DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY - PH.D. - DEGREE REGULATIONS

SUBSIDIARY LEGISLATION 327.695

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY - PH.D. - DEGREE

REGULATIONS

14th April 2023

LEGAL NOTICE 85 of 2023, as amended by Legal Notice 309 of

2023.

(1)

These regulations may be cited as the Doctor of

Philosophy - Ph.D. - Degree Regulations.

(2)

In these regulations, unless the context otherwise requires,

the terms used shall be taken to mean as indicated in the Glossary of

Terms listed hereunder

Glossary of Terms

Term

Explanation

Board

the Board of the University faculty or institute or

centre or school where the doctoral research will

be carried out

Bye-laws

Bye-laws made by the Board of a faculty,

institute, centre or school and approved by Senate

Doctoral

the Doctoral Academic Committee appointed by

Academic

Senate

Committee

Doctoral

the School in terms of the Statute for the Doctoral

School

School that provides a central coordinating and

support framework for researchers at doctoral

level, their supervisors and examiners

Doctoral

the Board of the Doctoral School appointed by

School Board

Senate

Faculty/

the University faculty or institute or centre or

Faculties

school where the particular degree is offered

Faculty

the Committee entrusted to oversee each

Doctoral

student’s research activities and doctoral studies

Committee

M.Phil. Degree the Degree of Master of Philosophy – M.Phil.

Ph.D. Degree/ the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy – Ph.D.

Degrees

Principal

the main supervisor assigned to students with

Supervisor

responsibilities as outlined in regulation 36

Professional

the Professional Development Committee

Development

appointed by Senate

Committee

University

the University of Malta.

(1)

These regulations shall be applicable from 1

February 2023 onwards.

(2)

Regulations 51 to 57 relating to the examination of the

thesis shall not apply to students who request to present their thesis

for examination prior to 1 February 2023. In such cases, the Doctor

of Philosophy – Ph.D. – Degree Regulations, 2008 shall apply.

There shall be a Doctoral Academic Committee and a

Professional Development Committee as specified in the Statute for

the Doctoral School.

Both committees shall act within the parameters of the

vision and the strategic plan of the Doctoral School Board, as

approved by Senate.

(1)

Faculties may accept applicants to register for

Ph.D. Degrees after it is ascertained by Senate that the Faculty can

provide suitable facilities for the proposed research as well as

supervisors who can provide regular and proper supervision taking

into account their academic record, expertise and other

commitments.

(2)

Faculties may offer the following Doctor of Philosophy

Degrees as specified in Faculty Bye-laws

(a)

Doctor of Philosophy degree; and

(b)

Doctor of Philosophy degree by Practice as

Research.

(1)

The Ph.D. Degree shall be awarded upon the

successful defence of a thesis containing original and significant

contributions to knowledge in one of the disciplines available for

study at the University. The thesis, presented after an appropriate

period of supervised research, shall consist of the students’ account

of the investigations and research done and shall offer evidence of

originality by the discovery of new facts, the development of new

theories and/or methods, and/or by the exercise of independent

critical judgement and shall constitute an addition to knowledge.

The thesis should be conveyed in a lucid and scholarly manner and

be of peer-reviewed publishable quality.

(2)

The Ph.D. Degree by Practice as Research shall be

awarded upon the successful presentation of practice and research,

accompanied by relevant documentation of the process as well as the

defence of a thesis. In the thesis students shall contextualise and

expound upon their practice in relation to their chosen research issue,

question, or problem and shall include a retrospective analysis of the

practice and result, critically reflecting on the key research issue,

question, or problem, chosen methodologies, the definition of

processes, evaluation, and contextualisation of the work, and which

shall contain original and significant contribution to knowledge.

(3)

All doctoral students are expected to take responsibility

for their personal and professional development in consultation with

their Principal Supervisor. Students are required to provide evidence

that they have pursued professional development activities (which

may involve taught study-units, attendance at Faculty seminars,

workshops, conferences, training sessions and study visits, and the

writing and publishing of academic papers both at the time of

applying for transfer from the M.Phil. to the Ph.D. Degree and prior

to their applying to submit their work for examination). Students

commencing their studies as from 1 February 2023 are required to

undertake a total of around 100 hours of such activities.

(4) Students shall comply with the provisions of these

regulations and of the Faculty Bye-laws and shall also satisfy any

other requirements prescribed in any other relevant statutes,

regulations, bye-laws and procedures of the University, including

applicable ethical and research integrity codes of practice, and health

and safety procedures.

(1)

In accordance with the provisions of Statute 3,

where the University, with the approval of Senate, enters into a

collaborative agreement with other universities for the granting of a

joint or double degree, then the Ph.D. Degree may be awarded

(a)

in the case of a joint degree, jointly on one award

certificate by all the partner universities and shall

be conferred at one of the partner universities, as

agreed among them; or

(b)

in the case of a double degree, separately by each

partner university.

(2)

A Ph.D. Degree collaborative agreement shall be

negotiated and agreed with partner universities, normally before the

registration of students for the Degree, in accordance with the

relevant guidelines approved by Senate.

(1)

The Doctoral Academic Committee shall consider

applications for Ph.D. Degrees from applicants who possess a

Master’s degree of this or another university, normally in the same

discipline as that applied for. If the degree is not in the same

discipline, the Committee may also consider other qualifications and

professional experience if deemed to be appropriate.

(2)

Bye-laws may provide that applicants in possession of a

Bachelor’s degree obtained at First Class Honours or at Second Class

Honours (Upper Division) may also apply, provided that the Faculty

Doctoral Committee

(a)

ascertains that the applicant has a very strong

background in the area of study related to the

proposed area of research; and

(b)

submits a clearly motivated recommendation for

acceptance in the form of an academic report to the

Board for eventual consideration by the Doctoral

Academic Committee and Senate.

(3)

Applicants are required to be in possession of the

qualifications deemed appropriate by the University to demonstrate

that their standard of English is satisfactory. The offer of a place to

read for a Ph.D. Degree may be made subject to the applicants

obtaining such proficiency qualifications prior to the commencement

of their studies.

