3.2.1 Dr.grader (forskerutdanning)
Regulations for the doctoral degree philosophiae doctor (PhD) at the University of Bergen
Approved by the University Board of Governors 12 June 2003
Entry into force 20 June 2003, with the adjustment of 21 October 2004
§ 1. Aim
The research programme for the PhD degree at the University of Bergen is organised within the framework of the doctoral degree programmes offered by the institution. The aim of the research programme is to qualify the candidate for research activities and other kinds of work requiring a high level of scientific insight. The programme comprises an independent research project resulting in a scientific dissertation of a high academic standard.
The doctoral candidate shall, moreover, receive advanced theoretical and methodological instruction, providing depth and breadth in his/her discipline and placing this particular discipline in a wider frame of reference. The programme shall also train the candidate in disseminating academic work within his/her field and to students and the general public.
§ 2. Admission
§ 2.1. The applicant's formal qualifications
To be admitted to a doctoral degree programme, the applicant must have obtained a higher degree which is approved by the Faculty and which constitutes the basis for admission.
The Faculty may require that special courses be followed and/or special tests be passed prior to the applicant's admission to the programme.
Application for inclusion in organised training for researchers, application form .
§ 2.2 Plan for the research training
An application for admission must include an outline of the research training including a brief description of the project, a plan for funding, a plan for the training component and for the dissemination component, a schedule, an indication of academic and physical resource requirements, plans for stays at other research institutions or activities. Documentation of the training which constitutes the basis for admission must be enclosed.
The applicant's research environment shall actively participate in the formulation of the project description and the plan for the research programme.
The project description must specify theme, research questions and choice of theory and methodology. The description must include tentative milestones for the progression of the various components of the research project, and include a proposal for supervisor(s), cf § 4.3 below.
Should the applicant choose to use a language for the dissertation other than those which have been approved in § 6.3 of the Regulation, an application for this must be submitted together with the plan of study.
§ 2.3 Conditions for admission
Decisions on admission are based on an overall assessment of the project description, the applicant's formal qualifications, access to sufficient resources for its completion and the submitted plan for the research programme, cf § 2.2 above. The decision shall be reached pursuant to the recommendation of the department with which the candidate will be affiliated.
The doctoral candidate shall be part of a research environment and shall contribute actively to the research there.
§ 2.4 Necessary equipment
The candidate shall have access to necessary equipment for the completion of the research project. What is deemed to be necessary shall be decided by the academic staff/the Faculty. For candidates who have external funding and/or place of work, agreement will be reached with respect to the research project in question.
§ 2.5 Admission procedure
Application for admission should be addressed to the Faculty which administrates the doctoral programme the applicant is applying for and shall be sent through the department with which the applicant wishes to be affiliated. Should the number of applicants exceed the admission capacity, the Faculty is responsible for establishing the criteria with which to rank qualified applicants.
If the applicant's research project is likely to depend on contact with several academic research en-vironments, statements should be obtained from these environments prior to admission. A tentative division of the proportional involvement of the various environments must be indicated, including any external partners.
§.2.6 Miscellaneous
In addition to the PhD Regulation, the labour legislation in force, regulations etc. also apply.
When the doctoral candidate receives notification of admission, no more than one month shall elapse before the contract for the research programme has been signed.
§ 3. Contract
Admission is formalised in a written contract within the framework of the standard contract for admission approved by the University Board of Governors.
The written contract is entered into by the doctoral candidate, the supervisor(s), the department and the Faculty with which the candidate will be affiliated, and states the rights and duties of the parties involved.
If the doctoral candidate is connected with another place of employment or research environment, a written contract shall be set up regulating the working conditions, necessary funding and necessary research equipment. The contract shall guarantee that the candidate takes regular part in an active research milieu, and ensure that the research training can be carried out within the appointed time.
The contract shall indicate the point in time when the research programme shall commence.
Considerable changes in the contract which affect the execution of the research project or the training component are subject to the approval of the Faculty.
