Faculty of Arts

Research Guidelines

The University of Melbourne Research Committee and the Faculty of Arts have developed guidelines and recommendations for the supervision of research students. In addition to policies outlined below, supervisors are expected to offer candidates general advice and guidance on such issues as residency requirements; Masters and PhD topics; progress reports for research candidates; PhD conversion and confirmation; and thesis submission.

Residency

Research students must be resident in Victoria for at least 1/3 of their candidature (special procedures apply for non-residents). Leave to study away from the University can be approved for up to 6 months and periods of more than 3 months require the appointment of an external associate supervisor.

Candidature

The following guidelines have been formulated by the University Research Committee and provide for a mutual agreement of responsibilities to be established between the student, the supervisor and the department for the duration of the student's candidature. There is a wide disciplinary diversity of topics, approaches and practices in higher degree research. The guidelines are not therefore intended as an indictment of, or a prescription for, school or individual practices. The guidelines are relevant to PhD and Masters research candidates and should be considered as a guide to ways in which potential and identified problems might be avoided.

Responsibilities of academic schools

  1. The Head of School is responsible for matters concerning research students, and for any communications with the Faculty Research and Graduate Studies Committee (Masters), or the RHD Committee (PhD). However, a Head of School may choose to set up a postgraduate committee to assist and advise on such matters as supervision and progress.
  2. The Head of School should not only advise prospective students on the range of research expertise of academic staff, but should clearly articulate school expectations, practices and standards with respect to supervised research. While it should be recognised that unforeseen eventualities beyond the student's or school's control may sometimes intervene to delay completion, the school should nevertheless emphasise the student's commitment to intensive work and to the time-frame in which the degree should be completed. Conditions of postgraduate scholarships and awards should be emphasised.
  3. The Head of School should ensure that an induction session for new and prospective students is provided, including a guide to the nature of research in the particular field, to the facilities available for postgraduates within the school (including library services), and to the school program of graduate seminars. There should be discussion of the characteristic stages towards completion of theses in the field, and typical examples of time-frames. It is advisable that material on these subjects also be made available in written form.
  4. When considering applications for admission to research candidature, the Head of School should ensure the area of research is of interest to the supervisor(s), is within the range of the supervisor(s)' methodological and theoretical expertise, and can be adequately supervised when the supervisor(s)' other academic commitments are taken into account.
  5. The Head of School should ensure that appropriate staff member(s) are available to supervise the student until the end of the candidature. If a supervisor takes study leave or is absent from the department for more than 2 months, arrangements for alternative supervision must be resolved to the satisfaction of the student, the school and the Research and Graduate Studies Committee (Masters) or the RHD Committee (PhD). Joint supervision may be an effective way of meeting these contingencies.
  6. Members of staff would ordinarily be expected to undertake no more than the equivalent of 7 full-time supervisory arrangements (including honours and masters coursework). Academic staff with heavy administrative burdens should carefully consider the number of supervisions undertaken.
  7. Through consultation with supervisors, the Head of School should monitor progress of research candidates and that they report regularly throughout the candidature (see Progress reports).
  8. In the case of students converting from Masters to PhDs, the Head of School is expected to provide the RHD Committee with evidence of satisfactory progress in the Masters research and a justification of the conversion including the PhD research outlines.
  9. The Head of School should formulate and make available to prospective and new students general guidelines regarding authorship of publications within the discipline.
  10. The school should provide an appropriate physical and intellectual environment for all students. Students should be encouraged to participate in research seminars and be given every opportunity to become an integral part of the research milieu of the school and the discipline. In the case of small schools, involvement in interdepartmental activities may also be advisable. The school's activities in these respects should include strategies consistent with the University's Affirmative Action program for women.
  11. In the event of the supervisor/student relationship breaking down, it is the responsibility of the Head of School to resolve the problem, if necessary in consultation with the RHD Committee (PhD) or Research and Graduate Studies Committee (Masters), and to seek alternative arrangements.

Responsibilities of candidates

Research candidature may be considered as a three-way interaction between the academic school, supervisor(s) and student. While schools and supervisors are expected to provide many forms of support and guidance, the ultimate responsibility for managing the research project and obtaining the degree rests with the candidate.

