The assessment committee must compose of three members:
- The members should be professors, full-time associate professors, or possess equivalent professional qualifications in the relevant field
- Two of the members must come from external institutions, and at least one of them should be from a foreign institution, unless this is not suitable from an academic perspective
Each assessor is responsible for ensuring that there are no conflicts of interest when assessing the PhD thesis. Assessors must contact the PhD School and the other committee members to disclose any prior involvement in the thesis or related matters. Additionally, none of the members should have published or collaborated on research projects with the PhD student.
For PhD students enrolled in the Industrial PhD Programme, at least one committee member must have research experience relevant to the business field in question, as outlined in PhD order § 26, paragraph 2. The representative from SDU serves as the committee chair. The student's supervisors cannot be committee members, but the main supervisor is linked to the committee without voting rights.
The faculty aims to ensure that both genders are represented in the Assessment Committee.
Appointment of the Assessment Committee
The Dean appoints the Assessment Committee based on a recommendation from the Head of Department.
When the submission warning is sent, the PhD School requests the Department to provide a suggestion for the Assessment Committee.
The Head of Department submits a proposed list for the Assessment Committee to the PhD School. Before doing so, the Head of Department must ensure that the nominated members of the Assessment Committee are willing to serve. Curriculum vitae (CVs) of the external examiners should be included.
Once the Dean approves the Assessment Committee, the PhD School informs the thesis author about the committee's composition. The author has one week to raise any objections to the committee members. If no objections are received within one week, the PhD School forwards the thesis to the Assessment Committee and the main supervisor.
The work of the Assessment Committee
The chair of the Assessment Committee is responsible for taking the lead in establishing the assessment timeline and agreeing on a tentative defense date as soon as the Committee is appointed. The defense date must be mutually agreed upon by the Assessment Committee, the principal supervisor, and the PhD student. The PhD School is informed of this date when it's decided, but it is not publicly disclosed until a positive recommendation is received from the Assessment Committee.
The chair of the Assessment Committee has the duty to involve the main supervisor in the process. This includes ensuring that the main supervisor is invited to the Assessment Committee's meetings, kept in the loop regarding email communications, and similar matters. The main supervisor's participation in the Assessment Committee's work is important to provide insights into the underlying PhD Program and the academic progress of the research project, among other things.
The chair is responsible for ensuring that the main supervisor is informed about the preliminary assessment of the thesis. The main supervisor should have the opportunity to provide input on the preliminary assessment and address any potential misunderstandings before it is sent to the PhD School.
Preliminary assessment of the PhD thesis
Within 2 months after the thesis submission, the Assessment Committee is required to provide a preliminary recommendation, which must be signed by all its members. This preliminary recommendation determines whether the current form of the thesis is suitable for awarding the PhD degree. It is the responsibility of the department secretariat to ensure that the Assessment Committee meets this deadline. Please note that the month of July is not included in the deadline for the preliminary recommendation.
The preliminary recommendation typically consists of 1-2 pages and should serve as a basis for the expected final recommendation. It must address the quality, self-conduct, and international standard of the thesis. The preliminary assessment should cover any significant critical points raised by the Assessment Committee. Additionally, it should note whether the thesis complies with the department's publication guidelines. The recommendation should be justified, and the decision should be either unanimous or by a majority vote. The recommendation is sent to the department's PhD secretary, who forwards it to the PhD School. After approval from the Head of the PhD School, a copy of the recommendation is sent to the author.
If the recommendation is positive, the Assessment Committee, along with the recommendation, submits a proposal for the title of the defense lecture and suggests a time and location to the department secretary. The PhD student should have the opportunity to explain key parts of the thesis during the defense, but the defense should not be limited to this.
If the preliminary assessment of the thesis is positive, the defense can proceed. However, if the thesis is not recommended as suitable, the Assessment Committee will indicate in its recommendation whether the thesis can be resubmitted in a revised form and, if so, within what time frame.
The author and the principal supervisor should be given two weeks to provide comments on the recommendation.
Based on the comments from the Assessment Committee, and possibly those from the author and principal supervisor, the Dean, in consultation with the Head of the PhD School, makes one of the following decisions:
- The defense cannot take place.
- The thesis may be resubmitted in a revised form within a period of at least three months. If resubmitted, the thesis will be assessed by the same Assessment Committee, unless there are specific circumstances that apply.
- The thesis is to be re-assessed by a new Assessment Committee.