidate hasdiscontinued theproject, theyshallcommunicatein writing this withdrawalofregistrationtotheProgrammeAdministrationManager.

3.4.14 A candidateshallpay suchfees asmaybe determined fromtimeto time by the University orpartnerorganisationinthecaseofacollaborativeSVPandwhichare notified tothecandidateat the beginningofeachacademic year.

3.5Supervisionand academicsupport

3.5.1Inpart 2oftheprogramme,a candidateshallbesupportedby ateamconsisting ofan AcademicAdviser and oneormoreConsultants,dependingonthe particularneeds ofthe candidateinrelationto the project(s)beingundertaken.

3.5.2IncaseswheretherearetwoConsultants,thesecondoneshallnormally beappointedafterthe candidate hasformulatedthe project(s)/proposalandshall haveaspecialist supervisory andassessmentrole,ensuring theproject’s academic rigour.

3.5.3FortheMProf/DProf, theacademicadvisershallbe fromacoreteamapprovedby the Programme Directors or the Chair of the School Research Degree Committee. For collaborative SVPs the Academic Adviser is from the partner institution. Academic Advisers from partner institutions will be trained bythe partner institution in a comparable way to the university’s training. The university’s training will be made available to partner staff acting as academic advisers. Theadvisershallhelp the candidate planandformulatetheirprogrammeandshallfocus onthe relationshipoftheproject(s)tothegeneric level-7descriptors forMProf candidatesandthegenericlevel-8descriptors forDProfcandidates.

3.5.4TheModuleLeadershallberesponsiblefortheacademiccontent andsuccessful delivery ofthemoduleandis alsoresponsiblefor theassessmentofthemodule.

3.5.5TheAcademicAdviserandmoduleleader shallberesponsible forarranging with theconsultant theamountoftimeandnormalpatternofthe consultancy foreachcandidate. The academic consultant could be external to the university or partner institution.

3.5.6The candidateshallberesponsibleforestablishinginitialandongoingcontactwith theAcademicConsultant.

3.5.7The programmeadministrationmanagershallforwardtotheAcademicConsultant acopy ofthe candidate’slearning agreement.

3.5.8Any proposalforachangeonacademicgrounds tothesupervisory teamshallbe madeinwritingby theAcademicAdviserto the programmeapprovalpanel.

3.5.9A candidateregisteredforeitherpart 1orpart2oftheMProfor DProf(orSVP) shallbeineligibletoactasanAcademicConsultantforanotherMProfor DProf(or SVP) candidate,andshallalsobeineligibletoactas Directorof Studiesfora researchdegree candidate (MProforDProf).

3.6Submissionofproject outcome(s)forexamination

3.6.1Outcomesorproducts in various formatsshallbeaccepted. Theformat shall be that whichbest achieves theaimoftheproject andcanincludereports,manuals, books,amajorcomposition,new courses,afilm,amajorexhibition andother audio-visualmaterial.

3.6.2Incases wheretheoutcomesarenon-textual,they must beaccompanied by a written critiquegivingmethodologicalandcontextualinformation.Thelengthof the critiqueshallbesubject toagreement by theprogramme approvalpanel.

3.6.3Except withthespecificpermissionofthe programmeapprovalpanel,written work for aproject shallbe presentedinEnglish.

3.6.4Whereacandidate’s project outcomeis part ofacollaborativegroupproject, thereshallbeclearindicationofeachcandidate’sindividualroleandcontribution.

3.6.5The project shallincludeastatement ofthe candidate’s aims,andtheway in whichtheseaimsadvancetheinterests ofthecandidateintheirpersonaland professionaldevelopmentandintheircommunityofpractice.

3.6.6Allwritten project outcomesshallbepresented according tothestandard format forwrittenworkfortheMProf/DProforSVPinrespectofheadings,subheadings, tables,diagrams,footnotes,andappendices. Thestandard formatis included as appendix2ofthese regulations.

3.6.7The project outcomesshallacknowledge published orother sources consulted (includingan appropriate bibliography) andany assistancereceived.

3.6.8Thereshallbean abstractofapproximately300 words boundinto theproject outcomewhichshallprovideasynopsis stating the natureand scopeofthework undertaken andoftheoriginalcontributionto thework of,andimpact upon, the candidate’sprofession.

3.6.9Thelengthofthewritten work shallbeasindicatedby theappropriateproject moduledescriptionandshallbesubject toapprovalby theprogramme approval panel. Aword count shallbeincludedat theendofthetext.

3.6.10 Thetext oftheproject shallbe presentedinaccordancewiththestandard format forwrittenworkpublishedintheprogramme handbook. Thestandardformatis included asappendix3ofthese regulations.