§ 4. Research training
§ 4.1 Standard duration
The research training shall be organised so that it can feasibly be completed within the standard timeframe. The contract period may be extended through leaves of absence in accordance with the candidate's rights as an employee, or through rights granted through their funding bodies (Norad, NUFU, etc.). The contractual period may also be extended for candidates who, in addition to the research programme, assume other academic tasks. Such tasks shall be stipulated between the candidate and the supervisor and approved by the Faculty.
The training component of the programme shall contain activities which correspond to at least 30 study credits. The training component shall be completed and approved before the dissertation is submitted.
§ 4.2. The training component
The training component of the research programme shall contain the necessary academic and methodological training which will benefit the doctoral candidate in his or her work on the dissertation and qualify the candidate for professions requiring indepth scientific knowledge. The training component shall also train the candidate in disseminating academic work within his/her field and to students and the general public. The training component shall also include training in the theory of science and ethics.
The Faculty is responsible for providing doctoral candidates with training at an advanced scientific level. If the Faculty does not itself organise the entire training component, the Faculty shall arrange for the candidate to participate in corresponding training at another unit/Faculty or at another institution offering accredited doctoral degree training. Academic networks and research institutions may be involved.
The training may consist partly of regular lectures/seminars and partly short intensive courses, or any other type of organised training approved by the Faculty. In those subjects where no organised training is available, an individual syllabus may be approved as part of the training.
As part of the training component, the doctoral candidate may deliver academic papers, arrange seminars or give lectures to gain experience and training in the dissemination of scientific knowledge. A popular scientific article requiring approximately the same effort as teaching may be deemed equivalent with respect to dissemination of scientific knowledge.
All applicants admitted to the research programme must complete the organised training component. The candidate must document that he/she has acquired the necessary knowledge. Such documentation may be provided through obligatory practical exercises, written or oral tests, giving lectures, teaching seminars or writing scientific and/or popular scientific articles, or in any other method approved by the Faculty.
The Faculty may grant exemption from participation in parts of the training programme if equivalent requirements have been fulfilled at another unit/Faculty or institution providing accredited training. Full or partial exemption may be also granted in special cases in which previous documented training or research experience is deemed to give the equivalent qualification, such as research stays at other research institutions, through academic networks and participation in national or international research courses and research institutions.
§ 4.3. Supervision
Work on the doctoral dissertation must be carried out under individual supervision, and the doctoral candidate must have regular contact with his/her supervisor(s) and shall be part of an active research environment. The doctoral candidate must be given the opportunity to have his/her dissertation work discussed at a seminars.
When the work on a doctoral dissertation involves several academic environments, the academic credit and any financial remuneration for the individual academic environments shall be stipulated in a separate contract. This also applies when the supervisors for a dissertation come from different academic environments. See the clause on this in the admission contract.
At least one supervisor shall be from the Faculty to which the doctoral candidate was admitted. Normally, one of them is appointed as the principal supervisor. In addition, one or more cosupervisors may be appointed.
The supervisor(s) must have a doctoral degree or other academic qualifications equivalent to a doctoral degree.
The principal supervisor is understood to be the supervisor who has the administrative responsibility for the research programme for the candidate in question. Normally the principal supervisor will also have the principal academic responsibility for the research programme for the candidate. The principal supervisor shall come from the Faculty to which the doctoral candidate was admitted and who manages the doctoral programme in question, or from institutions approved by the Faculty.
Co-supervisors are other academics who provide supervision.
An external supervisor is a cosupervisor from an academic environment at a Faculty which does not administrate the doctoral programme in question or who comes from an institution outside the University of Bergen. An external supervisor may be a principal supervisor according to institutional agreements between the environment in question and the University of Bergen.
§4.4 Reporting
During the course of the contractual period, each year the doctoral candidate and the principal su-pervisor shall submit separate written reports on progression in the research programme. These reports shall be sent to and approved by the Faculty or other units to which the Faculty has dele-gated this function.