(4)

In addition to the qualifications specified in paragraphs

(1), (2) and (3) of this regulation, applicants shall also possess such

qualifications and satisfy such other conditions as the Board may

from time to time establish for the purpose and which shall be

approved by Senate in the form of Bye-laws.

(1)

Applications may be submitted at any time of the

year but students shall be registered with effect from one of the

following dates: 1 October, 1 December, 1 February, 1 April, and 1

June.

(2) Applications for Ph.D. Degrees shall include the following

(a)

the provisional title for the thesis and practice, as

applicable;

(b)

a detailed research proposal of between 2,000 and

3,000 words, which shall include a timeline for the

progression of the research programme;

(c)

a statement on whether the studies will be

undertaken on a full-time or a part-time basis, and,

in the latter case, the number of hours that shall be

dedicated to this research work;

(d)

a statement regarding the applicant’s employment

commitments, as applicable;

(e)

the name of an academic member of staff of the

University who has agreed to act as Principal

Supervisor;

(f)

where appropriate, a request to undertake the

research outside the University; and

(g)

any other document as may be required by the

Faculty and indicated in the Faculty Bye-laws.

In the case of applicants from outside Malta, funding and

visa requirements shall be taken into consideration when the

application and research programme are being considered.

Accepted applicants shall be registered for the M.Phil.

Degree in the first instance. Senate may allow the transfer of

registration from the M.Phil. Degree to the Ph.D. Degree if the

conditions laid down in regulation 43 have been satisfied.

(1)

The Faculty Doctoral Committee shall request a

recommendation from the proposed Principal Supervisor and the

Head of Department in the form of an academic report, following

consultation, with the Department, that the research topic and

proposal are acceptable and the research is feasible.

(2)

Applicants shall be interviewed by the Faculty Doctoral

Committee with the participation of the applicants’ proposed

Principal Supervisor in order to assess the applicants’ ability and

potential to reach doctoral level.

(3)

The recommendation of the Faculty Doctoral Committee

shall be referred by the Board to the Doctoral Academic Committee

for its consideration.

The Doctoral Academic Committee shall recommend to

Senate the acceptance of applicants who satisfy the requirements

outlined in regulations 8 and 9, and the Faculty Bye-laws, and who

were successful during the interview conducted by the Faculty

Doctoral Committee.

Accepted applicants shall be expected to enrol by the date

indicated to them in accordance with paragraph (1) of regulation 9.

If they do not enrol without providing a valid reason, the offer of a

place on the doctoral programme may be withdrawn.

The time required for a complete Ph.D. Degree

application to be evaluated by the Department, the Faculty Doctoral

Committee, the Board, the Doctoral Academic Committee and

Senate shall normally be between three and six months.

Students shall seek the approval of Senate, through the

Doctoral Academic Committee, and following a recommendation by

the Board on the advice of the Faculty Doctoral Committee and the

Department, for any substantial modification to the approved title or

content of their thesis and practice, as applicable.

Theses and any other relevant documentation, shall be

written in English, except that when the area of research of the thesis

is a modern language, the Board may require or permit the students

to write the thesis and any other relevant documentation in that

language. In such cases, students shall be required to include an

extended summary of the thesis (approximately 5000 words) written

in English. In all cases, an abstract of approximately 300 words in

the language in which the thesis is written is also required.

(1)

Senate may allow students to undertake research in

collaboration with research institutions other than universities if such

collaboration would

(a)

extend the students’ own experience;

(b)

provide a wider range of expertise to assist in the

development of the research work; and

(c)

enable the students to become members of a wider

research community.

(2)

Such collaboration shall normally involve essential access

by the students to one or more of the following resources of the

collaborating research institution: taught study-units, workshops,

equipment, facilities, premises, supervision by staff and specific data

sets.

The University may allow students on doctoral

programmes to participate in research projects where data generated

jointly by a group of researchers is used for the writing of theses,

provided that each student writes a separate thesis.

Any research undertaken by students are subject to the

University Research Code of Practice and review in terms of the

Research Ethics Review Procedures.

All students accepted for studies for Ph.D. Degrees shall

undertake a substantial part of their research work at the University

as approved by the Doctoral Academic Committee, on the

recommendation of the Faculty Doctoral Committee and the Board.

Students may also be required to undertake a period of supervised

research at an overseas higher education and/or research institution

due to the nature of their research.

Applicants may also be accepted to register for Ph.D.

Degrees and to work mostly away from the University, provided that

(a) they shall work in a field of major relevance to the

University department where their research is to be

carried out;

(b)

the facilities at the place in which they will be

carrying out their research and which are essential

for their research shall be equivalent to, or better

than, or complementary to, the facilities at the

University department. The Principal Supervisors

concerned shall provide written evidence of this to

the Faculty Doctoral Committee; and

(c) they shall normally spend a total of at least three

weeks per academic year on the campus of the

University, during which period they shall hold

meetings with the Principal Supervisors and attend

any professional development activities organised

by the Faculty or the Doctoral School which shall

count towards the professional development

activities required as indicated in paragraph (3) of

regulation 6.

(1)

Studies for Ph.D. Degrees shall extend over three

years of full-time study or six years of part-time study. If the nature

of the work or the research so demands, the Doctoral Academic

Committee, on the advice of the Faculty Doctoral Committee and the

Board, may recommend to Senate a longer period.

(2)

In the case of students accepted in terms of paragraph (2)

of regulation 8, the period of full-time study shall normally extend

for not less than four years.

(3)

On the recommendation of the Faculty Doctoral

Committee, the Board and the Doctoral Academic Committee,

Senate may grant students an extension of studies of up to two years

in order to enable them to complete their studies, irrespective of

whether they are registered on a full-time or a part-time basis.

(4)

Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1) of this

regulation, in exceptional circumstances, the Senate, on the

recommendation of the Faculty Doctoral Committee, the Board and

the Doctoral Academic Committee, may give permission for the

submission of a thesis after the equivalent of two years of full-time

study or four years of part-time study have expired from the date of

first registration.

(1)

Full-time students may not engage in employment

which is likely to interfere with the progress of their research and

must seek the permission of Senate, on the recommendation of the

Faculty Doctoral Committee, the Board and the Doctoral Academic

Committee before engaging in any employment; the Faculty Doctoral

Committee must be kept informed about the nature and extent of

their employment commitments throughout their period of study.

