• Section 1 - Summary
• Section 2 - Accountability
• Section 3 - Scope / Application
• Section 4 - Definitions
• Section 5 - Policy/Regulation
• Section 6 - Procedures
• Part A - Summary of Roles and Responsibilities
• Part B - General
• Part C - PhD (Integrated) – Year 1 Thesis
• Part D - Nomination of Examiners – all theses/exegeses
• Requirements for Nomination
• Submission of Nominations
• Part E - Endorsement and Approval of Examiners
• Confidentiality of Examiners
• Part F - Submission of Theses for Examination
• Copies of Theses
• Special Requirements for Submission of a Thesis by Creative Project
• Enrolment Status around Submission
• Part G - Examination Process
• Examination of Theses that include a Live Performance or Exhibition
• Examiner Reports and Recommendations
• Part H - Classification of Thesis
• Restricted Access to a Thesis
• Dissatisfaction with Examination and/or Classification Outcome
• Part I - Conferral of Award
• Conflict of Roles
• Section 7 - Guidelines

Section 1 - Summary

(1) This Procedure outlines Higher Degree by Research (HDR) thesis submission, nomination of examiners, examination, amending the examined thesis, and the classification and conferral process.

Section 2 - Accountability

Section 3 - Scope / Application

(2) This Procedure applies to domestic and international candidates and VU Research employees.

Section 4 - Definitions

(3) International Standing – Defined as publications or grants of international standing, international collaboration or international research experience.

(4) Thesis Classification – The classification of a thesis is the process whereby a result is assigned to a HDR degree/thesis based on the majority result from the examiners reports.

Section 5 - Policy/Regulation

(5) See Higher Degrees by Research Policy.

Section 6 - Procedures

Part A - Summary of Roles and Responsibilities

Part B - General

(6) HDR candidates will have their thesis examined by at least two external examiners.

(7) The examination process varies by degree type.

(8) The relevant Deputy Director, Research Institute, or their nominee, acts as Chair of Examiners for HDR theses and has academic responsibility for the examination process.

(9) The ORTQI manages the conduct of the examination and classification process.

(10) Where the Principal Supervisor is also the Deputy Director, Research Institute, he or she is unable to act as Chair of Examiners and another senior academic must act as the Chair of Examiners for that candidate's thesis. ORTQI must be advised of the appointment at the time the thesis is submitted for examination.

(11) During their first year of study (EFT), PhD (Integrated) candidates will be required to submit a Year 1 Thesis.  This thesis is normally examined internally. Please refer to Part C for further information.

Part C - PhD (Integrated) – Year 1 Thesis

(12) A PhD (Integrated) Year 1 Thesis is to be between 12,000 and 15,000 words and relate to a research project conceptualised as a sub-project of the planned PhD.  Candidates will use the feedback received from the examiner(s) in the preparation of their candidature proposal and if approved, their overall PhD thesis.

(13) The Year 1 thesis is to be assessed at the level of AQF 9.

(14) PhD (Integrated) Candidates must submit their Year 1 Thesis by the due dates for the semester in which they are due to submit their Year 1 Thesis for examination.

(15) The Year 1 thesis will be examined by a single examiner internal to VU, with expertise in the area of the thesis, but has no involvement in supervision of the Year 1 project.

(16) The nomination of the examiner must be submitted to ORTQI (Academic Programs), by the due date for the semester in which Year 1 Thesis is due.

(17) In cases where a student achieves a 70% average across the Coursework units but a grade of 40 – 69% in the thesis, the thesis will be normally be referred to a second internal examiner and the average of the grades from both examiners will be the final grade.

(18) A PhD (Integrated) student who achieves a pass of 50% or above in all units including the Year 1 Thesis, but does not fulfil the hurdle requirement (70% average across the coursework units and 70% in the Year 1 Thesis) will be eligible for a Master of Research Practice exit award.

Part D - Nomination of Examiners – all theses/exegeses

Requirements for Nomination

(19) The Principal Supervisor is responsible for the nomination of appropriate examiners.  Nominated examiners are reviewed and endorsed by the relevant Deputy Director, Flagship Research Institute/Centres or their nominee prior to approval by the Dean, Graduate Research.

(20) Candidates may provide their Principal Supervisor with a list of suitable/unsuitable examiners for consideration, however, the final nominations are the Principal Supervisor's responsibility.

