Award Titles

1.1         The University of Wolverhampton may award the degree of PhD by Published Work where a student has made an independent and original contribution to new knowledge through the discovery of new facts, demonstrated an understanding of research methods appropriate to the chosen field and has presented and defended a thesis by oral examination to the satisfaction of the examiners.

1.2         The academic standards associated with the degree award of PhD by Publication shall be comparable with those of the degree award of Doctor of Philosophy.

Learning Outcomes and Peer Review

1.3         The University’s research degrees are awarded to students who have satisfied a team of specially appointed Examiners that both the thesis (including portfolio of creative / published work) and the oral defence of that thesis demonstrate that they have achieved the learning outcomes appropriate to the award sought, as specified in the QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications. Examiners are asked to confirm in their final report that students have met the learning outcomes for the award.

1.4         The learning outcomes expressly refer to peer-review and sole or lead authorship. The learning outcomes must all be demonstrated in the written commentary and/or peer reviewed original research-based published works.  

1.5         Published works that have not been peer reviewed cannot be submitted for a PhD by Published Work. An output shall be regarded as published work only if it is traceable through ordinary catalogues, tables of contents, critical reviews, abstracts or citation indices and if copies are or have been available to the general public including, for example, public exhibitions with published catalogues and public performances with published programmes. Reports provided exclusively for the public or private sector may not be submitted unless they have been published and are available generally. Proofs of works not yet accepted for publication shall not be submitted.

1.6         The published works submitted for examination will constitute a corpus of work that contributes a coherent body of knowledge rather than a series of disconnected research outputs.

Application

2.1         Initial registration for the PhD by Published Work is through the Research Proposal.

Period of Study

2.2         A PhD by Published work is studied part-time. The normal period of study for a PhD by Published Work shall be 12 months part-time from the date of approval of the Research Proposal. The maximum period over which a PhD by Published Work may be studied is 24 months part-time.

Academic Advisor

2.3         If the relevant Research Student Board approves an application, they will appoint at least one Academic Advisor who will be a serving member of the University. The role of the advisor(s) is to:

• provide general guidance and support to the student.
• comment on the appropriateness of the selected publications.
• provide advice to the student on the written commentary.
• offer advice on preparing for the oral examination.
• nominate the potential examiners.

Eligible Members of Staff

2.4         Eligible members of staff are defined for this purpose as academic staff of the University of Wolverhampton appointed to a full-time contract or occupying a substantive part-time post equivalent to at least 0.2 of a full-time contract.

2.5         Staff undertaking a PhD by Published Work must be in such employment at the time of approval of the Research proposal and at the time of submission of the PhD. They will have been in post for at least one year prior to submission of the Research Proposal.

3.1         A team of examiners will be convened to examine students at the appropriate time.

3.2         Three examiners, two external examiners and an internal examiner, must be appointed for each PhD by Published Work thesis presented for examination. 

3.3         All oral examinations will be Chaired by a representative of the University.  The Chair will be independent of the project, student, and academic advisor.  Their role is to ensure that the examination is conducted fairly and in accordance with the University’s regulations. 

3.4         Once the examining team has been appointed, neither the student nor the academic advisor shall have any contact with the examiners in relation to the thesis until the oral examination. 

General Regulations

4.1         All research students must present a written thesis, presented in English, in the format agreed by the University Research Committee, on the subject of their research, for examination by a team of examiners.

4.2         All research degrees must reach a standard of written English and academic communication appropriate for the topic and the level of award, and examiners will be asked to consider this element of the work.

4.3         The student will submit sufficient copies of the thesis in printed form to supply one for each examiner.  An identical digital version – in Word format - must be supplied for the viva Chair for reference. 

4.4         The thesis for a PhD by Published Work is comprised of:

1. Published works, and
2. Commentary and body of work.

Published Works

4.5         For the purpose of these regulations, ‘published work’ shall refer to journal papers, chapters, monographs, books, scholarly editions of a text, edited collections of essays or other materials, software, and creative work (which may be in any field including fine art, design, architecture, musical composition, dance or performance) or other original artefacts. The precise selection of work undertaken by the student will depend upon the discipline concerned.

