View Current

'Higher Degree by Research Examinations Committee' - Membership and Terms of Reference

This is the current version of this document. To view historic versions, click the link in the document's navigation bar.

Section 1 - Membership

(1) Each Higher Degree by Research Examinations Committee shall comprise:  

  1. Dean, Graduate Research or relevant Faculty, Sub Dean Graduate Studies - Presiding Officer
  2. three appropriately qualified academic staff of the University, appointed by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Vice-President (Research) or their delegate.

(2) Right of audience:

  1. Chair, Academic Senate
  2. Dean, Graduate Research
  3. an Office of Research Services administrative support staff member.

(3) Alternate member: Where the Sub Dean (Graduate Studies) is the candidate’s supervisor or otherwise has a conflict of interest, another chair will be nominated by the Dean, Graduate Research.

Top of Page

Section 2 - Terms of Reference

(4) The Higher Degree by Research Examinations Committee of the University Research Committee:

  1. shall consider response to external examiners recommendations and decide a final outcome on the work submitted
  2. shall manage all matters relating to the examination process of higher degree by research candidates in accordance with the Academic Regulations, and
  3. may refer decisions to the University Research Committee where it has difficulty reaching agreement or the matter is likely to create a new precedent for such decisions.

(5) The Higher Degree by Research Examinations Committee (the committee) will make one of the following recommendations:

  1. Once the candidate has made the substantive changes and any other changes to the satisfaction of the committee, the award will be conferred.
  2. The candidate will be required to resubmit the work by a specified date, which may require a further period of enrolment.
  3. Candidates may be called for an interview where the committee or the Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Vice-President (Research) believes the process would benefit from an interview with the candidate to determine the final examination outcome.
  4. An arbiter will be appointed to review the thesis and examiners’ reports.
  5. The work will be failed, the candidate not be permitted to resubmit, and the candidature be terminated.
  6. Where the candidature is for a doctor of philosophy award, the committee may alternatively recommend that the candidate not be awarded this degree, but be invited to revise the thesis and resubmit for examination for a master by research award.