(21) For the submission of the final thesis, potential examiners should:

1. be appropriately qualified experts normally of international standing in their discipline/field;
2. be external to Victoria University (VU);
3. normally be currently associated with a university or research institution;
4. have demonstrated current research expertise relevant to the thesis;
5. not have a conflict of interest in accordance with the official University Conflict of Interest in Thesis Examination Guidelines;
6. be independent of each other.

(22) The specific requirements for each degree type are:

(23) Only in exceptional and well documented circumstances will the Dean, Graduate Research approve two examiners currently employed by the same institution or with a prior close collaboration.

(24) The Principal Supervisor should establish that the nominated examiners will be available to assess the thesis at the anticipated time of submission, and are available to provide a report within a two-month period.

(25) If it is known at the time of nomination that an examiner is not able to provide their report within a two-month period but the Principal Supervisor wishes to proceed with the nomination, the Principal Supervisor must inform the candidate when they expect the report to be received and seek written approval for an extension to the time that the examiner will have to complete their examination. This should be provided this with nomination documentation.

(26) The Principal Supervisor is to advise potential examiners that the thesis will made available to them electronically.

Submission of Nominations

(27) The Principal Supervisor is to submit the completed Nomination of Examiners form to ORTQI.  The ORTQI then liaises with the Chair of Examiners for review and endorsement of the examiners.

(28) If an additional/replacement examiner is required, the Nomination of Additional Examiner form should be completed and submitted to the ORTQI who manages the examiner approval process according to Part E below.

(29) If examiners are yet to be approved at the time of submission of the thesis for examination, ORTQI will contact the Principal Supervisor to ascertain when examiners will be appointed and inform the candidate that there is a delay to the nomination.

(30) The Principal Supervisor must indicate, when nominating examiners, whether there is material in the thesis that is covered by confidentiality obligations (normally linked to a project agreement and/or invention disclosure/s), and confirm that examiners have been advised of this and have agreed to examine the thesis on a confidential basis.

(31) In nominating examiners to the Chair of Examiners, the Principal Supervisor must:

1. provide a copy of the draft thesis abstract;
2. provide information about each nominated examiner that demonstrates their research and research training expertise in relation to the specific project, as well as their international standing in the field (usually no more than two pages per examiner);
3. identify and declare any major or minor potential conflicts of interest in accordance with the University Conflict of Interest in Thesis Examination Guidelines.

(32) As examiners should be affiliated with a university or research institution, email addresses associated with the university or research institution will be used for the delivery of the thesis to an approved examiner.

(33) When a Principal Supervisor has failed to nominate examiners a month after thesis submission, the Chair of Examiners will be responsible for assisting in identifying potential examiners and ensuring that the completed Nomination of Examiner form is submitted to ORTQI no later than two months following thesis submission. In such cases, the Chair of Examiners may nominate the Principal Supervisor for de-registration for failing to nominate examiners in a timely manner.

Part E - Endorsement and Approval of Examiners

(34) The Chair of Examiners will review and if appropriate endorse the Principal Supervisor's recommendation of examiners. The nomination will be forwarded to ORTQI for further review. Examiners will only be considered as appointed when the Dean, Graduate Research has provided final approval.

(35) Once examiners are approved and the candidate has met all submission requirements as outlined in Part F below, the thesis can be forwarded to the approved examiners.

Confidentiality of Examiners

(36) The list of nominated examiners will not be disclosed to the candidate or to the other examiner/s prior to the thesis examination being completed, unless the circumstances in Clause 37 prevail.

(37) In the case of examination of a Thesis by Creative Project that requires examiner attendance at a live performance or exhibition, the candidate may be informed of the identity of the examiners at the time of the performance or exhibition, if the nature of the performance or exhibition means that it will be impossible for their role to remain confidential.

(38) Unless an examiner advises otherwise, their details will be released to the candidate at the conclusion of the examination process.

Part F - Submission of Theses for Examination

(39) The following general requirements must be met for a thesis to be accepted by the ORTQI for examination:

1. the candidate must be currently enrolled;
2. all required coursework and candidature milestones must be satisfactorily completed;
3. the thesis title must be identical to the title registered with the University. Where there has been a change of title from that which was approved at candidature, candidates must confirm the change and the reasons for it on the Release of Thesis form;
4. the signed candidate declaration, using the approved Student Declaration template must be included in the thesis;
5. the thesis must be accompanied by a completed and signed Release of Thesis form in which the Chair of Examiners endorses the Principal Supervisor's recommendation that the thesis is of examinable standard.