3.6.11 Project outcomesshallbepresented inaccordancewiththerequirements for research degreesincludedasappendix4oftheseregulations.

3.6.12 A candidateshallsubmit threecopiesof theirproject outcomeforexamination,all ofwhichshallberetainedby theUniversity.

3.6.13 A candidateshallsubmit theirwork,by theassessment deadline.Work shallbe deliveredby handorshallbesent byrecorded delivery asspecifiedinthe appropriateprogrammehandbook. Inallcases,areceipt must beobtainedand retained by thecandidateasproofofsubmission.

3.7Examinations of final project/s: general

3.7.1TheexaminationforMProf, DProfandSVPshallhavetwostages: first,the submissionandpreliminary assessmentofthe coursework (project outcome)and, second,its defence by thecandidatethroughoralpresentationandvivavoce.

3.7.2Thereshallnormally beapresentationby,and vivavoce for,acandidate unless, forreasons of sickness,disability,orcomparablevalidcausetheprogramme assessmentboardis satisfied that a candidatewouldbe underserious disadvantageifrequiredtobeassessed by thesemeans. Insuchcases,an alternative formofassessmentormodificationtotheseoralproceduresmaybe approved. Suchapprovalshallnot begiven onthegrounds that thecandidate’s knowledgeofthelanguageinwhichthethesis is presented is inadequate.

3.7.3The presentationand vivavoceshallnormally beheldintheUnited Kingdom,orat aMiddlesex University internationaloffice.

3.7.4A candidate’s AcademicAdviserorConsultantwillnormally actas internal project examiner for the MProf,but not for the DProf. For the DProf, the role of internal project examiner is undertaken by an independent academic. For both the MProf and the DProf, there will be an external examiner. Observers maybe present only withtheagreementofthecandidateandtheexaminers. Observers are not expected toparticipateintheassessment,but mayask questions ifrequested by the Chair. Observers shallwithdraw priortothedeliberations oftheexaminers on theoutcomeoftheexamination.

3.7.5The presentationand vivavoce examination panel is a delegated panel of the programmeAssessment Boardwhichshallmakeadecisionontheassessment reports submittedby theexaminersinrespectofa candidate.Theprogramme assessment board shalldeterminethegradesandmakerecommendations totheResearchDegrees Board. TheResearch Degrees Board may appoint asubgrouptoratify MProf, DProfandSVPrecommendations. Thepower toconferadegree shallrest withtheAcademic BoardoftheUniversity.

3.7.6Whereevidenceofacademic misconductinthepreparationofthe project workor otherirregularitiesintheconduct oftheexaminationcometolight subsequent to therecommendationoftheexaminers,theResearchDegrees Boardshallconsiderthematter,ifnecessary inconsultationwiththe examiners,andtakeappropriateaction. The university’s plagiarism procedures for research degrees apply.

3.7.7The Programme AssessmentBoardor School Research Degree Committeeshallensurethat examinations areconducted andtherecommendations oftheexaminers arepresented whollyin accordancewithUniversity regulations. Inany instancewherethe ResearchandResearchDegrees Committeeis madeawareofa failuretocomply withall theproceduresoftheexaminationprocess,it maydeclarethe examinationnulland voidandappoint newexaminers.

3.8Examination procedures

3.8.1The candidate’sAcademicAdvisershallproposeontheappropriateformthe arrangements forthecandidate’s examinationtotheResearch Degrees Boardforapproval. For collaborative provision the proposal will be routed via the appropriate School or IWBL. This shouldbedone nolaterthan threemonths beforethedateoftheexamination. Theexaminationmaynot take placeuntilthe examinationarrangements have beenapproved. Inspecialcircumstances,the ResearchDegrees Boardmayact directly toappoint examiners andarrangetheassessmentofthe candidate.

3.8.2TheAcademic Registryshallmakeknowntothe candidatethe proceduretobefollowed for thesubmissionofthe projectoutcome,andany conditions tobesatisfiedbeforethe candidatemay beconsidered eligiblefor examination.

3.8.3TheAcademic Registryshallnotify the candidate,theexaminers, andany observers ofthedate,time,andvenueofthe presentationandvivavoce.

3.8.4Examiners shouldnot normally haveless thanfourweeks toreadandevaluatethe candidate’sproject work/outcome. Incases whereit hasbeenagreedthat the submissionshouldbelongerthannormal(forexample,agroupproject),extra timeshouldbepermitted asdeterminedby theexaminers.

3.8.5The Programme AdministrationManager shallsenda copy oftheproject work/outcometoeachexaminertogetherwiththeexaminer’s preliminary assessmentreport formandtheUniversity’s regulations,andshallensurethat the examiners areproperly briefedastotheirduties.