(2)

The Senate, acting on the advice of the Principal

Supervisor and the Faculty Doctoral Committee, and on the

recom mendati on of the Board and the Docto ral Acad em ic

Committee, may terminate the students’ studies or change the

students’ status from full-time to part-time should the students’

employment be seen to interfere with the expected progress of the

research or can prejudice the students’ studies.

Doctoral students engaged as full-time Research Support

Officers by the University may be allowed to register on a full-time

basis, provided that the research which they are employed to support

falls within the area of research for their thesis, and provided that,

notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (4) of regulation 23, the

minimum period of study shall be three years.

Early submission shall not affect any laboratory bench fee

liability.

On the recommendation of the Faculty Doctoral

Committee, the Board and the Doctoral Academic Committee,

Senate may allow students, for a good and sufficient reason, to

suspend their studies for a maximum period of 18 months,

irrespective of whether they are registered on a full-time or a part-

time basis. In such cases, the period of suspension of studies shall

not be taken into consideration for calculating the period of

registration for the Ph.D. Degree in term s of the duration

requirement.

Senate may allow students to change their mode of study

from full-time to part-time or from part-time to full-time, whenever

feasible. In the case of a change in the mode of study from part-time

to full-time, students shall provide sufficient evidence about their

working commitments. The period of registration shall be

recalculated on the basis of the proportion of time during which the

students were studying in each mode.

(1)

In May of every year, students shall be required to

submit an annual progress report to the Faculty Doctoral Committee,

through their Principal Supervisor and co-supervisor (where

applicable), and the Head of Department.

(2)

Principal Supervisors and co-supervisors, where

applicable, shall submit a detailed individual progress report on their

students to the Faculty Doctoral Committee, through their Head of

Department, in June of every year. These reports should address the

students’ performance and any issues raised by the students.

Students shall be sent a copy of the reports by the Faculty Doctoral

Committee and have the right to submit their comments.

(1)

Following the initial enrolment, students are

required to enrol at the beginning of each academic year throughout

their period of study.

(2)

Students’ enrolment shall be subject to the Faculty

Doctoral Committee having received a satisfactory progress report/s.

Professional development activities may include taught

study-units, the writing and publishing of academic papers,

presentation at conferences, training sessions approved by the

Professional Development Committee and organised by the Doctoral

School, other training sessions that complement the students’

doctoral studies and their professional career as doctoral graduates,

as well as attendance at Faculty seminars, workshops and

conferences, study visits, and similar, according to a study plan

drawn up by the students in consultation with the Principal

Supervisor. Students commencing their studies as from 1 February

2023 are expected to complete professional development activities

for a total of around 100 hours, including a compulsory training

workshop covering research ethics and integrity.

(1)

Bye-laws may specify that the Ph.D. Degree

programme shall also include study-units intended to develop skills

and competencies as required for the proper execution of the research

or to introduce the students to specialist areas related to their doctoral

research. On the recomm endation of the Faculty Doctoral

Committee, the Board shall indicate the study-units for Senate’s

approval, through the Doctoral Academic Committee, at the time the

application is being considered.

(2)

Students shall successfully complete such study-units

with an overall average mark of at least 60% before they apply to

transfer their studies from the M.Phil. to the Ph.D. Degree. The

average mark shall be calculated at the end of the semester or

academic year, as applicable.

The assessment and re-assessment of taught study-units

shall be governed by the University Assessment Regulations, 2009,

and by the General Regulations for University Postgraduate Awards,

2021.

(1)

Doctoral students may be required to support the

Faculty’s teaching activities and/or provide laboratory demonstration

service for up to a maximum of 100 hours a year, provided that these

duties do not conflict with their research work and that students may

be exempted from this requirement for a good and valid reason.

(2)

The criteria used in assigning such duties to students shall

be equitable and transparent.

(3) Doctoral students involved in teaching shall be assigned a

mentor for advice and support. They shall also be provided with

advice and facilities to ensure that they may teach effectively.

Students involved in laboratory demonstration work shall be

provided with instruction and guidance, including relevant health and

safety training.

(4)

For such work, students shall be remunerated at standard

rates as approved by the University.

(1)

When accepting an application for a Ph.D. Degree,

the Senate, on the recommendation of the Faculty Doctoral

Committee, the Board and the Doctoral Academic Committee, shall

appoint a Principal Supervisor from among the resident members of

the academic staff of the University in accordance with the

provisions of regulation 5. Such a member of staff shall have

appropriate qualifications, including a research or practice-based

doctoral degree obtained not less than three years previously. The

Principal Supervisor shall have extensive knowledge and research

experience in the broad subject area of the students and current

involvement in research groups.

(2)

On the recommendation of the Faculty Doctoral

Committee, the Board and the Doctoral Academic Committee, Senate

may also appoint a supervisory team that includes the Principal

Supervisor, a co-supervisor and/or an adviser, at least one of whom has

supervised a Ph.D. degree to completion or is at the grade of an

associate professor or a professor.

(1)

Principal Supervisors shall be responsible for

providing guidance to students under their care in the following

areas

(a)

offering ideas and providing guidance on the

planning and progress of research, and the writing

and publication of results in scholarly journals;

(b)

providing or arranging for instruction in research

methodology, including use of information

technology and other professional development

activities;

(c)

guiding students in acquiring and improving

appropriate generic skills, including written and

oral

communication,

decision-taking,

and

organisational and management skills; and

(d)

providing the necessary advice to students so that

they abide by the highest principles of research

integrity, ascertaining that students are aware of the

manner in which research results are reported and

that they understand the implications of plagiarism

and other unbecoming academic practices, as well

as supporting students in complying with the

University Research Ethics Review Procedures.

(2)

Principal Supervisors shall meet students regularly to

review their progress and keep a record thereof.

(3)

Principal Supervisors shall convene a meeting of the

supervisory team, if applicable, at least once a year. Such meetings

may also include remote communications.

