Informasjon til deg som er veileder
For deg som er veileder for PhD
In order to hold a disputation / final defence, the following has to be in place:
1. The department needs to forward a proposal to the Doctoral Committee suggesting a committee for the candidate. The Head of Department needs to sign the proposal. CVs for external members who have not been a part of the pre doc committee is required.
2. The Doctoral Committee (UUV) and the Dean need to approve the committee.
3. The candidate needs to submit the dissertation with all required additional documents. Information is available for the candidate at the student portal.
4. The Chair of the committee coordinates the committee's work. It is often useful to set deadlines.
5. The Chair of the committee must coordinate the date with the committee, Supervisor(s), Head of Department and candidate. The date is then to be forwarded to the Doctoral Administration. The Doctoral Administration will consult the Dean, book rooms etc and finally confirm the date.
6. Disputations will as far as possible take place during the semester. They will usually not take place during summer, Easter or Christmas vacations. The period between mid June and late August is also avoided. An effort is made to avoid work days in connection with bank holidays.
7. The committee's report and topic for trial lecture has to be sent to the Doctoral Administration within 3 months of the committee receiving the dissertation. The committee may submit its report before 3 months has passed.
8. The committee's report must be submitted to the Doctoral Administration, in a signed version (scanned signatures accepted) no later than one month before the date of the Final Defence
9. The dissertation must be made available to the public in the library in the final printed version no later than one month before the date of the Final Defence.
10. The topic of the trial lecture will be send to the candidate (by the Doctoral Administration) 10 working days before the Final Defence.
Rates for the committees:
10.000 NOK First Opponent
8000 NOK Second Opponent
7000 NOK Chair
PhD candidates should be encouraged to get involved in the process of finding their own supervisor. The Associate Dean should inform new PhD candidates that they are expected to approach faculty and ask about availability and willingness to supervise.
Departments can decide to propose an interim supervisor during the first year of the PhD. A supervisor close to the PhD candidate’s research area must then be proposed during the fall term of the second year.
The Department head proposes a supervisor and the Dean of the PhD programme decides on whether or not to approve the proposed supervisor. In approving a supervisor the Dean of the PhD programme, with advice from the Doctoral Programme Committee, will put emphasis on:
1. The proposed supervisor is an active researcher that publishes in the top journals of his/her academic area. To act as references, top journals are found at level 4 and 4* on the ABS rankings and at the Financial Times list of academic journals.
2. The proposed supervisor has an international network, co-authors papers with faculty from other well recognized universities and actively present research at conferences.
3. The proposed supervisor is experienced in supervising students and has a track record of helping students in starting a successful research career.
The above items are ordered in terms of importance. However, they are not strict requirements. Collectively they represent the profile of a BI faculty that should be capable of effectively supervise PhD students.
In cases where a proposed supervisor is not well described using the items above, the Department head needs to submit a justification to the Doctoral Program Committee explaining why the person in question would be the best supervisor available.
a) The report is independent of the pre doc - you are evaluating the dissertation and whether this is (as it stands today) worthy of being defended for the degree of PhD.
b) Here are a few bullet points which may help with the structure.
- The reports are typically between 3 and 7 pages, single line spacing font size 12. They often start with an introduction of the actual dissertation.
- Here is an example of the structure of two reports:
Report 1: 1. Introduction, 2. General remarks, 3. Strengths, 4. Weaknesses / problems, 5. Committee's Conclusion
Report 2: 1. Research area, 2. Framework, 3. Research method, 4. Empirical part, 5. Analysis, 6. Conclusions, 6. Evaluation, 7. Committee's conclusion.
- All reports end with a conclusion in the final paragraph where it clearly states whether the committee finds the dissertation worthy of formal defence for the PhD degree or not. The report needs to be signed by all members of the committee (we do request original signatures - but we can arrange that on the day of the disputation.) So a way to arrange this is by having all members of the committee signing the final page of the report and scanning it. The chairman of the committee then needs to join the pages together so the complete report has all signatures and e-mail it to the Doctoral Administration.
- How the report turns out depends on the dissertation, the committee and the chairman. Often the first and second opponent write a few pages of comments and send to the chairman who writes one report based on the opponents comments. And then the final report is sent to the committee members for approval / signatures.
For further information on the report, or in case of disagreements within the committee, please see the PhD regulations Section 8. The committee's report, procedure for the report or contact the Doctoral Administration.
The Pre Doc Committee must be appointed based on a proposal by the Associate Dean of the department responsible for the specialisation and in consultation with the candidate's supervisor. The proposal is to be signed by the Head of Department before it is sent to the Doctoral Committee (UUV). The Doctoral Committee needs to approve the proposal.
The pre doc committee should be as follows:
Chairman: Main supervisor
First opponent: An external member
Second opponent: A member of BI's academic staff
The member of BI's academic staff will usually end up being the Chairman of the final committee, and the external member of the pre doc will be the second opponent of the final committee.
Information regarding the pre doc is available in the student portal (this is only meant as guidelines)
When the committee is approved, the supervisor should coordinate a date, and inform the Doctoral Administration so that a room can be booked.
The candidate will be asked to submit the pre doc paper just over one month prior to the date for the defence. The committee will have one month to evaluate the pre doc paper. They are not asked to write a report. All feedback will be given during the pre doc. Many candidates find it useful to bring a digital recorder in order to listen to the feedback afterwards. Candidates should ask permission before recording.