4.6         The number of publications will depend on both the academic area and the type of publication included in the submission, but as a guide, the submission should comprise between three and ten publications.

4.7         Any submission for a PhD by Published Work will involve a coherent portfolio of published work, with appropriate currency. The publications submitted for the degree shall have been published within the last ten years and should demonstrate a continuing record of publication. This will be ensured as follows:

• At least 80% of the published works submitted must have been published within six years of the date of submission for examination. Where appropriate, a maximum of 20% of outputs may have appeared within 10 years prior to submission. (The 80% is calculated as the proportion of separately published outputs rather than as a proportion of total word count.)
• Publications included in the submission for a PhD by Publication should not have been used in the submission for another research degree

4.8         Where more than one chapter from a single edited book is included, there is a strong expectation that, taken together, these will comprise less than half of the published works submitted for examination.

4.9         Students must ensure they have all relevant copyright permissions before they submit their work for examination.

Commentary and body of work

4.10       The commentary will be presented in English. The published works will also be in English unless a specific exemption is sought from the University Research Committee at the time of submission of the Research Proposal. Permission to include publications in a language other than English will only be granted provided that the academic advisor has reading knowledge of the language of the publications and that the inclusion of such publications would not prejudice or limit the selection of appropriate examiners or Independent Chair.

4.11       The written commentary provides a context for the published work, a statement (or re-statement) of the argument / research questions (including theoretical and methodological underpinnings) that the published works together put forward.  This should explain how the findings from the collection of published works address the research question. The commentary should also state (or restate) the original contribution(s) to knowledge that the published works together advance.

Co-authored works

4.12       Where jointly authored works are to be submitted for the degree, the student shall submit (as appendices to the commentary) a formal statement for each applicable work endorsed by the co-authors clearly identifying the student’s intellectual ownership and contribution to each published work. The statement(s) shall quantify the student’s contribution to the formulation, execution, analysis and publication of the research.

4.13       In addition, the written commentary must clarify the student’s contribution and identify the basis for their claim to the intellectual content of any jointly authored works. Students should expect their individual contribution to multi-authored works to be a focus of the oral examination.

Word Count

4.14       A guide to the word count can be found in the table below.

Editorial support on the thesis

4.15       When a research student submits their thesis, it must be solely their own work (except where the Regulations permit the inclusion of appropriately referenced collaborative research or work). The student must not appoint or employ a ‘ghost writer’ to write parts or all of their thesis, whether in draft or as a final version.

4.16       Editors, whether they are part of the supervisory team, informal mentors, family or friends or professional proof-readers or editors, need to be clear about the extent and nature of help they can offer to a student in their editing role. Supervisors also need to be clear about the role of ‘third party’ editors as well as their own editorial role.

4.17       A student may use ‘third party’ editorial assistance or proof-readers (paid or voluntary) from an outside source. However, this must be with the knowledge and support of the student’s academic advisor and must strictly follow the regulations.

4.18       A ‘third party’ editor cannot be used to:

• Change the text of the thesis to clarify and/or develop the ideas and arguments.
• Reduce the length of the thesis so it falls within the specified word limit.
• Correct information within the thesis
• Change ideas and arguments put forward within the thesis.
• Translate the thesis into English.

4.19       A ‘third party’ editor can be used to offer advice on:

• Spelling and punctuation
• Formatting and sorting of footnotes and endnotes for consistency and order.
• Ensuring the thesis follows the conventions of grammar and syntax in written English.
• Shortening long sentences and editing long paragraphs
• Changing passives and impersonal usages into actives, or vice versa, as may be appropriate.
• Improving the positioning of tables and illustrations and the clarity, grammar, spelling and punctuation of any text in or under tables and illustrations
• Ensuring consistency of page numbers, headers, and footers.

