AssessmentpolicyforYear1PhDstudents

Timeline of the activities/assessments October1 January2 May3 June4 Actions (i) Arrival and registration. (ii) Start the induction and enrol for relevant training sessions. (i) Submit a project plan (2 A4 pages long), agreed between student and supervisor. (ii) The project plan is assessed by the 2nd supervisor (iii) The 2nd supervisor and student meet to discuss the future course of the project. PhD students should have completed 8 PDR meetings online and the supervisor is expected to approve the notes of the meetings in TULIP. (i) All students are required to submit an annual progress report. This report should have (a) Introduction, (b) Objectives / Mathematical formulation, (c) Literature review, (d) Numerical Implementation and/or Experimental technique (as appropriate), (e) Results obtained so far, (f) updated project plan. It is expected that this report will normally be about 50 pages long for First Year PhD students. This report can be a work-in-progress version of the final thesis. The students are encouraged to submit any conference or journal papers that they might have published/submitted along with this report. (ii) The report is assessed by the primary supervisor and an academic staff member who is not a member of the supervisory team. (iii) The primary supervisor is also expected to comment on the number and frequency of PDR and supervisory meetings that have already taken place in the previous academic year, along with his/her assessment of the technical report. (iv) These reports should be sent to the DDPR by the end of July. (i) Students are required to present their work at the annual research conference. (ii) The session chair will assess the performance of the student based on the oral presentation and the subsequent Q&A session. (iii) The feedback on the oral presentation will be sent to the DDPR. (iv) All students and First Supervisors must complete the Annual Progress Report online. The DDPR will make the final decision regarding progression based on the (i) PDR meeting reports, (ii) assessor reports on the annual progress report, (iii) feedback from the oral presentation in the annual research conference, (iv) the supervisors recommendation in the online Annual Progress Report. All the necessary paperwork will be sent to the second supervisor who is expected to have a meeting with the student in question to let him/her know about the final decision about progression and to discuss issues, which are relevant to the progress of this student in his/her subsequent years of study.

July5

August6

This is only applicable for the students joining on the 1st of October. For other students the induction process and registration should take place in the month in which they join for PhD. 2 This is only applicable for Year 1 students. The timeline shown here is applicable for the PhD students who will join from the 1st of October. For the students who join some other time will need to submit their project plan in the 3rd month of the start of their PhD. 3 The number of PDR meetings for a PhD student who did not join on the 1st of October should have one PDR meeting per month up to the end of May. 4 The timeline shown here is applicable for the PhD students who will join from the 1st of October. For the students who join some other time will need to submit their project plan in the 9th month of the start of their PhD. 5 This timeline is applicable for all PhD students irrespective of the starting date. 6 This timeline is applicable for all PhD students irrespective of the starting date. The DDPR will take decision if any of the assessment requirements can be waived for a particular student because of his/her starting date or for any other conditions (e.g. medical conditions).
1

 AssessmentpolicyforYear2PhDstudents
Timeline of the activities/assessments October7 May8 June9 Actions (i) Arrival and registration. (ii) Start the induction and enrol for relevant training sessions. PhD students should have completed 8 PDR meetings in online and the supervisor is expected to approve the notes of the meetings in TULIP. (i) All 2nd year PhD students are required to submit an annual progress report. This report should have (a) Introduction, (b) Objectives / Mathematical formulation, (c) Literature review, (d) Numerical Implementation and/or Experimental technique (as appropriate), (e) Results obtained so far, (f) Updated project plan. It is expected that this report will normally be about 100 pages long for 2nd year PhD students. This report can be a work-in-progress version of the final thesis. The students are encouraged to submit any conference or journal papers that they might have published/submitted along with this report. (ii) The report is assessed by the primary supervisor and an academic staff member who is not a member of the supervisory team. (iii)The primary supervisor is also expected to comment on the number and frequency of PDR and supervisory meetings that have already taken place in the previous academic year, along with his/her assessment of the technical report. (iv) These reports should be sent to the DDPR by the assessors of the annual progress report by the end of July. (i) All PhD students are required to present their work at the annual research conference. (ii) The session chair will assess the performance of the student based on the oral presentation and the subsequent Q&A session. (iii) The feedback on oral presentation will be sent to the DDPR. (iv) All students and First Supervisors must complete an Annual Progress Report online. The DDPR will make the final decision regarding progression based on the (i) PDR meeting reports, (ii) assessor reports on the annual progress report, (iii) feedback from the oral presentation in the annual research conference, (iv) the supervisors recommendation in the online Annual Progress Report. All the necessary paperwork will be sent to the second supervisor who is expected to have a meeting with the student in question to let him/her know about the final decision about progression and discuss issues, which are relevant to the progress of this student in his/her subsequent years of study.

July10

August11

This is only applicable for the students joining on the 1st of October. For other students the induction process and registration should take place in the month in which they join for PhD. 8 The number of PDR meetings for a PhD student who did not join on the 1st of October should have one PDR meeting per month up to the end of May. 9 The timeline shown here is applicable for the PhD students who will join from the 1st of October. For Year 2 students this report needs to be submitted on the 21st month of their PhD. 10 This timeline is applicable for all PhD students irrespective of the starting date. 11 This timeline is applicable for all PhD students irrespective of the starting date. The DDPR will take decision if any of the assessment requirements can be waived for a particular student because of his/her starting date or for any other conditions (e.g. medical conditions).
7

CoversheetforDepartmentalDirectorofPostgraduateResearch(DDPR)

STUDENTSNAME:
1

................................................................