(4)

The supervisory role of Principal Supervisors, co-

supervisors and advisers shall cease when the student’s work is

submitted for examination. The role will normally be re-assumed, on

the advice of the Board of Examiners, in order to provide guidance to

students whose work is referred back for minor or major changes or

for resubmission. The resumption of the supervisory role is to be

agreed by both the student and the supervisory team.

(5)

Principal Supervisors, co-supervisors and advisers are not

responsible for proof-reading theses and any other relevant

documentation or to ensure that they do not contain plagiarised parts

or other academic misdemeanours.

(6)

If plagiarism is detected in drafts or in the final version of

the thesis or other student’s work prior to the formal submission for

examination, the Principal Supervisor shall use discretion as to

whether to reprimand the student and demand corrective action or

report the matter to the University Assessment Disciplinary Board,

depending on the gravity of the offence.

(7)

The total number of doctoral students for whom any

single full-time resident academic shall act as Principal Supervisor at

any time shall be limited to three, provided that if academics can

demonstrate to the Doctoral Academic Committee that

(a)

they dispose of a research management structure

which facilitates communication and interaction

between supervisor and individual researchers; or

(b)

they have less teaching commitments than normal,

then the Doctoral Academic Committee may

authorise the supervision of a larger number of

doctoral students.

A co-supervisor may be appointed when the nature of the

research work makes it necessary or expedient to do so and to

complement the expertise of the Principal Supervisor.

One or more advisers may be appointed when it is

anticipated that particular aspects of the research work will

necessitate occasional significant consultation with one or more

experts.

When co-supervisors and/or advisers are appointed, the

Principal Supervisor shall retain the ultimate responsibility of

leadership in supervision.

(1)

The Senate, acting on the advice of the Board, shall

appoint a Faculty Doctoral Committee composed of between three

and five members, chaired by the Dean or delegate, the other

members being resident academics. The Faculty Doctoral

Committee may co-opt up to two additional resident academic

members of the same or another Faculty, provided that any member

of the Faculty Doctoral Committee shall withdraw from the meeting

during deliberations about students they are supervising. The

Academic Registrar or delegate shall act as Secretary.

(2)

The Faculty Doctoral Committee shall follow, as it deems

fit, the progress of students in their research work, provided that it

shall meet to review the progress of each student at least once a year.

(3)

In proposing supervisory teams, transfer assessment

boards and boards of examiners, the Faculty Doctoral Committee

shall ensure that the provisions of the University Consanguinity/

Affinity/Dual Relationship Policy in relation to Examiners/

Supervisors and Students are adhered to.

(4)

If a Principal Supervisor leaves the University or is

otherwise unable to supervise, the Faculty Doctoral Committee shall

arrange for alternative advice by an appropriate academic and take

steps to ensure that the student’s research is not hindered or impeded.

If the absence is of a permanent nature, the Faculty Doctoral

Committee through the Board, shall propose a new Principal

Supervisor to the Doctoral Academic Committee and Senate.

(5)

Students who wish to change their Principal Supervisor

should discuss this matter with the Chair of the Faculty Doctoral

Committee who shall recommend to the Board, through the Faculty

Doctoral Committee, to make adequate provisions to rectify the

situation if reasonable grounds are shown to exist and, where

applicable, funding arrangements permit. If the Chair of the Faculty

Doctoral Committee is the Principal Supervisor, the matter shall be

referred to the Director of the Doctoral School.

The Faculty Doctoral Committee shall periodically inform

the Board, in writing, on the general performance of students. Such

advice may include a recommendation either to

(a)

grant an extension of the study period in order to

enable the students to complete the thesis, provided

that the period of extension of studies shall be

according to regulation 23; or

(b)

terminate the studies prematurely if this is deemed

to be proper in the circumstances, provided that

students may appeal to Senate within 15 working

days from the notice of termination of studies.

(1)

After 12 months and not later than 24 months of

full-time study or the equivalent in part-time study have elapsed,

students shall request the Faculty Doctoral Committee in writing to

transfer their studies from M.Phil. to Ph.D. level. Without prejudice

to the student’s request to transfer, the supervisory team shall endorse

or otherwise the request.

(2)

Students are expected to submit work that shall consist of

either a substantial body of work based on the research and/or

practice undertaken together with relevant documentation or at least

two chapters of the entire thesis. When submitting the work for

assessment, students shall include a signed declaration that the work

has been submitted through a plagiarism detection software that is

approved by the University, together with the resultant report.

Students shall also present evidence that they have pursued

professional development activities as required in paragraph (3) of

regulation 6.

(1)

On the recommendation of the Faculty Doctoral

Committee, the Board and the Doctoral Academic Committee,

Senate shall appoint a Transfer Assessment Board, composed of an

examining Chair, an internal examiner, who shall normally be a

resident academic, and the Principal Supervisor. Where the students

are involved in teaching and research at the University or at the

Junior College, whenever practicable, academics with appropriate

expertise from Faculties or departments different from where the

students teach shall be appointed as an examining Chair and internal

examiner.

(2)

The Transfer Assessment Board shall

(a)

ascertain that the students have completed

successfully any required study-unit/s and has

pursued professional development activities as

required in paragraph (3) of regulation 6;

(b)

ascertain that the quality and scope of the research

work presented by the students has the potential to

reach the standard appropriate to that required of a

doctoral degree;

(c)

verify that the work submitted is the students’ own

and assess the extent of any collaboration; and

(d)

submit the students to an oral examination held at

the University.

(3)

If the Transfer Assessment Board discovers what, in its

opinion, appears to be prima facie a case of plagiarism or other

academic misdemeanours in the submitted work, it shall

(a)

stop the process of assessment forthwith and report

the alleged breach of the regulations to the

University Assessment Disciplinary Board; in the

case of plagiarism, a copy of the plagiarism

detection software report together with supporting

documentation which purports to prove the alleged

plagiarism or other academic misdemeanours shall

be provided to the University Assessment

Disciplinary Board; and

(b)

resume assessment of the work if the decision of

the University Assessment Disciplinary Board

allows it and subject to any disciplinary penalties as

may be imposed.