Submission of the final thesis

4.20       Following successful examination and the approval of any amendments, which the examiners require, the student will be required to submit a final electronic version (E-Thesis) to Registry Services to be loaded to the University institutional repository (WIRE). Once the e-thesis is deposited in WIRE, it is published online so it can be accessed by scholars and others anywhere in the world.

Restrictions on access to a thesis

 4.21       An application for confidentiality may be made to the Dean of Research on the following grounds:

• to enable a patent application to be lodged.
• the thesis contains politically sensitive material.
• the thesis contains sensitive material that relates to questions of national security.
• the thesis contains commercially sensitive information, the release of which might prejudice the commercial interests of any person including the author, the University, or an external company.
• placing the thesis in the public domain might endanger the physical or mental health or the safety of an individual.
• placing the thesis in the public domain would cause the author or third parties mentioned in the text to be open to legal challenge or racial, ethnic, political, or other persecution.

4.22       An application for restricted access must be made at the earliest opportunity and approval must be sought and granted no later than the time at which examination arrangements are approved. The normal maximum period of confidentiality is two years. Where a shorter period would be adequate, the University shall not automatically grant the full two years.

4.23       Where an application for confidentiality has been granted, the thesis will, immediately on completion of the programme of work, be retained by the University on restricted access and, for a time not exceeding the approved period, shall only be made available to those who were directly involved in the project.

4.24       A data only record will appear in WIRE (including author, title, keywords etc.) until the restricted access period has expired. The copies of the thesis submitted for examination shall remain the property of the University, but the copyright of the thesis shall be vested in the student.

5.1         The examination for a research degree shall have two stages: firstly, the submission and preliminary assessment of the thesis and secondly its defence by oral examination; the viva voce.

5.2         Students are required to attend the viva voce examination on the agreed date unless there are exceptional and unforeseen circumstances, which prevent attendance.

5.3         The viva voce examination should take place within 3 calendar months of the examiners receiving the thesis.

5.4         RASC shall ensure that all examinations are conducted, and the recommendations of the examiners are presented, wholly in accordance with the University’s regulations. In any instance where RASC is made aware of failure to comply with all the procedures of the examination process, it may declare the examination null and void and appoint new examiners.

5.5         RASC (or its Chair, acting on behalf of the sub-committee) shall make a decision on the reports and recommendation(s) of the examiners in respect of the student. The power to confer the degree shall rest with RASC, acting on behalf of Academic Board of the University of Wolverhampton.

Preliminary Report on the Thesis

5.6         Registry Services will send a copy of the thesis to each examiner together with the examiner’s Preliminary Report form, University Research Degrees Regulations, and the Notes of Guidance for Examiners. They will also respond to any questions the examiners have concerning the examination procedures.

5.7         Each examiner will read the thesis and provide an independent Preliminary Report on it to the University before any oral examination is held. In completing the Preliminary Report, each examiner shall consider whether the thesis provisionally satisfies the requirements of the degree and where possible shall make an appropriate provisional recommendation subject to the outcome of an oral examination.

5.8         All Preliminary Reports must be received by Registry Services at least 10 working days before the scheduled date of the viva.  The University may reschedule a viva where this is not the case.

5.9         Registry Services will ensure that the Chair has all Preliminary Reports to be distributed to the examination team on the day of the viva; but they will not be made available to the student.

The Oral Examination

5.10       Registry Services must notify the student, examiners, supervisors, and independent Chair in writing of the date and the arrangements for the oral examination. Arrangements include any agreed reasonable adjustments where these have been requested by the student, with reference to their tutor awareness sheet.

5.11       The oral examination shall not be arranged less than one month from the date of receipt of the thesis by the examiners to give the examiners a reasonable period in which to assess the work.

5.12       The oral examination shall be held in the UK (on university premises).  In exceptional circumstances, RASC may give approval for the examination to take place by video conference, in line with the Policy on Remote Viva Voce Examinations.