The Faculty, supervisor(s) and the doctoral candidate undertake to actively deal with matters which can lead to delays or the failure to carry out the research programme, so that the programme may be carried out within the standard timeframe, as far as this is possible.
Deficient or unsatisfactory progress reporting may lead to compulsory termination of the research programme prior to the end of the contractual period.
§ 4.5 Terminating supervision
When they agree to do so, the doctoral candidate and the supervisor may request that the Faculty appoint a new supervisor for the candidate. The acting supervisor may not withdraw until a new supervisor has been appointed.
If a doctoral candidate or supervisor finds that the other party is not complying with his/her obligations as stipulated in this Regulation, cf §4.5, the party claiming the breach of obligations shall discuss this with the other party. The candidate and supervisor shall then attempt to find a solution to the situation which has arisen.
If, after discussions, the parties have not reached an agreement on how to resolve this situation, the candidate or the supervisor may request to be relieved from the supervision contract. A request for such a release shall be sent to the Faculty, which shall decide whether to release the doctoral candidate and the supervisor from the contract.
Following such a decision, the Faculty shall ensure that the doctoral candidate signs a supervisor contract with a new supervisor.
§ 4.6 Disputes
Pursuant to this Regulation, disputes concerning the rights and obligations of the supervisor and the candidate may be presented for discussion and decision by the Faculty in question.
The decision reached by the Faculty may be appealed to the next highest authority.
§ 5. Termination of the organised research programme prior to the contracted time
§ 5.1 Voluntary termination
The candidate, supervisor or the Faculty may take the initiative to terminate the organised research programme prior to the contracted time. In the event of such a voluntary termination of the organised research programme, the parties shall draw up a contract to address matters pertaining to terms of appointment, funding, rights to results etc.
Upon voluntary termination due to the candidate's desire to change his/her project or transfer to another project, the candidate shall apply for new admission based on the new project.
A dissertation which has been completed under organised supervision in a doctoral degree programme cannot be submitted for evaluation for an independent doctoral degree.
§ 5.2 Compulsory termination
The Faculty may decide to impose compulsory termination prior to the end of the contracted time of the organised research programme to which the candidate has been admitted. Compulsory termination may be effected when one or more of the following conditions is present:
- Repeated and fundamental breaches by the candidate of his or her obligation to inform, followup or report.
- Fundamental delay in the progression of the research project of such a nature that it creates reasonable doubt as to whether the candidate will be able to complete the project within the contracted time. To constitute the basis for compulsory termination, the fundamental delay must be due to factors over which the candidate has control.
- Fundamental delay in the completion of the training component due to matters over which the candidate has control.
- Breach of the researchethics guidelines which apply to the academic field.
- Behaviour exhibited by the candidate which violates the trust which must be present between the university and the candidate during the programme, including criminal offences related to the execution of the research programme.
The decision to implement compulsory termination is made by the Faculty administrating the doctoral programme, cf § 2.8, following a recommendation from the academic unit. The decision may be appealed to the next highest authority.
If the doctoral candidate is employed at the University, the contract may only be terminated if the terms and conditions stipulated in the Norwegian Civil Service Act are met.
§ 6. The dissertation
§ 6.1 Level and form
The dissertation must be an independent, scientific piece of work of international standard and high academic standard with respect to the research questions, examination of concepts, methodological, theoretical and empirical basis, documentation and form of presentation. The dissertation must con-tribute to the development of new academic knowledge and be of an academic standard appropriate for publication as part of the scientific literature in the field in question.
The dissertation may be a self-contained piece of work or a continuation of previous academic work in the candidate's studies.
Work which has been approved as the basis for previously completed examinations cannot be submitted for evaluation unless it constitutes a minor part of a dissertation consisting of several conjoined pieces of work.
Several minor pieces of work may be accepted as part of a doctoral dissertation, provided that the content of these works forms a whole. In such cases, the individual parts must be accompanied by a summary, giving a detailed account of their interrelationship.