(40) If there is disagreement in the first instance concerning as to whether the thesis is ready for submission, the matter should be discussed between the candidate, supervisor/s and the Chair of Examiners. If resolution cannot be found, the matter should be referred to the Dean, Graduate Research.

(41) In exceptional circumstances, if a candidate insists on submitting the thesis (or re-examined thesis) against the advice of the supervisors and Chair of Examiners, the candidate will be asked to sign a declaration that releases the University from any responsibility should the nominated examiners adversely appraise the thesis.  The signed declaration should accompany the thesis.  In this instance, the relevant Deputy Director, Flagship Research Institute/Centres will be responsible for nominating examiners (if the above applies to an initial examination).

Copies of Theses

(42) Each candidate must lodge one electronic copy of their thesis (PDF) for examination unless requested otherwise. The electronic copy will be made available to the examiner/s.

Special Requirements for Submission of a Thesis by Creative Project

(43) In all cases where the creative project does not include a live performance or exhibition, the three required components for submission, the Creative Component, the Analytical Written Component and the Thesis Abstract must be submitted simultaneously.

(44) ORTQI should be notified at least six months in advance of the timing of the initial presentation where the creative project involves a live performance or exhibition.  The timing, in relation to the full submission of the Thesis by Creative Project for examination, will be planned and formally approved, prior to the appointment of examiners and notification to the ORTQI.

(45) The formal submission of the Analytical Written Component may occur prior to, simultaneous with, or after the live performance or exhibition, but must occur no later than four calendar months following the conclusion of the live performance or exhibition. The scheduling of the live performance or exhibition must take this into account.

(46) All examiners will be provided with the Thesis Abstract no less than 10 University business days prior to their scheduled attendance at the live performance or exhibition. In addition, if the candidate has opted for the Analytical Written Component to be read prior to the viewing of the performance or exhibition, then this must also be provided no less than 10 University business days prior to the scheduled live performance or exhibition.

(47) If the candidate is unable to formally submit the written component of the work within four calendar months of the live performance or exhibition then an Application for Extension form must be completed prior to the due date.

(48) Failure to formally submit the written component by the due date, or apply for an extension by the due date, will result in the commencement of Unsatisfactory Progress proceedings against the candidate.

Enrolment Status around Submission

(49) Once a candidate has submitted their thesis for examination, they are not required to re-enrol. They will, however, remain a candidate of the University until their thesis has been classified.

(50) International candidates who have submitted their thesis for examination are responsible for ensuring that their visa status is current and correct if they wish to remain in the country.

(51) Scholarship stipend payments will cease on submission of a thesis for examination

Part G - Examination Process

(52) The thesis will be forwarded to the approved examiners normally within five University business days following receipt of the thesis and/or approval of examiners. The examiner will be requested to confirm receipt of the thesis.

(53) Examiners are given two months from the date the thesis was dispatched to them to return their examination report. Examiners will receive a reminder from ORTQI after six weeks and contacted again once the two month period has lapsed. In the event that an examiner's report has not been returned after 12 weeks, an additional examiner is normally appointed.

(54) If, at any time, an examiner is no longer able to assess a thesis, a new examiner will be appointed and provided with two months from the date the thesis was released to them to assess and return their examination report.

(55) Candidates should contact their supervisor should they have any questions following the submission of their thesis for examination.

(56) Examiners will receive the University’s examination guidelines as well as any additional guidelines in relation to the University’s expectations of the standards and outcomes for that specific research degree.

(57) If examination of the thesis is subject to confidentiality obligations, the examiners will be asked to sign and return a "One Way Confidentiality Deed Poll" prior to having the thesis released to them.

(58) ORTQI will advise the candidate should there be an unforeseen delay in receiving their examination results (see Clause 53).  The actual reason will not be disclosed to the candidate.

Examination of Theses that include a Live Performance or Exhibition

(59) Examiners will be advised of the format of the examinable work at the time of their engagement by the University, including any requirement to attend a live performance or exhibition.

(60) One Reserve Examiner is appointed in the event that one of the two original examiners is for some reason unable to attend the exhibition or performance, or to complete other aspects of the examination process.

(61) All examiners including the Reserve Examiner are expected to attend the exhibition or performance of the candidate’s creative work as a component of the thesis.