5.13       The academic advisor may, at the written request of the student, attend the oral examination as an observer, but shall withdraw prior to the deliberations of the examiners on the outcome of the examination.

5.14       The only other people who may attend the oral examination are those who are necessary for the University to discharge its obligations under the Equality Act 2010 and where this has been agreed in advance.

5.15       At the end of the examination, the student and advisor will leave the room. The examiners or the Chair may however invite them back to clarify any outstanding issues arising from the examination. If an academic advisor has not been invited to attend the viva voce by the student, they are not permitted to join the meeting between the student and examination team that delivers the outcome.

Recommendations Available to the Examiners

5.16       Following the completion of the oral examination, the examiners shall, where they are in agreement, submit to Registry Services a joint report and recommendation relating to the award of the degree.

5.17       The examiners will be asked to make one of the following recommendations:

1. Pass
2. Pass, subject to the correction of minor editorial or other stated deficiencies in the commentary, to be made within twelve weeks.
3. Fail.

5.18       The examiners shall inform the student of their recommendations to RASC on the day of the examination.

5.19       The preliminary reports and joint recommendation of the examiners shall together provide sufficiently detailed comments on the scope and quality of the work to enable RASC to satisfy itself that the recommendation proposed is appropriate. Where the examiners are not in agreement, separate reports and recommendations shall be submitted.

Award of the Degree Subject to Minor Amendments to the commentary

5.20       Where the examiners are satisfied that the student has in general reached the standard required for the degree but consider that the thesis requires additional explanatory information or some minor amendments and corrections, they may recommend that the degree be awarded subject to the student amending the thesis to the satisfaction of the internal and/or the external examiner(s).

5.21       Minor corrections that are permissible include typographical errors, minor amendments and/or replacement of, or additions to the text, references, or diagrams. Other more extensive corrections may be made as long as they do not require significant (as defined by the examiners) re-working or re-interpretation of the intellectual content of the commentary.

5.22       Where minor amendments are required, the student must submit the corrected thesis within a maximum of 12 weeks from the date the examiners’ feedback is sent to the student.   RASC may, where there are exceptional reasons, approve an extension of this period. For students with disabilities, learning differences or long term health conditions, where it is indicated on their tutor awareness sheet, an additional 25% time is given (totalling 15 weeks).

5.23       When students submit the corrected thesis, they shall attach a summary of the changes they have made identifying where the changes can be found in the corrected thesis.

5.24       The degree will not be awarded until confirmation that the corrections have been completed is received. Where the student does not submit the amended thesis within twelve weeks and in the absence of approved and recorded Leave of Absence, the University reserves the right not to confer the award.

5.25       The minor amendments must be made to the satisfaction of at least one examiner as agreed by the examiners following the viva voce. Examiners may not make additional requirements at this stage. Upon receipt of the corrected thesis, the nominated examiner will, within one month of receipt, complete the Examiner’s Final Declaration Form and return it to Registry Services.

5.26       Where the examiners are unable to agree a joint recommendation following submission of the amended thesis, the procedures in Regulations 5.29 and 5.30 shall apply.

Failure of PhD by Published Work

5.27       Where the examiners’ recommendation is fail, the student may make a further application at any time, provided that such an application includes additional works based upon further study and research.

5.28       The period of study shall be 12 months from the date of approval of the new Research Proposal. The student shall submit a new copy of the published works and commentary for examination.  A new team of examiners will be appointed.

Where Recommendations are not Unanimous

5.29       Where Examiners are unable to reach an agreed recommendation, the Dean of Research may:

a) accept a majority recommendation,
b) accept the recommendation of the external Examiner, or
c) require the appointment of an additional Examiner.

5.30       Where an additional external examiner is appointed under Regulation 10.30c) above, they shall prepare an independent report on the thesis and may request an additional oral examination.  That examiner will neither seek nor be informed of the recommendations of the other examiners. The reports from all the examiners are considered by the Dean of Research.