A work or piece of work which was previously accepted for a doctoral degree at a Norwegian or foreign university or college cannot be submitted for evaluation even if the work is submitted in a revised form.
§ 6.2 Joint publications
Joint publications may be approved for evaluation (also one of several works, cf 6.1) provided that the doctoral candidate's contribution represents an independent contribution which can be identified to the extent necessary for the evaluation. In such cases the coauthors and other persons who have been following the work will be asked to submit a declaration identifying the specific contribution of the doctoral candidate.
§ 6.3 Language
The dissertation shall be written in English, Norwegian, or another relevant research language (German or French). Any candidate wishing to use another language than those mentioned in the first sentence, must apply for special permission for this upon admission, cf § 2.2.
§ 6.4 Public access
The dissertation must be made available to the public no later than two weeks' prior to its public defence.
No restrictions can be placed on making public and publishing a doctoral dissertation, with the exception of a prior agreed extension of the date for making public/publication. Such a delay may occur when the research programme is partially or entirely funded by an external party, and the external party needs to consider patenting/commercialisation, cf admissions contract part C. An external party cannot make it a condition that all or parts of a doctoral dissertation may not be made public or published.
§ 6.5. Submission for a new evaluation
A doctoral dissertation that has previously been rejected after an evaluation may be submitted in a revised form for a new evaluation, either as a single piece of work or as one of several conjoined works. A new evaluation may only take place once.
§ 6.6 Abstract of dissertation, press release
An abstract of the dissertation shall be prepared in English (1-3 pages), so that research environments in Norway and abroad may familiarize themselves with the results. The abstract shall accompany the dissertation.
Well in advance of the public defence, the candidate shall prepare a press release which must be sent to the Faculty for approval. The press release shall use the template that has been approved for this purpose.
The Faculty is responsible for ensuring that the press release is sent to the Information Department no later than two weeks prior to the public defence of the dissertation.
The Faculty is responsible for providing information to the doctoral candidates on procedures in connection with the publication of the dissertation. Guidelines, examples of press releases, etc, shall be sent to the candidate when the dissertation has been approved.
§ 7. Evaluation
The doctoral degree is awarded on the basis of:
a) a recognised scientific dissertation and a satisfactory public defence thereof,
b)approved completion of the training programme, or any other approved academic training or qualification, and
c)an approved trial lecture on a prescribed theme.
§ 8. Submission, withdrawal
The application for evaluation of a dissertation is to be made to the Faculty where the doctoral candidate is enrolled. The specified number of copies of the dissertation must accompany the application, as well as proof that the training programme has been completed and approved, cf § 4.2. If the dissertation is accepted for public defence, additional copies must be submitted as stated by the Faculty.
The dissertation is to be submitted in a standard format and in the form (paper-based or electronic) stipulated by the Faculty.
A submitted dissertation cannot be withdrawn until a final decision has been reached as to whether it may be approved for public defence for the doctoral degree. The thesis shall be evaluated in the form it is submitted.
§ 9. Appointment of an evaluation committee
To evaluate the dissertation and the public defence thereof, the Faculty appoints an expert evaluation committee consisting of at least three members, based on the proposal from the relevant academic staff. The reason given for the composition of the committee should indicate how the committee together covers the academic field of the dissertation.
The Faculty appoints one of its representatives as chairperson of the committee. Should unusual circumstances so indicate, the Faculty may appoint an administrative leader who will not participate in the academic evaluation of the dissertation. Insofar as this is possible, two of the committee members shall not be connected to the University of Bergen. At least one member should be from a foreign educational institution. The members of the evaluation committee must hold a doctoral degree, or other academic qualifications equivalent to a doctoral degree. The gender of the doctoral candidate should be represented in the committee. The provisions pertaining to legal competence in the Norwegian Public Administration Act, §§ 6 ff., apply to the members of the committee, cf § 10 of the same Act. The appointed supervisor cannot be a member of the committee, but may be requested to attend meetings of the committee to provide an account of the supervision and the work on the dissertation. Nor can the appointed supervisor administer the work of the committee or chair the public defence.
