Section B: conduct of assessment

8.1 The grounds for the award of specified research degrees are provided in the University’s Degree Regulations and Programmes of Study:

Degree Regulations and Programmes of Study

8.2 The student must read the Code of Practice for Supervisors and Research Students:

8.3 It is a supervisor’s responsibility to ensure that the student is informed of all assessment practice and requirements, including The Code of Practice for Supervisors and Research Students.

8.4 There are flow charts showing the thesis assessment process and the responsibilities of the student, College, School and Examiners: 

8.5 The standards for the Format of a Thesis can be found online at: 

9.1 It is a supervisor’s responsibility to ensure that the student is informed of all assessment requirements.

Regulation 10 Reasonable adjustments

10.1 Reasonable adjustments must be determined in advance by the Disability and Learning Support Service (DLSS). They are recorded in the student’s Schedule of Adjustments by the DLSS, which communicates the Schedule of Adjustments to the student, the student’s supervisor, the School’s Co-ordinator of Adjustments, and other relevant areas.

10.2 The School’s Co-ordinator of Adjustments has responsibility for overseeing the implementation of the Schedule of Adjustments. The Co-ordinator of Adjustments will liaise with academic colleagues who are responsible for putting the adjustments in place in the School. In the case of oral examinations, the supervisor is responsible for communicating relevant adjustments to the chair of the oral examination.

10.3 The Co-ordinator of Adjustments will liaise with the DLSS should any adjustments require further discussion, clarification or alteration. If there are any amendments to the Schedule of Adjustments, the DLSS will communicate these and ensure that the student is informed.

10.4 The DLSS provides examples of reasonable adjustments, deadlines and support:

Disability and Learning Support Service 

10.5 The DLSS supports students in the preparation and review of their Schedule of Adjustments. It is a student’s responsibility to ensure that their Schedule of Adjustments covers all types of assessment methods relevant to the programme. For example if a student discovers that an aspect of their programme is likely to impact on their support needs, they should contact the DLSS as soon as possible in case any amendment is required to be made to their Schedule of Adjustments.

10.6 Arrangements can be made via the DLSS for students with temporary injuries or impairment, on the submission of relevant medical information. Students should contact the DLSS as soon as possible to allow the DLSS to determine any relevant adjustments and support.  

Regulation 11 Language of assessment: languages other than English or Gaelic

11.1 Quotations may be given in the language in which they were written.

 11.2 In very exceptional circumstances, a candidate may be granted permission to submit a thesis, research project or dissertation written in a language other than English, where this is not specified by the relevant course or programme handbook. Approval will only be given in cases where the nature of the research is such that presentation of the research results in the language(s) of the materials under analysis confers significant intellectual advantage to the community of scholars who are expected to comprise the primary audience of the research. Approval to do so must be sought either at the time of admission to the University or no later than by the end of the first year of full-time study (or equivalent part-time study), and will not be normally be granted retrospectively. Approval must be given by the appropriate College Committee, which must be satisfied that there are sound academic reasons for the request, and that appropriate arrangements can be made for supervision and examination, including the availability of both internal and external examiners suitably qualified to read and examine the thesis, research project or dissertation in the proposed language of submission.

11.3 Where such approval is given, in addition to the standard requirements, the thesis, research project or dissertation should also include a substantial summary (of approximately 10,000 words in the case of theses) written in English, summarising the main arguments, and an abstract in English must also be produced. Where Examiners’ reports are completed in a language other than English, these must be translated into English before submission to the Board of Examiners. Any costs associated with this should be borne by the relevant School.

Regulation 12 Language of assessment: Gaelic

12.1 The University of Edinburgh wishes to accord Gaelic equal respect with English under the terms of the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005.

12.2 Candidates who wish to submit a thesis, research project or dissertation in Gaelic should seek approval to do so as early as possible, and certainly not later than by the end of the first year of full-time study (or equivalent part-time study) in the case of Doctoral and MPhil students. Approval must be given by the appropriate College Committee, which must be satisfied that appropriate arrangements can be made for supervision and examination, including the availability of both internal and external examiners suitably qualified to read and examine the thesis, research project or dissertation.

12.3 Where such approval is given, in addition to the standard requirements, the thesis, research project or dissertation should also include a summary (of approximately 1500 words) written in English, summarising the main arguments, and an abstract in English must also be produced. Where Examiners’ reports are completed in Gaelic, these must be translated into English before submission to the Board of Examiners. Any costs associated with this should be borne by the relevant School.

Regulation 13 Progression review

13.1 Guidance on the procedure for the progression review is included in the Code of Practice for Supervisors and Research Students:

13.2 It is expected that progression reviews are normally held early within the 9 to 12 month period, to allow time for a repeat review if this is required.

13.3 There are similar procedures for full-time and part-time students, and reviews of part-time students will also take place within 9 to 12 months of their enrolment. Part-time students will not be expected to have made as much progress as full-time students within this time. Exceptionally, the first progression review may be postponed, with permission from the College. The postponement must be no longer than six months.