6.1       Conferment of an award is withheld from any student who has not fulfilled a legitimate requirement of the University, including the settlement of any outstanding debt to the University.

6.2       A student must not state that they have been awarded a research degree on their CV, in job applications or at interview until a formal conferment letter is received from the University.

7.1         Any alleged misconduct in research (that is, other than academic misconduct in an assessment) will be dealt with initially through the Procedures for the Investigation of Allegations of Misconduct in Research.

7.2         Any alleged assessment offence will be dealt with through the ‘Procedure for managing an alleged assessment offence’, where a student has:

a) sought to gain unfair academic advantage in the assessment process for themselves or another student, and/or
b) not complied with internal or external ethical approval processes, and/or
c) breached a principle of research integrity.

7.3         An assessment offence may be committed in relation to a “piece of work contributing to a research award of the University”. This includes any written work or oral presentation submitted for assessment or submitted to a Faculty Research Committee in support of the Progression stage of a Research Degree Programme or as part of the Annual Progress Review.  

7.4         All research will use text-matching software to produce an originality report, to be submitted alongside assessed work, including:

a) Annual Progress Review.
b) Progression Stage.
c) The thesis.
d) A resubmitted thesis, where resubmission is required.

7.5         The University reserves the right to submit any assessment item to a text-matching database for electronic originality checking with or without a student's consent. 

8.1         The University has an appeals procedure that is available for all research students. (https://www.wlv.ac.uk/current-students/conduct-and-appeals/ This process can also be used to appeal against the outcome of an Extenuating Circumstances claim. 

8.2         Appellants will not be disadvantaged as a result of bringing an academic appeal.

8.3         A student registered for a postgraduate research degree has the right to appeal against a decision made at any of the key assessment points:

a) Taught modules (Professional Doctorate Students only)
b) Progression decision (Annual Progress Review or Progression Stage)
c) Examination or re-examination of the thesis.

8.4         In addition, students may also appeal against decisions made relating to:

a) the decision that there is no prima facie case for the award of a PhD by Published Work.
b) Withdrawal of registration due to lack of academic progress.

9.1         Research students who are dissatisfied with their conditions of work or the quality of their supervision should wherever possible discuss the difficulties with their supervisor.

9.2         If a research student prefers not to discuss their concerns with the supervisor, the student should approach the Postgraduate Research Tutor.

9.3         If the complaint is not resolved through informal routes, then the University of Wolverhampton has a formal Student Complaints Procedure. Information on the complaints procedure may be found at: https://www.wlv.ac.uk/about-us/governance/legal-information/policies-and-regulations/

10.1       The University may award consider an Aegrotat or Posthumous award, on the recommendation of the Dean of Research.  In reaching the decision, the Dean of Research will normally convene an Examination Panel in accordance with section D5.

10.2       In addition to the award sought (or an MPhil in the case of PhD), the Examiners may recommend the award of Postgraduate Diploma (by research), if they believe the work is close to but not sufficient.  

10.3       In considering whether to accept such a thesis, the relevant committee will assure itself that the work available is of sufficient quality to demonstrate to Examiners that the student had achieved the objectives of the research programme.

10.4       In considering the request for an Aegrotat award, the University Research Awards sub-committee will assure itself that appropriate efforts have been made to support the student and to retrieve the programme of study, and that the student is unlikely to be able to complete the programme in the foreseeable future.

10.5       Research submitted for consideration for a Postgraduate Diploma (by Research) cannot subsequently be employed by the student towards a Research Degree.

11.1       In exceptional circumstances, following an investigation, the University may at any time, on the recommendation of the Academic Registrar, revoke an award and all privileges connected therewith, having determined that there is good cause to do so. This may include:

a) Where an award is found to have been obtained by fraud or deception including academic and research misconduct.
b) Where a graduate has not met the requirements of the award conferred or
c) Where the award has been obtained due to administrative error or irregularities in the conduct of the Research Awards Sub-committee.

PDF Version of the Regulations for the degree award of PhD by Published Work, to download.