Normally, no more than a month should pass from the submission of the dissertation to when the doctoral candidate is informed of the composition of the committee.
If a dissertation is submitted in revised form for a new evaluation, at least one member from the original evaluation committee should participate in the work of the new committee.
The committee's recommendation shall normally be ready at the latest three months after the dis-sertation has been sent to the members of the committee.
§ 10. The committee's recommendation and procedure of the recommendation
§ 10.1 The committee's recommendation and the doctoral candidate's comments
Within a time limit established by the Faculty, the committee must submit a detailed recommendation, with any individual statements enclosed, as to whether or not the dissertation is worthy of being defended for the doctoral degree. Details must be given of any dissent among the members of the committee. The committee may require that the doctoral candidate submit source material as well as supplementary and clarifying information.
The evaluation committee's recommendation, complete with any individual statements and/or statements of dissent, must be submitted to the Faculty and forwarded to the doctoral candidate as soon as possible. The candidate may submit written comments no later than fourteen days after receipt of the recommendation.
Should the comments from the doctoral candidate be of significance as to whether the dissertation can be approved, these comments must be considered by the evaluation committee before the Faculty reaches a formal decision in the matter.
The evaluation committee's recommendation, together with any additional comments, shall be dealt with by the Board of Governors, or the body the board has delegated this authority to.
§ 10.2 The Faculty's procedural handling of an unanimous recommendation
The Dean of the Faculty may with full authority approve the committee's recommendation if the unanimous conclusion of the evaluation committee is that the dissertation is worthy of public defence for the doctoral degree.
Should the Dean for various reasons wish to present the recommendation to the Faculty's Board of Governors, and should at least two-thirds of the members of the Faculty's Board of Governors that are present find that there is reasonable doubt as to whether a dissertation should be approved, the Faculty's Board of Governors shall ask for a more detailed explanation from the evaluation committee. If this contact does not provide the necessary clarification, the Faculty's Board of Governors shall appoint two new experts who shall make individual statements on the dissertation. The doctoral candidate shall be informed of these appointments.
Should two-thirds of the members of the Faculty's Board of Governors that are present vote against the original recommendation, the Faculty's Board of Governors may reach the decision to reject the original recommendation, even if the original recommendation has the support of one or both of the two newly appointed experts.
§ 10.3 The Faculty's procedure in the event of a split recommendation
Should there be dissent in the committee, the Faculty's Board of Governors may without further evaluation decide the matter by a vote of a two-thirds majority. Should a two-thirds majority not be attained, the Faculty's Board of Governors shall request a more detailed clarification from the evaluation committee, or, if such contact has not provided, or it is assumed will not provide, the necessary clarification, the Faculty's Board of Governors shall appoint two new experts who shall provide individual statements on the dissertation. The doctoral candidate shall be informed of these appointments.
Should both of the newly appointed experts agree with the conclusions of the majority in the original committee, this recommendation shall be followed. Should the minority conclusion receive support from one or both of the two newly appointed experts, the Faculty's Board of Governors may decide the matter with a two-thirds majority.
§ 10.4 Revision for new evaluation
A dissertation which is not approved for public defence may nevertheless be recommended for re-submission in a revised form for a new evaluation, cf § 6.5
§ 10.5 The result of the proceedings
The doctoral candidate shall be informed as to the outcome of the proceedings.
§ 11. Trial lecture and public defence
The doctoral degree programme is concluded with:
a) An approved trial lecture on a prescribed topic, and
b) Public defence.
§ 11.1 Trial lecture
The trial lecture shall be on a prescribed topic. The topic for the trial lecture is determined by the Faculty and the candidate must receive notification of the topic ten working days prior to the lecture. The trial lecture shall normally be held after the submission of the dissertation, but prior to the public defence, and shall be approved by an evaluation committee appointed by the Faculty. The trial lecture must be deemed satisfactory prior to awarding the diploma.