(4)

Following the oral examination, the Transfer Assessment

Board shall submit the individual report of all the members and a

signed joint report to Senate through the Doctoral Academic

Committee. The Transfer Assessment Board shall either

(a)

recommend to Senate the transfer of registration of

the students from the M.Phil. to the Ph.D. Degree;

or

(b)

determine that the students’ research work has not

reached a sufficient standard to warrant

recommendation for transfer and gives students

advice in writing requiring re-submission within

six months if the students are registered on a full-

time basis or 12 months if the students are

registered on a part-time basis; students shall be

allowed to re-submit their work for transfer once

only; or

(c)

determine that the students’ work does not have the

potential to reach the standard required of a

doctoral degree and recommends to Senate that the

students be given up to 12 months in order to be

examined for the award of an M.Phil. Degree.

(5) The reports of the Transfer Assessment Board shall be

submitted to the Doctoral Academic Committee within two months

from submission of the work by the students.

(1)

If the Doctoral Academic Committee, on the

recommendation of the Transfer Assessment Board, having also

ascertained that the work reflects the approved research proposal and

satisfies the conditions stipulated in paragraph (2) of regulation 43,

submits a positive recommendation, Senate may allow the transfer of

registration from the M.Phil. Degree to the Ph.D. Degree.

(2)

If the transfer is allowed by Senate, the work already done

shall count towards the requirements for the Ph.D. Degree.

However, the transfer shall not imply any entitlement to the award of

the M.Phil. Degree and, consequently, the post-nominal letters

M.Phil. cannot be used at this stage.

(3)

If students are not in a position to request transfer of

studies to the Ph.D. Degree within the period stipulated in paragraph

(1) of regulation 42, the students shall be required to provide the

Faculty Doctoral Committee with the reason for the non-submission.

Senate, after consideration of the recommendations by the Faculty

Doctoral Committee, the Board and the Doctoral Academic

Committee, shall either

(a)

grant the students a specified period within which

to present the work for transfer of studies to the

Ph.D. Degree; or

(b)

allow the students to submit the work within a

specified period for examination towards the

M.Phil. Degree; or

(c)

terminate the students’ registration.

(4)

The conclusions of the Transfer Assessment Board shall

be communicated to the students after Senate’s approval.

(1)

Not less than three months before the intended date

of submission, students shall signify their intention to present their

thesis to the Faculty Doctoral Committee stating its exact title, on the

a pp r o p r ia te f o r m . Th e F a c u l t y D oc t or a l C o m m i t t e e , af t e r

ascertaining that the period of study conforms to that stipulated in

these regulations, shall advise the Board to recommend to Senate,

through the Doctoral Academic Committee, the appointment of a

Board of Examiners.

(2)

In the case of Ph.D. by Practice as Research, the Board of

Examiners may be appointed at an earlier stage, normally at least six

months after the transfer to the Ph.D. Degree is approved.

(1)

When presenting the thesis or the practice and

thesis for examination, students shall submit

(a)

a signed declaration that the thesis and/or the

practice is their own personal work, and that the

greater portion of the work has been done after

their registration for the Ph.D. Degree;

(b)

a signed declaration that they have abided by the

University Research Ethics Code of Practice and

followed the Research Ethics Review Procedures as

well as that the thesis and any other documentation

has been submitted through a plagiarism detection

software approved by the University, together with

the resultant report/s;

(c)

where appropriate, a statement declaring that a part

of the thesis or the practice has already been

submitted for another degree, qualification or

publication; and

(d)

a signed declaration by the Principal Supervisor

indicating that they are aware that the students are

submitting the thesis for examination.

(2)

Other than during the oral examination, students shall not

discuss their work with the examiners during the period between

their appointment as examiners and the publication of the result as

approved by Senate.

(1)

The thesis by research shall be written in the

prescribed format and shall not exceed 100,000 words excluding the

list of references, footnotes, endnotes, appendices, abstract, and

extended summary, if applicable. Bye-laws may specify the

minimum number of words. The work presented shall conform to the

established scholarly standards of the appropriate discipline.

(2)

For the Ph.D. Degree by Practice as Research, students

shall be required to submit a presentation of practice supported by an

analytical account of the process and a thesis. The thesis shall

consist of between 30,000 to 50,000 words which shall normally

constitute around 50% of the project. The submission as a whole

shall demonstrate original and significant contribution to knowledge

in the field, showing doctoral level ability of analysis and mastery of

existing knowledge in a way that is accessible and auditable by

knowledgeable peers.

(3) The presentation of formally examinable practice shall not

normally be more than one calendar year in advance of the final

written submission, as specified in the Faculty Bye-laws.

Boards of Examiners for taught study-units shall be

appointed and shall act as stipulated in the University Assessment

Regulations, 2009 and in the General Regulations for University

Postgraduate Awards, 2021.

(1)

Theses and practice (as applicable) shall be

examined by a Board of Examiners appointed for the purpose by

Senate, through the Doctoral Academic Committee, on the

recommendation of the Faculty Doctoral Committee and the Board.

(2)

The Board of Examiners for Ph.D. Degrees shall include a

Chair, who shall be a resident academic, a visiting external examiner,

and two internal examiners who shall normally be resident

academics. The Chair shall only act as a convenor.

(3)

The Board of Examiners for M.Phil. Degrees shall include

a Chair, who shall be a resident academic, a visiting external

examiner, and two internal examiners who shall normally be resident

academics. The Chair shall only act as a convenor.

(4)

In all cases, if sufficient examiners cannot be sourced

locally, two visiting external examiners and one internal examiner,

who shall be a resident academic, shall be appointed.

(5)

Examiners shall be academics experienced in research in

the general area of the students’ theses and where practicable, shall

have experience as specialists in the topic to be examined. The

external examiner/s shall also be academic/s who command authority

within the area of research concerned. Where the students are

currently involved in teaching and/or research at the University or at

the Junior College whenever practicable, the internal examiners, who

shall normally be resident academics, shall be appointed from

different faculties or departments than those where the student

teaches.

(6)

Principal Supervisors, co-supervisors and advisers shall

be precluded from being examiners but Principal Supervisors shall be

invited to attend as observers during the oral examination. Principal

Supervisors may contribute to the discussion if and when they are

invited to do so by the members of the Board of Examiners, but must

withdraw prior to any deliberations of the Board of Examiners.