  1. All candidates should observe the University's rules, regulations and requirements (both specifically relating to the degree and other requirements), and consult the handbook for guidance especially when making applications for variations of candidature.
  2. Through the orientation session held by their school or by consulting with their supervisors, commencing candidates to become familiar with:
    a) the nature and limitations of research in their field;
    b) the facilities (including support for fieldwork if necessary) available for postgraduates in their schools and the University;
    c) the dimensions of the project, the time-frame for completion, and the normal stages encountered along the way.
  3. From the outset of candidature students should confer with their supervisors at what are mutually agreed to be appropriate and regular intervals. Candidates should keep supervisors informed of their research activities, progress and problems.
  4. After the first 6 months of full-time (or 12 months part-time) Masters research candidature, students are required to submit a progress report detailing progress made, and any problems faced during this period. Around 9 months full-time (or 21 months part-time) after admission to probationary PhD candidature, the candidate should submit an application for confirmed candidature and a report on the research (based on a format set out in an application form sent out by the School of Graduate Research) so that confirmation may be finalised by the end of the probationary period. Individual schools may have additional requirements.
  5. If a school recommends against granting confirmed PhD candidature or recommends that candidature should be terminated on the grounds of unsatisfactory progress, the candidate may make a submission to the RHD Committee, and may subsequently appeal to the Academic Board against any decision of the Sub-Committee.
  6. After proceeding to confirmed PhD candidature, candidates should present to their supervisor at least one significant piece of written work (in the form of a report, draft chapter or work-in-progress paper) annually. Student and supervisor should also undertake a major review of work completed at least six-monthly so it can be assessed within the overall shape of the study and the time-frame for completion.
  7. If a candidate is unable to resolve serious problems with the supervisor(s), he or she should first ask the head of school to help. If the head of school is unable to resolve the problem, the Secretary of the RHD Committee (PhD) or the Manager of the Research and Graduate Studies Committee (Masters) should then be approached. It is important that these steps be taken without delay so that progress is not unduly impeded. In cases where the supervisor and the head of school are one and the same person, the Secretary of the RHD or RAGS Committee should be approached directly. Help is also available from the University of Melbourne Postgraduate Association and the University Counselling Service.
  8. A PhD or Masters research program at the University of Melbourne is a demanding undertaking requiring performance to the full extent of the candidate's ability. It is therefore expected to be a full-time commitment unless enrolment is part-time. Part-time students should ensure that they continue to have sufficient time available each week as agreed with their schools, to work on their projects. In some instances, the candidate, in consultation with their supervisor and head of school might determine that additional coursework subjects will assist in their research program. Application should be made on the "Additional coursework subjects" form in these cases.
  9. Professional development is considered an integral part of the PhD training program, and might include tutoring or demonstrating. The University of Melbourne does not stipulate the maximum hours to be worked, but recommends as a guide, that more than 6 hours per week across the year, during normal working hours would be undesirable.
    • Where sessional teaching is undertaken, it should be understood that the initial tutorial will include two hours of preparation and marking. Repeat tutorials involve one additional hour.
  10. No other commitments should impact on the time commitment to the PhD or Masters program. It is the responsibility of the supervisor, head of school and student to ensure that paid work will not jeopardise the completion of the course of study in the time allowed. While it is recognised that teaching experience may be beneficial if candidates wish to pursue an academic career, they should not be required to undertake demonstrating or tutoring if this will hold back their studies.
  11. Candidates have a responsibility (shared with the University) to ensure that they re-enrol each year. It is important to notify the School of Graduate Research (PhD) or the Arts Faculty (Masters) of any change of address so that enrolment papers are received.
  12. Candidates should apply in good time before any planned leave of absence, period of study away, change of status, change of title, change of supervisor. Candidates should notify the University when they return from leave of absence or leave to study away from the University.
  13. In preparing the thesis, candidates should bear in mind the following:
    1. they are expected to be familiar with the literature in the particular field and assess it critically
    2. they should formulate a clear hypothesis or overall question, and should support their conclusions with adequate data or evidence and analysis
    3. the evidence presented should be relevant to the main hypothesis being investigated
    4. candidates should pay particular attention to the final presentation of the thesis. Not only should the final version be carefully checked for errors, but it should be clearly structured and easy to follow, and should form an integrated whole (examiners can ask for theses to be revised if presentation is below the required standard). A high standard of written English should be attained. Candidates should refer to the specifications available from the School of Graduate Research (PhD) or Arts Faculty (Masters).
  14. In writing up their research, candidates must avoid the following:
    1. the fabrication of data - claiming results where none have been obtained
    2. the falsification of data - altering results to confirm the hypothesis
    3. plagiarism, including the direct copying of textual material, the use of data or ideas from other people without adequate attribution
    4. attribution to others who have not in fact contributed to the research.
  15. Candidates should observe the University of Melbourne Code of Conduct for Research
  16. At the outset of their candidature, candidates should clarify with their supervisors University & school practice regarding intellectual property, including patents and authorship of any publications arising from their work. They should be informed by the supervisor in writing of any limitations on publication or communication of their work consequent upon commercial agreements at the outset of the candidature or as soon as such commercial agreements have been reached. In such cases a written agreement should be concluded over the signatures of the candidate, principal supervisor(s) and Head of the unit(s) and school(s) concerned.
  17. Candidates collecting data from human subjects (including surveys) should ensure that approval from the relevant ethics committee is obtained. Candidates undertaking any experiment involving animals should also ensure that ethics approval and a licence is obtained. Applications for ethics approval and licences should be made before data collection commences.
  18. Candidates should be aware that the University provides insurance coverage for post-graduate students. The University of Melbourne has in force Personal Accident insurance coverage for postgraduate students for up to $100K. The Personal Accident Insurance provides students with various levels of benefits under the policy, including Accidental Death, Permanent Disability and non recoverable medical expenses incurred through accident whilst engaged in activities relating to studies or research including field trips. However, in some cases, especially travel, this cover may not be sufficient and it is therefore advisable that students arrange separate travel insurance.