13.4 Colleges/Schools may also have additional requirements, for example 10 week    review.

13.5 Schools must ensure that students are aware of how the progression review will be conducted.

14.1 If the outcome of the annual review is 14(b) then the three month period starts from the date of issue of the progression decision to the student.

14.2 If there are doubts about a student’s ability to complete a PhD successfully then option (d) must be considered. If there are serious doubts as to the student’s research capability, then options (e) or (f) must be considered.

14.3 The Procedure for Withdrawal and Exclusion from Study can be found at: 

Withdrawal and Exclusion from Studies Procedure

Regulation 15 Repeat progression review

15.1 The repeat review can contain any or all of the components of the progression review (see regulation 13).

15.2 The options for recommendations from the repeat progression review are those listed in regulation 14, with the exception of Regulation 14(b). Only one repeat review may be undertaken before confirmation of registration.

15.3 The College has responsibility for providing the student with a statement on expectations for progress.

16.1 The student must complete the suite of submission forms at least two months before the thesis is submitted:

• Notification of Intention to Submit,
• Thesis Abstract,
• Access to a Thesis and Publication of Abstract.

Student forms

17.1 The thesis, containing an abstract and lay summary, must be submitted to the relevant College Office. Only the submission sent by the College Office is assessed by the examiners.

17.2 All theses must conform to regulations and guidance in Section C.

17.3 Once a student has submitted a thesis they cannot retract it.

17.4 The relevant College Office is responsible for transmitting the thesis and the examiners’ report forms to the examiners.

Regulation 18 Early submission

18.1 The student must discuss early submission with their supervisor. Colleges are unlikely to approve early submission without the agreement of the Principal Supervisor.

Regulation 19 Examiners' reports

19.1 At the University of Edinburgh, doctoral and MPhil degrees are assessed through a two-stage process in which each examiner, acting independently, submits an initial (‘Part I’) report on the thesis before the oral examination is held. Following the oral, the examiners are asked to submit a joint (‘Part II’) report on the thesis. Examiners submit their own Part I reports and the Internal Examiner is responsible for sending the Part II report to the relevant College Postgraduate Committee. The forms are available online:

College and School forms

19.2 Exceptionally, if the examiners do find it necessary to consult before writing their Part I reports, this fact and the reason(s) for it must be noted in their reports.

19.3 The reports must be sufficiently detailed to enable members of the College Postgraduate Committee (after the oral examination) to assess the scope and significance of the thesis and to appreciate its strengths and weaknesses. They must be expressed in terms that are intelligible to those who are not specialists in the particular field of the thesis.

19.4 Examiners must complete their initial reports (Part I) prior to the oral examination, in the time frame advised by the School or College. The joint report (Part II) should be completed directly after the oral examination and sent to the College Postgraduate Committee within two weeks of the oral.

19.5 The chair of the oral examination should ensure that the Part II report gives a full account of the examiners’ views. In the unlikely event of examiners failing to reach agreement, separate recommendations may be made and will be subject to arbitration by the College Postgraduate Committee.

Regulation 20 Preparation for oral assessment

20.1 Oral assessment may be conducted by video link as set out in the University’s PhD by Research oral examinations by video link policy.

Oral examinations by video link

20.2 The Internal Examiner is responsible for consulting with the relevant Graduate School and ensuring that all the necessary arrangements for the oral assessment are made. The arrangements, including the date and place of the oral, the chairing of it, and the names of all those participating in it, must be provided in advance to all those who are to be present (i.e. the student, all examiners, any Non-Examining Chair and any observer). Where a Non-Examining Chair has not been appointed the Internal Examiner will chair the oral. (See regulation 4.)

20.3 If an examiner is unable to participate in the oral assessment, it may be postponed to a later date. If postponement would be a serious hardship to the student, the College Postgraduate Committee will consider appointing an alternative examiner.

20.4 The examiners complete and submit the relevant forms by the specified deadline:

College and School forms

Regulation 21 Oral examination

21.1 The expectation is that the oral examination will be held within three months of submission of the thesis.

21.2 The oral examination may be used to establish a student’s knowledge of the field of their research, to establish the extent of any collaboration and to confirm that the work is the student’s own. Through the oral examination, the examiners are assessing jointly whether the thesis and the student’s defence of it satisfy the requirements and regulations for the award of the degree.

21.3 Where there is a non-examining chair, they will chair and attend for the duration of the oral. Where a non-examining chair has not been appointed the Internal Examiner will chair the oral. (See regulation 3.)

21.4 Supervisors may attend the oral examination, with consent of the student and examiners, but will not participate in or comment during the oral examination. Supervisors must leave the examination room with the student and do not participate in the examiners’ discussion and decision on recommendations.

21.5 The (oral) examination procedure of practice-led PhDs can include exhibitions, performances and other events, elements and processes.