(62) The third examiner will be designated the Reserve Examiner. The Reserve Examiner is required to produce an examination report but the report will be for feedback only unless:

1. a primary examiner is unable to attend a performance and ORTQI has been unable to contact another examiner; or
2. a primary examiner has been able to attend the performance but unable to write a report on the performance project; or
3. a primary examiner is late in providing a report on the performance project.

(63) The candidate will only receive the examination reports of the first two examiners unless:

1. one of the original examiners has been replaced; or
2. there is a divergent result between the first two examiners;

(64) The examiners will write independent reports on the creative project, including a short description of the Creative Component and its execution, and provide their report and recommendation within two months of receiving the formal submission.

(65) The examiners shall not communicate with each other or the candidate about the live performance or exhibition until their independent examination reports have been submitted and the thesis has been classified.

Examiner Reports and Recommendations

Examiner Recommendations

(66) Each examiner will make one of the following recommendations for the classification of the thesis/major work:

1. PASSED without further correction;
2. PASSED, subject to minor corrections being made to the satisfaction of the Chair of Examiners;
3. PASSED, subject to substantial amendment, as outlined in the examiner’s report, being made to the satisfaction of the Chair of Examiners;
4. DEFERRED and the candidate should be permitted to resubmit the thesis in a revised form;
5. FAILED.

(67) In addition to providing their examiners’ report, examiners are also asked when examining a doctorate, to assess the quality of the thesis and the generic attributes of the candidate.

After Examiners' Reports are Received

(68) The examination results will not be released until all reports have been received.

(69) Once all reports have been received, ORTQI will send the examination reports to the candidate copied to the Chair of Examiners and all supervisors via email.

(70) The University will pay examiners on receipt of their examination report an honorarium rate, set in accordance by the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee.

(71) When there is a divergent view between the examiners about the proposed recommendation for pass, defer or fail, a third examiner will be nominated. Once the third examiner’s report has been received, the majority of the examiners’ recommendations will determine the result for the thesis.  In the case of a divergent result from the third examiner one passed, one deferred and one fail), the thesis will be sent to a fourth examiner for an overall result. The examination results will not be released until all reports have been received.

Overall Recommendation for a Passed Thesis

(72) If both, or two out of three, examiners recommend that the thesis be passed, then the candidate is required to prepare a Response to the Examiners using the Response to Examiner Template, and revise their thesis accordingly. Candidates are expected to respond to the comments made by all examiners (irrespective of the recommended grade).

(73) In the event that one examiner has recommended that the thesis be classified as failed (but the overall recommendation is a pass due to a majority rule), every effort should be made to address the comments made by that examiner in the Response to Examiner Template.

(74) Where an examiner recommends a change to the thesis title, the candidate must document their response to this in the Response to Examiner Template.

(75) After the candidate and supervisor have completed their Response to Examiners and revised their thesis accordingly, the candidate must submit their thesis to the Chair of Examiners normally within:

1. two months (EFT) if both results are 'passed' with no or minor changes, or a combination of these two recommendations;
2. four months (EFT) in all other cases (substantial amendments or one deferred/failed result received).

(76) If the candidate requires additional time to revise their the thesis and respond to the examiners, the candidate must complete the Application for Extension form two weeks prior to the expiry date.  Normally no more than three additional months EFT will be granted.

(77) Where a candidate receives an overall pass result, the candidate, may still access the University library, their supervisor, and use their University email account even though they are not required to re-enrol.

(78) Where a candidate has failed to submit the revised thesis within the timeframe outlined in Clause 75 or to apply for an extension, ORTQI will commence Unsatisfactory Progress proceedings.

Overall Recommendation for a Deferred Thesis

(79) If the majority of examiners recommend that the thesis be deferred, then the candidate will be required to re-enrol by the date stipulated by ORTQI and undertake a major re-write of the thesis.

(80) Unsatisfactory progress proceedings will commence against the candidate should they fail to re-enrol by the timelines stipulated in the above clause. 

(81) Normally, the candidate must resubmit their thesis for re-examination by the examiner(s) who initially deferred the thesis within twelve months EFT of receiving the notification.

(82) If the candidate exceeds the maximum duration for their course following re-enrolling for major rewrite, they will be liable for the post maximum duration fee.

(83) If the candidate requires more than twelve months (EFT) to make changes to the thesis prior to submitting for re-examination, the candidate must complete the Application for Extension form two weeks prior to their original deadline. Normally no more than three additional months will be granted.