    19. Supervision

    The recommended frequency of supervision meetings is half an hour every two weeks for a full-time candidate and every four weeks for a part-time candidature. The supervisor should maintain a record of supervision meetings, consisting of the date of consultation, the issues considered and the decisions reached. These records are important memoranda in reviewing supervisory arrangements. More information about supervision can be found in the section 'Candidature' below.

    Supervision difficulties: Throughout their candidature students can expect support and guidance to be readily available from their school. If problems arise between candidates and their supervisor that cannot be resolved by consultation, the postgraduate coordinator or Head of School should be consulted. If a complex problem cannot be resolved satisfactorily within the school, candidates may seek additional advice from the School of Graduate Reserach or the Arts Faculty. The University of Melbourne Postgraduate Association is the representative body for postgraduate students and provides advice, support and specialised assistance for the satisfactory resolution of grievances.

    External supervision: The principal supervisor for a research candidate must be a staff member of the University who has sole responsibility for the supervision of the thesis, however it may be desirable for the student to have more than one supervisor. An external supervisor will not normally be approved as the sole or principal supervisor but one may be appointed with the approval of the Head of School.

    Principles for supervision

    These principles should be read in conjunction with 'Responsibilities of academic schools', above. They are intended as a guide to overcoming problems which are known to impede progress.

