Students have an annual progress review at regular intervals throughout their postgraduate study. The general principle is: one APR for each year a student is registered, and APRs would normally be around 8, 20 and 30 months after admission to a full-time degree.
So while nominally, MPhil = 1 APR, MD = 2 APRs and PhD = 3 APRs, further reviews are required for as long as students are registered. Students will be asked to submit an extra report in their writing up year as well as any extension year that follows, unless they submit before the APR deadline.
In a part-time degree, the reviews will be less frequent but never more than 12 months apart. Therefore a part-time student can expect more reviews in total than an equivalent full-time student.
The timetable for APRs in all our part-time and full-time postgraduate degree programmes is given here.
For continuity, the review will normally be with the same progress panel members who reviewed and signed off the project proposal.
The purpose of the progress review
The approach to a progression review will feel intimidating for a student, but it rarely turns out that way. A progress panel will be broadly similar in seniority and experience to the examiners, and so the progression review is often an enjoyable and intellectually stimulating experience for the student. In early reviews the panel will provide an independent opinion on the research direction which can often lead to exciting new ideas. In later reviews, the examiners will give the student an insight into likely lines and styles of questioning for the final exam.
The panel will assess progress against the project proposal, and provide early advice on any concerns. In most cases of concern, a student is already aware that their project isn’t where it should be. Where a problem is picked up early, the panel can almost always give a student a helping hand back on track.
The time course of the progress review
- Around 2 months before the review is due, the student will receive a reminder from us and the review record will be created in ePortfolio. The student completes and submits their report and an on-line review of progress for the supervisor and panel to review.
- The supervisor completes their on-line review of the student’s progress, and submits the report. This will be visible to student and panel in time for the meeting.
- The student contacts their panel members to arrange the face-to-face meeting. Panel and student meet, and the panel complete their report.
- One of the postgraduate tutors reads and signs off the reports from the student, supervisors and panel.
- The Dean or Associate Dean signs off all the reports. Only at this stage is the progression approved. The panel, Institute and Graduate School reports are released to the student and supervisor.
We have numbered the activities because ePortfolio will insist that the reports are completed in exactly this order. If – for example – the supervisor does not complete their report, then the panel can never report and the student cannot progress.
The content of the progress review
You should study in detail the recommendations of the Research Student Handbook. However, here are some general guidelines on preparing, and the content of the review.
In the first and intermediate reviews students are expected to make a short presentation, before the panel members turn to the written report and start a conversation with the student.
At the first panel meeting, most students present a literature review. They should be able to explain the scientific background, the aims and the direction of the research. Some students will have early results, while others may be establishing the laboratory skills or ethical framework for their experiments.
At intermediate reviews, the panel members will expect to see data with a detailed analysis in some areas, further refinement of the study aims and a clear plan towards completion of data collection.
By the final review, the data collection should be substantially complete. An outline structure for the thesis is expected, ideally with some chapters populated. For the final APR it’s OK to have a less formal panel meeting without presentation, or even to complete the entire process online (especially when for example a student has left Newcastle to write up).
The panel will review progress against the project plan, but will also be particularly interested in whether the student has taken ownership of the work. While there are seldom any absolute right and wrong answers, a student should speak authoritatively about the scientific context of their research, and be able to defend their particular methods and conclusions while respecting an alternative point of view.
Outcome of the progress review
The outcome that everybody hopes for is an unconditional approval. This indicates that the panel are happy with progress, and that any minor concerns are unlikely to affect a positive outcome.
It is not unusual that the panel raises some concerns. These may be around the design and direction of the project, or the progress against the time plan. In many cases this need not affect progress but when the concerns are more significant, then the panel may recommend a further review after 2 months.
Students in particular shouldn’t be too discouraged by this outcome. Research is unpredictable, and there are many reasons why a project doesn’t go to plan. An important role for the progression panel is to spot these problems, and provide an early opportunity to put them right.
Change or termination of degree programme
On rare occasions the panel may recommend changing to a different degree, or terminating the degree programme entirely. This is a disappointing outcome for any student, but equally for the supervisors and University, and is a very difficult decision for a panel. A panel would only ever make this recommendation when they believe the student has little or no chance of completing their registered degree, and that the change is in the best interests of the student.
Progression under difficult circumstances
Difficult life events affect us all from time to time, and postgraduate students are no exception. We and the graduate school are very sympathetic to changes in circumstances that affect a student’s study, and an interruption or extension to studies would in most cases be granted for as long as needed.
We should point out that there is no scope to lower the academic standards required to graduate with a higher degree. In particular, the panel and final examiners will apply the same high standards to all candidates, irrespective of the circumstances leading up to the assessment. Therefore if studies are likely to be affected, please do contact us early and take full advantage of the options to interrupt or extend the programme.
For further information, see the University page on progression reviews, and particularly the Research Student Handbook.