(84) If the candidate wishes to resubmit their thesis for examination earlier than 9 months EFT, the candidate must submit the same documentation as outlined in Higher Degrees by Research Procedure 3 Pre-Candidature and Candidature, Clause 12 (a - c).

(85) All candidates submitting their thesis for re-examination must complete the Response to Examiner template addressing the substantive changes made to their thesis.  The candidate must ensure that the resubmitted thesis demonstrates they have met the criteria as stated in Higher Degrees by Research Procedure 8 Thesis Requirements, Part C. This documentation will be forwarded to the examiner(s) who deferred the thesis along with the resubmitted thesis. The initial examiner report(s) will also be returned to the examiner(s) (if applicable, the name of the other examiner will be de-identified).

(86) Where an examiner is unable to re-examine the revised thesis, a new examiner will be appointed and will be advised at the time of appointment that they are assessing a resubmitted thesis. The examiner will not be sent the initial examiner reports, template or detailed letter from the candidate addressing the substantive changes made to the thesis.

(87) The examiner(s) will be given two months from the date of dispatch of the thesis to return their report and will only be able to grade the thesis as 'passed' or 'failed'.  Brief comments may be provided for feedback only (no more than 1 double sided typed page).  Examiners will not be requested to complete the University Thesis Quality information.

(88) Where there is a divergent view between the examiners who assess the revised thesis, then:

1. in the case where one passed or failed result was received from the initial examination, this result will be used along with the re-examined results to determine the majority result of the thesis;
2. in the case of a re-examination, the candidate is still expected to respond to all examination reports when submitting their thesis for classification;
3. in the case where only two examiners have assessed the thesis, a new examiner will be appointed in line with the provisions outlined in Clause 21.

Overall Recommendation for a Failed Thesis

(89) If the majority of examiners recommend that the thesis be failed, this will be conveyed to the candidate, supervisory team, Chair of Examiners and Research and Research Training Committee.

(90) The Dean, Graduate Research will classify the thesis as failed.

(91) Should the candidate wish to appeal the recommendation, the process as outlined in Clause 107 - 112 of this Procedure must be followed.

Part H - Classification of Thesis

(92) In the case of all degrees, the classification will be simply 'Passed' or 'Failed' and the result recorded on the transcript will be S (ungraded pass) or U (ungraded fail).

(93) In the case where the thesis has been classified as 'Failed':

1. the result will be recorded following the three week period allocated to candidates to appeal the decision;
2. the thesis cannot be revised and resubmitted for any other research degree at VU.  

(94) In the case of candidates sponsored by DFAT, ORTQI will endeavour to ensure that the thesis is classified within the required timeframe.

(95) The Chair of Examiners reviews the final digital version of the thesis, the Response to Examiners, completes the Recommendation on Classification of a Doctoral Thesis and forwards this documentation to ORTQI.

(96) ORTQI will forward completed classification documents as follows:

1. where the examiners recommended either no or minor changes, and the Chair of Examiners has recommended a pass classification, the classification documents will be reviewed, signed and classified by the Dean, Graduate Research;
2. in all other cases, the classification paperwork will be forwarded to the Dean, Graduate Research to constitute an Academic Review Panel (ARP) to review the classification paperwork and the final thesis.

(97) Further to Clause 95, if the Dean, Graduate Research or the ARP request further changes to be made to the thesis prior to classification, the changes must be made and the revised thesis and or paperwork submitted within one month (EFT) of the notification, otherwise Unsatisfactory Progress Proceedings will be invoked.

(98) An ARP will normally comprise three members from representatives nominated by the Dean, Graduate Research:

1. a senior academic (Level D or E) involved in research training as a Principal supervisor, who has not had any association with the thesis (Chair);
2. a Deputy Director, Flagship Research Institute/Centres in which the candidate is not associated with; and
3. one other senior academic (Level D or E) involved in research training who has not had any association with the thesis.

(99) Where any candidate has been the subject of Unsatisfactory Progress Proceedings and their thesis is subsequently submitted to an ARP for classification, an individual who participated in the Unsatisfactory Progress Proceedings cannot serve as a member of that Panel. In these circumstances the Dean, Graduate Research will appoint the members of the Panel, including the Chair.

(100) Once the ARP members have reviewed all documentation including the final version of the thesis and certified that the candidate has satisfied all academic requirements for the award, the members will recommend to the Chair, ARP, that the thesis be classified.  The Chair, on behalf of the ARP will recommend the Dean, Graduate Research (or nominee) approves the classification.