3.8.6TheAcademic Registryshallensurethat allexaminers have completed andreturned theirpreliminary assessment forms totheUniversity beforethepresentationand vivavocetakesplace.

3.9Candidate’sresponsibilitiesinthe examination process

3.9.1The candidateshallensurethat the project work/outcomeis submitted and received beforetheexpiry oftheregistrationperiod.

3.9.2Thesubmissionoftheproject work/outcomeshallbeat thesolediscretionofthe candidate. Whilea candidatewouldbeunwisetosubmit the project work/outcomeforexaminationagainst theadviceofthesupervisory team,it is theirright todoso.Equally,candidatesshouldnotassumethat anacademic adviser’s orconsultant’s agreementtothesubmissionguarantees theawardof the degree.

3.9.3Whereacandidatesubmits theirproject work/outcomeagainst theadviceofthe supervisors,thelattershallmakeknownthis factinwriting totheDean of School or Director of the IWBL and the Academic Registry,immediately thesubmissionis made. The Academic Registryshallnotinformtheexaminers ofthisfact,but shallinformtheChairof the Programme AssessmentBoard.

3.9.4The candidateshalltake nopartinthearrangements oftheexaminationandshall have noformalcontactwiththeexternalexaminer(s) betweentheirappointment asexaminers andthepresentationandvivavoce.

3.9.5The candidateshallensurethat the project outcome formatis inaccordancewith therequirementsforsubmissionforpart2oftheM/DProf(seesection3.6above).

3.10 Examinersand Chair

AllMProf, DProfandSVP presentations andvivavoceshallbechaired. A Chairshallbe independent ofthe candidate’s consultancy teamandshallnormally beasenioracademic withexperienceofexamining professional doctorates at Middlesex University. AChairisnot anexaminer. Theirroleis toensure that theexaminers arefully apprised of,andfollow,theregulations andproceduresof theUniversity relating toMProf/DProf/SVPexamining. For the examination of candidates from partner institutions, the Chair will always be from the University.

3.10.1Candidateswho are not permanent membersoftheUniversitystaff

Acandidate for the degreeof:

  • DProf(orSVPvariant)shallbeexaminedby oneortwoexternalexaminer(s),andby oneindependentinternalexaminer. For collaborative provision the internal examiner will normally be from the partner institution in which the candidate is studying. Thecandidate’s advisershallattendtheoral examinationasadvisertotheexam board. Theadvisershallnot beanexaminer.
  • MProf(orSVPvariant)shallbeexaminedby oneortwoexternalexaminer(s)andby oneinternalexaminer.The candidate’s advisershallnormally betheinternalexaminer.

3.10.2 Candidateswho arepermanentmembersofthe University staff

Bothforthedegree ofDProf(SVP equivalent)andforthedegree ofMProf(SVP equivalent)there shallbe twoexternalexaminers. Additionally,there maybe one internal examiner. For DProf they shallnotbe a memberofthe candidate’s advisory team. The candidate’sAdvisernormally attendsthe oralexaminationasadviserto the exam board.

3.10.3Anexternalexaminershallbeindependent ofboththe University andofthe candidate’s organisationandshallnot have actedpreviously as the candidate’s ConsultantorAdviser. Formermembers ofstaffor DProf/SVP graduatesshallnot

normally be approveduntil three years afterthe terminationoftheiremployment orstudiesrespectively withthe University or the partner institution. For collaborative SVPs external examiners shall be nominated by the partner institution and approved by the Research Degrees Board.

3.10.4Prior to appointment, an external examiner shall be asked whether he/she has had any previous connection with the candidate which might give rise to a conflict of interest. Any declared previous connection shall be evaluated and a decision made as to whether it has the potential to give rise to a conflict of interest by the Research Degrees Board before the nomination is approved.

3.10.5The ResearchDegrees Boardshallensure that the sameExternal examineris notapprovedsofrequently inits opinionthat theirfamiliaritywiththe programme mightprejudice objective judgment. Inthe case of several MProf/DProf/SVP candidatesundertakingprojects onasimilartopic,anyparticularexaminershallnot normally examine more thanthree candidatesinthesame assessment round.

3.10.6An internal examiner shall be defined as an examiner who is:

aa member of staff of the University or the partner institution; or

ba member of staff of the candidate's Collaborating Establishment.

cVisiting Professors, Emeritus Professors, Honorary Professors of the University or of the partner institution.

There shall not be more than one internal examiner.

3.10.7Examiners shallbe actively engaged inresearchand/orprofessionaldevelopment inthe generalareaofthe candidate’s finalproject and,wherepracticable,have experience asa specialist inthe topic(s)tobe examined.