(7)

The deliberations of the Board of Examiners are strictly

confidential and those present at the oral examination are not at

liberty to divulge to the student or to any unauthorised person their

own or any other Board member’s opinions on the merits of the

thesis and practice (as applicable) submitted for examination. The

Board of Examiners may inform the student of its recommendations

to Senate but should ensure that the student understands that any

recommendation shall need to be ratified by Senate. The decisions of

Senate shall be communicated to the students by the Academic

Registrar.

In matters related to the examination of a thesis not

provided for by regulations 51-57 of these regulations, the Board of

Examiners shall be guided by the provisions of the University

Assessment Regulations, 2009.

(1)

The examination of a student for the award of a

Ph.D. Degree consists of the submission of the thesis by the student

and the oral defence of the thesis, including any subsequent changes

as may be required by the Board of Examiners.

(2)

The examination of a student for the award of a Ph.D.

Degree by Practice as Research consists of the presentation of the

practice and research, accompanied by relevant documentation of the

process as well as submission and oral defence of a thesis, including

any subsequent changes as may be required by the Board of

Examiners.

(1)

Each member of the Board of Examiners, except

for the Chair, shall assess the thesis and practice (as applicable) and

submit a detailed preliminary individual report before the student is

admitted to the oral examination. The Examiners shall require

(a)

evidence that the thesis represents a significant

contribution to knowledge in a particular field of

study;

(b)

evidence of originality by the discovery of new

facts, and/or the development of new theories and/

or methods, and/or by the exercise of independent

critical judgement;

(c)

evidence of the ability of the student to relate the

subject matter of the thesis to the existing body of

knowledge;

(d)

evidence of the ability of the student to apply

research methods appropriate to the subject;

(e)

a satisfactory level of literary presentation;

(f)

evidence that the work is of peer-reviewed

publishable quality; and

(g)

compliance

with

the

provisions

of

these

regulations.

(2)

The Chair, acting as a convenor, shall read the thesis but is

not expected to examine it or to submit an individual report.

(3)

If the Board of Examiners discovers what, in its opinion,

appears to be prima facie a case of plagiarism or other academic

misdemeanours in the submitted work, it shall

(a)

stop the process of examination forthwith and

report the alleged breach of the regulations to the

University Assessment Disciplinary Board; in the

case of plagiarism, the plagiarism detection

software report together with supporting

documentation which purports to prove the alleged

plagiarism shall be provided to the University

Assessment Disciplinary Board; and

(b)

resume assessment of the thesis and practice (as

applicable) if the decision of the University

Assessment Disciplinary Board allows it and

subject to any disciplinary penalties as may be

imposed.

(1)

Following the submission of the preliminary

individual reports, students shall be required to defend their thesis

and practice (as applicable) orally and in person before all the

members of the Board of Examiners. The oral defence, which shall

be held in English, except for a thesis written in another modern

language, which may be held in that particular language, shall cover

the subject of the thesis and practice (as applicable) and matters

relevant thereto, and shall enable the examiners to

(a)

question the student on the substance and method

of the work submitted, as well as the significant

contribution to knowledge in the particular field of

study;

(b)

assess the ability of the student to present and

defend intellectual arguments;

(c)

assess the student’s knowledge and understanding

of the discipline and of the relevant literature; and

(d)

verify that the work submitted is the student’s own

and assess the extent of any collaboration.

(2)

In the case of Ph.D. by Practice as Research, the

submission of both practical and written components shall be the

subject of the oral examination.

(3)

Students shall be informed of the date of the oral

examination at least three weeks before the scheduled date.

(4) The oral examination shall take place at the University,

except when a particular Ph.D. Degree programme is governed by a

collaborative agreement, in which case the location shall be specified

in the agreement. In exceptional circumstances, the Doctoral

Academic Committee may approve that an oral examination is held

with one of the examiners participating remotely.

(5)

If the Board of Examiners discerns serious dissonance

between the quality of the work and the performance of the student

during the oral examination, it shall endeavour to establish whether

the work is truly the student’s own. If the Board of Examiners is of

the opinion that a breach of the University Assessment Regulations

may have occurred, it shall submit a report in writing to the

University Assessment Disciplinary Board. When the University

Assessment Disciplinary Board informs the Board of Examiners of

its decision, it shall proceed with the examination process subject to

any disciplinary penalties as may be imposed, unless the University

Assessment Disciplinary Board finds that the student is in breach of

the regulations and recommends that the degree be not awarded.

(1)

Following the oral examination, the Chair of the

Board of Examiners shall prepare a final joint report signed by all the

members, which shall include: (i) an appraisal of the scope and

quality of the work as apparent from the written thesis and practice

(as applicable) and the oral defence; (ii) the list of changes, where

applicable, as an appendix; and (iii) a recommendation to Senate.

(2)

The Chair of the Board of Examiners shall forward to the

Doctoral Academic Committee all the reports prepared by the Board

of Examiners, including the preliminary individual reports and the

final joint report with the list of changes, where applicable, as an

appendix, in order to ascertain that all the regulations and procedures

related to the examination of the work for the award of the Ph.D. or

M.Phil. Degrees have been adhered to.

(3)

Following consideration by the Doctoral Academic

Committee, the Chair of the Board of Examiners shall be requested

to forward the list of changes, where applicable, to the student for

guidance and action. If all the documents are in order and after any

required changes are submitted to the satisfaction of the Chair or the

Board of Examiners, as applicable, the recommendation of the Board

of Examiners shall be forwarded to Senate for consideration at the

next scheduled meeting. Simultaneously, the Board shall be

informed that a recommendation has been made to Senate.

(1)

The decision of the Board of Examiners in the final

joint report shall be to either

(a)

approve the thesis and practice (as applicable), if

no changes are required and recommend to Senate

that the student be awarded the Ph.D. Degree; or

(b)

require the student to affect minor changes in order

to be awarded the Ph.D. Degree. The list of changes

shall be forwarded to the student by the Chair for

guidance and action as specified in paragraph (3) of

regulation 54. The student shall be required to

submit the revised thesis within three months

following the written official notification sent by

the Chair, and include a report explaining how all

the requested changes have been addressed. Minor

changes shall only be allowed once.