21.6 The professional doctorate oral examination may cover any part of the degree programme.

21.7 At the end of the oral examination, the examiners may, if they have agreed a recommendation to make to the College Postgraduate Committee, indicate their recommendation to the student. The examiners must stress, however, that their recommendation is not final but will form the basis of the Part II report (see regulations 22-24). Receipt of the Part II report by the student from the College constitutes formal notification of the decision and beginning of any additional period of study set by the examiners.

Regulation 22 PhD by Research and other Doctorates: examiner recommendation

22.1 Students cannot resubmit the thesis more than once in line with 22 (d), (e) and (h).

22.2 If the student does not meet the requirements set under 22(b) to (h) then they have not complied with all assessment requirements (see Regulation 9), which will result in a fail.

22.3 A student presenting a thesis under Regulation 22 (h) may not subsequently be permitted to resubmit the thesis under Regulation 24 (e).

22.4 The College Office is responsible for ensuring that the student receives a written statement of any revisions to be made to the thesis. The supervisor must confirm with the student their understanding of any revisions to be made.

22.5 Where a student is offered the award of a different degree under (f), (g) or (i) above then the original word limits for the offered degree are set aside.

22.6 Where the examiners’ recommendation is (j), the College will provide the student with a written explanation of the decision. In these circumstances the College Postgraduate Dean or nominee will be available to discuss the outcome with the student, should the student request this.

22.7 Students failing to meet requirements following resubmission under (d), (e) or (h) may be considered for an exit award.

23.1 Students cannot resubmit the thesis more than once in line with 23 (d) and (e).

23.2 If the student does not meet the requirements set under Regulation 23 then they have not complied with all assessment requirements (see Regulation 9), which will result in a fail.

23.3 The College Office is responsible for ensuring that the student receives a written statement of any revisions to be made to the thesis. The supervisor must confirm with the student their understanding of any revisions to be made.

24.1 Students cannot resubmit the thesis more than once in line with 24 (d) and (e).

24.2 If the student does not meet the requirements set under Regulation 24 then they have not complied with all assessment requirements (see Regulation 9), which will result in a fail.

24.3 The College Office is responsible for ensuring that the student receives a written statement of any revisions to be made to the thesis. The supervisor must confirm with the student their understanding of any revisions to be made.

24.4 Students failing to meet requirements following resubmission under (d) or (e) may be considered for an exit award.

24.5 Where the student is offered the award of an MPhil as an exit degree, having originally submitted for a doctorate, the MPhil word count will be set aside.

25.1 No further criticism of other material or aspects of the thesis passed as satisfactory at the first assessment can be introduced at a later stage. The written statement and the aspects of the thesis which require revision must be approved by the College Postgraduate Committee and cannot subsequently be altered without the agreement of that Committee.

25.2 A student is permitted only one opportunity to resubmit their thesis. Thereafter, at most, they may make only minor corrections.

25.3 In the event of resubmission, the examiners will re-assess the thesis and may hold a second oral examination, if they consider it appropriate.

25.4 If resubmission is recommended, only one copy of the original thesis should be returned to the student. The other should be retained by the Internal Examiner to facilitate checking of revisions when the thesis is resubmitted.

26.1 Plagiarism is the act of copying or including in one’s own work, without adequate acknowledgement, intentionally or unintentionally, the work of another or your own previously assessed original work. It is academically fraudulent and an offence against University discipline. Plagiarism, at whatever stage of a student’s course, whether discovered before or after graduation, will be investigated and dealt with appropriately by the University. The innocent misuse or quotation of material without formal and proper acknowledgement can constitute plagiarism, even when there is no deliberate intent to cheat. Work may be deemed to be plagiarised if it consists of close paraphrasing or unacknowledged summary of a source, as well as word-for-word transcription. Any failure adequately to acknowledge or properly reference other sources in submitted work could lead to lower marks and to disciplinary action being taken.

26.2 It is academically fraudulent and an offence against the University’s Code of Student Conduct for a student to invent or falsify data, evidence, references, experimental results or other material contributing to any student’s assessed work or for a student knowingly to make use of such material. It is also an offence against the University’s Code of Student Conduct for students to collude in the submission of work that is intended for the assessment of individual academic performance or for a student to allow their work to be used by another student for fraudulent purposes.

26.3 A student who has submitted work for one course at this or another University must not submit the same work or part of the work to attempt to achieve academic credit through another course. See also the Undergraduate and Postgraduate Degree Regulations at:

Degree Regulations and Programmes of Study

26.4 Students need to be careful when asking peers to proof-read their work. Proof-readers should only comment on the vocabulary, grammar and general clarity of written English. They should not advise on subject matter or argumentation.  

26.5 Students need to be careful to avoid academic misconduct when submitting group projects and to be clear about their individual contribution to the submission.

26.6 Information on academic misconduct and plagiarism, and how such cases will be handled, is given on the Academic Services website.

Academic misconduct

Regulation 27 Security of marks        

27.1 The College has responsibility for the security of arrangements. In practice, the operation of this may be delegated to the College Office, Graduate School or equivalent.