Indicateiftheprojectplanrelatedassessmenthasbeencompleted(onlyfor1styearstudents) YES NO (deleteasappropriate) Indicateif8compulsoryPDRmeetingshavebeencompletedandsubmittedinTULIPbytheendofMay YES NO (deleteasappropriate) Comment: Indicateiftheassessmentoftheannualprogressreporthasbeencompleted YES NO (deleteasappropriate) Comment: Indicateiftheassessmentrelatedtotheoralpresentationattheannualresearchconferencehasbeen completed YES NO (deleteasappropriate) Comment: Indicate if the annual progress review has been completed by both the supervisor (s) and the student satisfactorily YES NO (deleteasappropriate) Comment: Indicateif3mandatorymeetingsbetweenthestudentandthesecondsupervisorhavetakenplaceinthelast academicyear YES NO (deleteasappropriate) Comment: PleasecommentonanyotheraspectswhichhaverelevancetothestudentsPhD Comment:

DDPR:......................................................................................................

Date:.....................

ASSESSMENT&FEEDBACK1stYEARPROJECTPLAN
The second supervisor is requested to complete the form after reading the 1st year project plan and meeting the student.

STUDENTSNAME:

................................................................

Commentonwhethertheprojectplanisrealisticandunderstoodbythestudent,isunderpinnedbythenecessary facilities,andwhetherthestudentandthetechnicalsupervisor(s)seemtohaveestablishedanappropriateworking relationship. FEEDBACK:

SecondSupervisor:......................................

Date:.....................

PleasesendacopyofthisformtothePhDsupervisorandacopywillbeheldattheStudentSupportOfficefortheir records.

ASSESSMENT&FEEDBACKFORM:ANNUALPROGRESSREPORT
1 QUALITY OF UNDERLYING SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (The supervisor is expected to make comments on independentthinkingandinitiativestakenbythestudent) Didthestudentreportarigorousresearchapproach?Howwelldidthestudentmakescientificandengineering judgements?Didthestudentdemonstrateindependentthinking?Howwelldidthestudentplanandmanage theirwork?Aretheaimsandobjectivesoftheprojectclearlyidentified? INTRODUCTION Howwelldoesthestudent,throughreferencetopriorwork,sethis/herresearchincontextanddemonstrateits engineeringrelevance? LITERATUREREVIEW Howwelldoesthestudent,reviewtheexistingbodyofliterature?Didthestudentidentifythegapsintheexisting bodyofknowledge?Howwelldoesthestudentplacehis./herworkinthecontextofexistingbodyofliterature. THEORETICALUNDERSTANDING Doesthestudentdemonstrateacomprehensiveunderstandingofthetheoreticalbackgroundoftheirresearch? Doesthereportappropriatedrawon,andmakeexplicitreferenceto,keypublicationsinthefield?Didthe studentstatethekeyassumptionsbehindtheanalysisundertaken? NUMERICAL/EXPERIMENTALFORMULATION Howwelldoesthestudentdescribetheirnumerical/experimentalmethodology?Didthestudentmentionthe boundaryconditionsappropriately?(Fornumericalprojects)Didthestudentquantifytheexperimentalerror and/ornumericaluncertaintyappropriately? PRESENTATION&DISCUSSIONOFRESULTS To what extent do the results presented in the report address the stated research objectives? Are the plots appropriate to the nature of the results presented in the report? Are the figures formatted and captioned correctly? Does the student demonstrate scientific insight and understanding in their interpretation of the results? CONCLUSIONS&FUTUREPROJECTPLANNING Does the student draw conclusions that are relevant to the research objectives? To what extent are these conclusionsjustifiedbytheworkpresented?Doesthestudenthavearealisticplanforthefurtherwork? TECHNICALWRITING Isthecontentstructuredappropriately,anddoesthestudentmakeeffectiveuseofheadings/subheadings?Is thenarrativeconciseanddoesitprogresslogicallyfromsectiontosection?Arethewritingstyle,grammarand spellingofanacceptablestandard?Arethelistofcontents,nomenclatureandabbreviationsusedproperly?

2 3 4

7 8

ASSESSMENT&FEEDBACKFORM:ANNUALPROGRESSREPORT

STUDENTSNAME:
1

................................................................

QUALITYOFUNDERLYINGSCIENTIFICRESEARCH FEEDBACK: INTRODUCTION FEEDBACK: LITERATUREREVIEW FEEDBACK: THEORETICALUNDERSTANDING FEEDBACK: NUMERICAL/EXPERIMENTALFORMULATION FEEDBACK: PRESENTATION&DISCUSSIONOFRESULTS FEEDBACK: CONCLUSIONS&FUTUREPROJECTPLANNING FEEDBACK: TECHNICALWRITING FEEDBACK:

PleasewriteyouroverallimpressionaboutthequalityofthisreportandindicateifthisPhDprojectisontheright coursesothatacompletioncanbeexpectedattheendofthreeyears.

Supervisor:......................................

Assessor:....................................... Date:.....................

School of Engineering - Annual review of PGR students Research Students Progress Presentations Candidate ___________________________________ Year_______ Date_____________

Session Chair_____________________ Internal Examiners ______________________ Tick boxes where required and add brief comments on overall progress. Return to Denise Bain.
Satisfactory excellent

Presentation

structure of presentation (introduction / main content / conclusions / future work / issues) lay-out and clarity of presentation slides (legible / use of figures / technical content (understanding of relevant material to a sufficient depth) quality of answers to questions (background knowledge / technical depth / understanding) clarity of speech time keeping (15 20 minutes)

Overall project

clarity of aims and objectives of entire project and how they will be achieved clarity of aims and objectives of future work and how they will be achieved Adequacy of equipment Engagement with supervisors Number of publications conf YES YES journal NO NO

Recommendations Progression to next year On target to complete research in 3 years and go to submission pending (if applicable) On target to compete write-up in 4th year (if applicable) Overall progress comments

YES

good

Poor

NO

Any problems ? (student or supervisor) Continueonbackofsheetifneeded.