(101) In the event the ARP is not of the view that the revised thesis does not address the examiners’ feedback, the Chair, ARP will write to the supervisory team advising of the areas requiring further clarification and/or revision and the timelines for resubmission of the revised thesis and supporting documentation to the Panel.  Failure to make the required amendments in the timelines stipulated will result in unsatisfactory progress proceedings being instigated against the candidate.

(102) Once the Dean, Graduate Research (or nominee) has classified the thesis, ORTQI will notify the candidate in writing of the requirement to supply an electronic (PDF) copy of the final version of the thesis by the date stipulated. This is a prerequisite in order to be eligible to graduate.

(103) Once the candidate's thesis has been classified, all candidate entitlements, including any allocated study space will cease.

Restricted Access to a Thesis

(104)  Where there are commercial intellectual property issues, or the circumstances of the research project warrant the imposition of a measure of secrecy, the candidate may discuss with the supervisory team restricting partial or full access to the thesis. Candidates should consider whether restricting access would impede their ability to publish their research or to make their work and achievements known to potential employers. A thesis can be restricted for up to two years. In exceptional circumstances, a further extension to restrict access may be granted.

(105) The completed Restricted Access to a Thesis Form is submitted with the electronic copy to the ORTQI. The Dean, Graduate Research approves applications for restricted access to a thesis.  If approved, the ORTQI notifies the candidate, supervisory team and the library.

(106) Once the restricted period has lapsed, the thesis will become available to the public unless the candidate reapplies for a further extension.

Dissatisfaction with Examination and/or Classification Outcome

(107) Candidates who wish to appeal the outcome of their thesis examination (including classification) have up until three weeks from receiving the examination and/or classification outcome, and may do so on the following grounds:

1. procedural irregularities in the examination process;
2. evidence of prejudice or bias in the examination process.

(108) The application for appeal must be addressed to the Chair, Research and Research Training Committee, C/O ORTQI.

(109) An HDR Examination Appeals Panel (HDR EAP) will be elected by the Chair, Research and Research Training Committee (or nominee) and membership will comprise:

1. Panel Chair:  Chair of the Research and Research Training Committee, or nominee;
2. A Deputy Director, Flagship Research Institute/Centres other than that in which the candidate is associated with, or nominee;
3. A senior researcher from the Flagship Research Institute/Centres in which the candidate is associate with, or nominee;
4. Academic Board's Graduate Research Student representative, or nominee;
5. Vice-President (Research) or nominee.

(110) The composition of the HDR EAP can only be challenged if evidence is provided prior to the Hearing to the Chair detailing prejudice or bias against the candidate.

(111) The members of the Panel must not have had any prior involvement with the candidate or the examination or classification of the thesis.

(112) The decisions of the HDR EAP are final and binding and there is no further avenue for appeal within Victoria University.

Part I - Conferral of Award

(113) The Dean, Graduate Research provides a list of candidates who have been classified as having satisfied all the requirements for the award to University Council, who authorises the conferral of the awards, for HDR degrees.

(114) The Dean, Graduate Research provides the Research and Research Training Committee, for transmission to the Academic Board, with an annual report on the examination and classification process and the quality of the outcomes achieved.

(115) On confirmation of receipt of the electronic copy of the thesis by ORTQI and conferral by the University, a Notice of Completion, academic transcript and AHEGS statement are generated by Assessment and Completions and forwarded to the graduand.

(116) Following conferral, doctoral candidates may use the title "Dr".

(117) The graduand is invited to participate in the next round of graduation ceremonies where the testamur will be presented.  Candidates who graduate in absentia can organise for their testamur to be collected from campus or mailed for a fee.

(118) Candidates only need to apply to graduate if they are enrolled in a course and wish to exit this course with a lower (alternate) award.  In this instance, candidates will need to complete the Application for an Award Alternate Exit form.

Conflict of Roles

(119) No individual may be involved in dual or multiple roles. Where the potential for a conflict of roles exists the following alternate delegations will normally apply:

1. For Deputy Director, Flagship Research Institute/Centres who is also the Principal Supervisor - The Dean, Graduate Research (or their nominee, normally a senior academic).
2. For Deputy Director, Flagship Research Institute/Centres in which the candidate is associated with – Deputy Director, Flagship Research Institute/Centres of the other Flagship Research Institute/Centres.
3. For the Dean, Graduate Research – Vice-President (Research) or nominee.

Section 7 - Guidelines

(120) Forms and guidelines for graduate researchers