A

recommendation to Senate, through the Doctoral

Academic Committee, that the student be awarded

the Ph.D. Degree shall be made after the Chair

confirms that the minor changes have been carried

out satisfactorily; or

(c)

require the student to affect major changes in order

to be awarded the Ph.D. Degree.

The list of

changes shall be forwarded to the student by the

Chair for guidance and action as specified in

paragraph (3) of regulation 54. The student shall be

required to submit the revised thesis within a

minimum of six months and a maximum of 12

months following the written official notification

sent by the Chair, and include a report explaining

how all the requested changes have been addressed.

Major changes to the thesis shall only be allowed

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY - PH.D.

once. A recommendation to Senate, through the

Doctoral Academic Committee, that the student be

awarded the Ph.D. Degree shall be made after all

the members of the Board of Examiners confirm

that the major changes have been carried out

satisfactorily; or

(d)

refer the thesis back to the student to resubmit it in

a revised and complete form and for the student to

be re-examined and considered for the award of the

Ph.D. Degree. The list of changes shall be

forwarded to the student by the Chair for guidance

and action as specified in paragraph (3) of

regulation 54. A minimum period of 12 months

and a maximum period of 18 months following the

written official notification sent by the Chair shall

be allowed. A second oral examination shall be

held following the resubmission of the thesis

during which the external examiner may participate

remotely. A resubmission of the thesis shall only be

allowed once. A recommendation to Senate,

through the Doctoral Academic Committee, that

the student be awarded the Ph.D. Degree shall be

made after all the members of the Board of

Examiners confirm that the resubmitted thesis

merits the award of the Ph.D. Degree; or

(e)

agree that the Ph.D. Degree be not awarded and

recommend to Senate that the student be awarded

the M.Phil. Degree; or

(f)

agree that the Ph.D. Degree be not awarded and

require the student to carry out minor changes in

order to be awarded the M.Phil. Degree. The list of

changes shall be forwarded to the student by the

Chair for guidance and action as specified in

paragraph (3) of regulation 54. The student shall be

required to submit the revised thesis within three

months following the written official notification

sent by the Chair, and include a report explaining

how all the requested changes have been addressed.

Such minor changes shall only be allowed once. A

recommendation to Senate, through the Doctoral

Academic Committee, that the student be awarded

the M.Phil. Degree shall be made after the Chair

confirms that the minor amendments have been

carried out satisfactorily; or

(g)

agree that neither the Ph.D. Degree nor the M.Phil.

Degree be awarded and the student be declared to

have definitively failed.

(2)

Should a student not submit the changes indicated within

the maximum period granted by the Board of Examiners, the Board

of Examiners shall declare that no degree be awarded, unless in

extraordinary circumstances Senate agrees to extend the period in

which the student is required to submit the changes.

(3)

Should a student not attend for the oral examination

without prior justification, the Board of Examiners shall declare that

no degree be awarded, unless in extraordinary circumstances, Senate

may request that a second oral examination be arranged if

extenuating circumstances are subsequently revealed that could not

reasonably have been presented at the time of the oral examination.

(4)

In the case of Ph.D. by Practice as Research, the Board of

Examiners shall proceed as indicated in paragraphs (1) to (3) of this

regulation with regard to the written thesis and mutatis mutandis with

regard to the practical component.

(5)

When a student is considered for the award of the M.Phil.

Degree in terms of sub-paragraphs (e) and (f) of paragraph (1) of this

regulation, the thesis shall be assessed against the following criteria,

that it

(a)

constitutes research of an advanced or an original

nature;

(b)

contains evidence of the ability of the student to

relate the subject matter of the thesis to the existing

body of knowledge;

(c)

contains evidence of the ability of the student to

apply research methods appropriate to the subject;

(d)

has a satisfactory level of literary presentation; and

(e)

is in compliance with the provisions of these

regulations.

(1)

Where examiners are not in agreement, they shall

follow the relevant procedures as described in the University

Assessment Regulations, 2009.

(2)

When the disagreement cannot be resolved, and the

decision is taken by a majority vote, the Chair shall record this in the

examiners’ final joint report, provided that any disagreeing member

may submit a minority report giving reasons for the disagreement. In

such circumstances, Senate shall either accept the majority report, or

appoint an additional examiner or examiners, or a new Board of

Examiners to resolve the matter.

(1)

Following approval of the recommendation of the

Board of Examiners by Senate, students shall be provided with the

final joint report on their thesis prepared by the Chair of the Board of

Examiners.

(2)

Students shall be allowed to use the post-nominal letters

Ph.D. or M.Phil., as applicable, after the conferment of the Degree.

Academic appeals may be lodged by students against

decisions taken by the Transfer Assessment Board or the Board of

Examiners within 15 working days of being notified of Senate’s

decision.

The academic judgement of the Transfer Assessment

Board or the Board of Examiners is not reviewable by the Doctoral

Appeal Review Board considering the students’ appeal and a

recommendation to alter the decision can only be made if the change

can be justified by evidence provided by the student that there was an

administrative, procedural or clerical error in the examination of the

thesis and/or the practice.

Appeals regarding poor or inadequate supervision of

doctoral research being raised at this stage for the first time shall not

be entertained.

Appeals concerning decisions of the University

Assessment Disciplinary Board regarding plagiarism and other

academic misdemeanours by students shall be considered by the

University Assessment Appellate Board as provided for in the

University Assessment Regulations, 2009.

(1)

Senate shall appoint a Doctoral Appeal Review

Board which shall be composed of

(a)

a pro-rector, who shall be designated as Chair for

each appeal;

(b)

an academic not below the rank of associate

professor; and

(c)

a postgraduate student appointed by Senate from

among the students’ representatives on Senate,

provided that all members of the Doctoral Appeal Review

Board would not have been involved in the original recommendation

of the Transfer Assessment Board or the Board of Examiners or the

Doctoral Academic Committee, as applicable.

(2)

The procedures to be followed by students and by the

Doctoral Appeal Review Board shall follow mutatis mutandis the

relevant provisions in the University Assessment Regulations, 2009.