After the trial lecture, the evaluation committee shall send a report to the Faculty where it explains its evaluation of the trial lecture.
The report shall conclude by indicating whether the trial lecture is approved/not approved.
§ 11.2 Public defence
The public defence shall normally be held by a set deadline, cf § 9 last paragraph, after the dissertation has been submitted for evaluation.
Normally, the public defence shall take place in Norwegian, English, Danish or Swedish.
The public defence shall be open to the public. Normally, there shall be two opponents. The two opponents shall be members of the evaluation committee appointed by the Faculty. In special cases, opponents may be appointed who have not been members of the evaluation committee.
The public defence is chaired by the Dean of the Faculty, or by a person appointed by the Dean. The chairperson of the public defence gives an account of the submitted dissertation, the trial lecture and the evaluation of this. Thereafter, the doctoral candidate explains the objective and the results of the scientific research. The discussion is opened by the first opponent, and concluded by the second opponent. However, each faculty may determine another sequence and delegation of tasks between the doctoral candidate and the opponents. Other persons present who wish to participate in the discussion must give notice of this to the chair of the proceedings within the time determined by the chair.
After the public defence, the evaluation committee shall send a report to the Faculty, in which it accounts for the evaluation of the defence of the dissertation. The report shall conclude by indicating whether the public defence is approved/not approved.
If the public defence is not approved, a new public defence may be held. As far as this is possible, the new public defence shall be evaluated by the original evaluation committee. The public defence must be found satisfactory prior to awarding a diploma.
§ 12. Conferment and diploma
On the basis of the report from the evaluation committee that states that the trial lecture and the public defence have been deemed satisfactory, the University's Board of Governors confers the doctoral degree on the candidate.
A doctoral degree diploma is issued by the institution. The diploma must state the title of the dissertation together with details of the academic training programme in which the doctoral candidate has participated.
§ 13. Appeal
§ 13.1 Appeal of admission decision/application proceedings
Rejection of an application for admission in accordance with § 2 of this Regulation may be appealed pursuant to §§ 28 etc. of the Norwegian Public Administration Act. In such cases, a detailed appeal must be lodged with the Faculty. Should the rejection be upheld, the appeal must be forwarded without undue delay to the Central Board of Appeals.
§ 13.2 Appeal relating to approval of the organised training programme
For an appeal concerning approval of courses or other components of the organised training programme (cf § 4.2), § 12.1 of the Norwegian Public Administration Act applies. However, if the appeal applies to examination or test results, the Act on Universities and Colleges applies.
§ 13.3 Appeal of a rejection of the application for evaluation, or rejection of the dissertation, trial lecture or public defence
Rejection of the dissertation, trial lecture or public defence may be appealed pursuant to the provi-sions in §§ 28 etc. of the Norwegian Public Administration Act. In such cases, a detailed appeal must be lodged with the Faculty. If the decision subject to appeal was made by the evaluation committee, the Faculty may set aside or alter the decision should the appeal be found reasonable. If not, the appeal is forwarded to the University's Board of Governors. The Board of Governors may try all aspects of the appealed decision.
Should the subordinate body or the board dealing with the appeal see fit, a committee or individuals may be appointed to undertake an assessment of the evaluation and the criteria it is based upon, or to undertake a new or supplementary expert evaluation.
§ 14. Responsibility for the research programme
The Board of Governors at the University of Bergen has the overarching responsibility for the research programme at the institution. The responsibility for the academic and administrative execution of the research programme is delegated to the faculties within their respective academic fields.
The responsibility for coordinating interdisciplinary and interfaculty doctoral degree programmes shall be connected to the host faculty.
§15. Delegation
According to this Regulations, the Faculty's authority cannot be delegated to the departmental level, unless explicitly stipulated in this Regulations.
Sist oppdatert av : - Se historikk