The Doctoral Appeal Review Board may recommend to

Senate any of the following decisions when considering appeals

against a decision of the Transfer Assessment Board

(a)

to reject the appeal, in which case the student shall

be informed in general terms of the reason; or

(b)

that the transfer of registration of the student from

the M.Phil. Degree to the Ph.D. Degree should

proceed.

(1)

The Doctoral Appeal Review Board may

recommend to Senate any of the following decisions when

considering appeals against a decision of the Board of Examiners

(a)

to reject the appeal, in which case the student shall

be informed in general terms of the reason; or

(b)

to require the student to revise the thesis and re-

submit it for re-examination by the original

examiners within a specified time limit; or

(c)

to declare the examination null and void and direct

the Faculty to conduct a fresh examination using

the original Board of Examiners or a new Board of

Examiners appointed by Senate; or

(d)

to recommend to the Board of Examiners that, for

reasons stated, they should reconsider their

decision.

(2)

Where a new Board of Examiners is appointed, the

examiners shall be no fewer in number than those who originally

assessed the thesis and/or practice, as applicable. The new members

shall not be given any information about the previous examination

except the fact that they are conducting an examination on appeal.

(3)

When a new examination is taking place, the examiners

should submit an preliminary individual report on the appellant’s

work, conduct an oral examination and submit a final joint report.

Students must abide by the University Intellectual

Property Policy, 2014.

In line with the University of Malta Open Access Policy,

the University Library shall provide in open access the electronic

copies of the theses and practice (as applicable) and shall make them

publicly available on the University Institutional Repository.

(1)

Confidential information includes, but is not

limited to, training know-how, information, methodologies and

manuals; workbooks; statements of operating practice;

specifications; drawings; designs; formulae; discoveries; inventions;

technical information; know-how generally; lab notebooks;

manuscript papers; software; information about the methods,

concepts and techniques on which software is based; samples;

fin ance s; fin anci al mo del s; p r ici ng and ot her co mm erci al

information; business plans; marketing plans; and any information

considered to be sensitive by the University Research Ethics

Committee.

(2)

Personal data that may come into students’ possession

and/or that students may be exposed to and/or that students may have

access to in carrying out work placements and/or clinical practice in

furtherance of their studies at the University shall also be considered

as confidential information.

(3)

Students are bound not to disclose any confidential

information which may come into their possession and/or which they

are exposed to and/or which they have access to. Furthermore,

s t u d e n t s m a y b e as k e d b y t h e U n i v e r s i t y t o s i g n s p e c i f i c

confidentiality agreements should it be deemed necessary.

(4)

Subject to the provisions of paragraph (1) of this

regulation, information shall not be considered as confidential

information pertaining to the University if

(a)

it was already known to the student and it was not

subject to any obligation of confidence by the

student to the University;

(b)

it is or becomes publicly known without an act or

omission of the student;

(c)

it is obtained by the student from a third party with

a valid right to disclose such confidential

information, provided that said third party is not

under a confidentiality obligation to the University;

(d)

it is approved for release in writing by an

authorised representative of the University; or

(e)

the student is specifically required to disclose such

information pursuant to a law or order of any Court

of competent jurisdiction.

(1)

Notwithstanding the provisions of regulation 66,

where the student considers that the thesis and practice

documentation (where applicable) should remain confidential during

or after completion of the programme of study or research, a request

for it to be embargoed must be made to the Board. The Board shall

submit its recommendation to Senate through the Doctoral Academic

Committee. The period of confidentiality approved shall not

normally exceed two years from the publication of the result and

shall be communicated to the Library by the Faculty. However, in

cases where publication of the student’s work would prove

detrimental to the student, the University, the sponsor, the funding

body, or the persons referred to in the student’s work, a longer period

may be approved.

(2)

In any case and without prejudice to paragraph (1) of this

regulation, the University retains the right to request the embargo of

a thesis. In the event that it is embargoed, the student shall be bound

to treat the contents of such work as confidential. Prior to any

publication, the provisions about publication and exploitation, as

detailed in the University Intellectual Property Policy, 2014, shall

apply in every case.

(1)

Students shall abide by all applicable data

protection policies and/or regulations of the University that may be

in force from time to time.

(2)

Students shall only process personal data that may come

into their possession and/or that they may be exposed to and/or that

they may have access to in carrying out their research in furtherance

of their studies.

(3)

The terms 'personal data' and 'processing (of personal

data)' shall have the meanings assigned to them in the General Data

Protection Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/679).

(1)

Following successful defence of the thesis and

prior to the conferment of the Ph.D. or M.Phil. Degree, the student is

required to present one electronic version of the thesis for the

University Library, and copies as required by the respective Faculty

together with a signed declaration of authenticity to the Faculty. The

electronic version must conform to the formatting standards set by

the University Library. In case of failure to submit the copies of the

thesis as required by this regulation, the Ph.D. Degree or M.Phil.

Degree shall not be conferred.

(2)

In the case of Ph.D. by Practice as Research, the student is

also required to provide a permanent record of the research practice

in an appropriate format (digital means, scores, artefacts, drawings,

photographs) and must be included in the document deposited with

the University of Malta Library.

(3)

Theses and records of research practice shall each be

assigned an identifier by the University Library, consisting of a set

of digits and letters, in order to act as unique identifiers for the

works.

These regulations shall apply mutatis mutandis in the case

of students being considered for the M.Phil. Degree.

The Senate may, on the recommendation of each Board,

approve Bye-laws governing the Ph.D. Degree to regulate matters

not covered by these regulations.

If issues arise that are not explicitly addressed by these

regulations, the matter shall be referred to Senate that shall have the

authority to decide on any action it deems fit and equitable to resolve

the issue.

The provisions of the foregoing regulations shall apply

mutatis mutandis to students registered on a part-time basis and

subject to such changes as may reasonably be deemed necessary by

the Board, the Doctoral Academic Committee and Senate due to the

part-time registration of the student.

Wherever in any Bye-laws made under the Education Act

(Cap. 327) there is a reference to “Doctor of Philosophy - Ph.D. -

Degree Regulations, 2008”, that reference shall be substituted by the

words “Doctor of Philosophy - Ph.D. - Degree Regulations, 2023.”