    1. Supervisors undertaking research supervision for the first time will not usually be appointed sole supervisor.
    2. Supervisors are expected to provide continuing guidance to research candidates on the research being undertaken and on meeting time-lines.
    3. Supervision of research students is not only a complex teaching task, it should be regarded as a shared enterprise in which both supervisor and student have an intellectual investment. Proposed research projects should therefore be of mutual interest. Prospective supervisors should have a sufficient range of theoretical and methodological expertise to offer the student proper supervision. There should be adequate time to supervise when other academic commitments are taken into account.
    4. The supervisor needs to be well acquainted with the candidate's academic background so that if the proposed project requires additional skills and knowledge, the candidate can be informed how these might be acquired.
    5. The supervisor should alert the commencing candidate to commonly encountered tasks, processes and standards expected of research in the particular field. This is a useful framework for helping the student to develop and refine a topic which can be researched and written up within the required time-frame.
    6. Once the topic is refined to the satisfaction of the student and supervisor, the supervisor should assist the student to formulate a framework for the research and time estimates for the completion of various phases. Having such a framework, which may be modified as the research proceeds, gives a sense of focus, helps student and supervisor to check progress, and is often a useful early orientation to writing the thesis. The framework should be used to guide the student, but should not constrain the development of the research.
    7. From the outset of candidature, supervisors and students should ensure they confer at appropriate and regular intervals. This is particularly vital in the first year and for part-time students. Such agreements may be re-negotiated from time to time as the candidature proceeds. Meetings may be minor and frequent and/or more formal and less frequent. In this context, it is helpful for the supervisor to make explicit the purpose of the meeting. It is a useful practice to keep a diary of supervisions with dates and details of discussions. In addition to informal meetings, it is important that major reviews take place at least six monthly in order that the student's achieved work can be assessed within the overall shape of the study and time-frame for completion. Both supervisor and student should then be in a position to be able to report when required on progress and to judge when some intervention may be desirable.
    8. Early in a student's candidature, the supervisor must make an assessment of a student's written work. If the supervisor considers that further work is required in areas such as composition and grammar for the student to be successful in completing the thesis, the supervisor should then provide advice and assistance as to how an appropriate standard can be achieved. Such advice may include referral to units such as the Centre for Communication Skills, English as a Second Language, the Learning Skills Unit and the Planning and Academic Programs Unit, School of Graduate Research. The supervisor should continue to monitor the student's progress in order to resolve any on-going difficulties.
    9. The supervisor is expected to read any written work thoroughly, in advance of meetings, and to provide regular feedback on the student's work, although a supervisor should not be obliged to read an excessive number of drafts of the same section or chapter. It is vital that criticism is given in a constructive, supportive and sensitive fashion. The supervisor needs to recognise that doing a research degree is an emotional as well as an intellectual commitment; students will be discouraged by continual harsh criticism. Supervision sessions should be structured so that it is relatively easy to exchange ideas.
    10. The supervisor has a responsibility to ensure that both full-time and part-time candidates are included in the academic life of the school. Candidates should be required to present work-in-progress papers to their peers and academic staff. Candidates should be strongly encouraged to take part in school and/or inter-school seminars, conferences, informal functions and the like. Reports from conferences etc., should be conveyed to schools and research students. Postgraduates should be encouraged to publish their work, jointly with supervisors when appropriate. A supportive environment and a sense of collegiality are important influences, particularly for women, in timely completion of research projects.
    11. At the beginning of the candidature the supervisor has the responsibility for initiating discussions with a view to making mutually satisfactory arrangements regarding intellectual property, including patents and authorship of any publications arising from the candidate's work. The head of school should be notified that these discussions have taken place. Arrangements which are made should reflect codes of practice with respect to authorship in the discipline. Arrangements should also reflect the responsibility of the supervisor in fostering the student's career.
    12. Any restrictions on publication rights due to confidentiality requirements need to be clearly outlined at the outset. This particularly involves restrictions arising from registration of patents, and advice from the University Contracts Office may need to be sought to determine the period of disclosure of any results from the research.
    13. Supervisors should ensure that they and the candidates under their supervision are familiar with the University's "Code of Conduct for Research".
    14. It is important not to lose sight of the personal dimension of the supervisory relationship. A candidate's progress may be impeded by personal crises to which the supervisor should be responsive. The supervisor should know where help might be sought within the University and what to do if there is a need to suspend candidature or negotiate an extension.
    15. There are some instances when the supervisory relationship breaks down. In such cases, the supervisor should see to it through the head of school, the Faculty R&RT Committee (Masters) or the RHD Committee (PhD) if necessary, that other arrangements are made to the satisfaction of the student.
    16. In view of the fact that women postgraduates sometimes encounter particular problems in relation to the research environment and the supervisory relationship, supervisors should actively support the University's policies and strategies on affirmative action and avoidance of sexual harassment.

    Progress reports

    Masters by research students

    Masters by research students are required to submit two Progress Reports (Progress Report 1 and Progress Report Two also known as the "Review by Circulation" report) over the course of their candidature in consultation with their supervisor, at the six-month full-time candidature (twelve months part-time) mark and then 6 months (or 12 months part-time equivalent) prior to their expected completion date. Students will be sent the appropriate reports before they are due.

    As part of their first progress report (at 6 months full-time candidature), research Masters candidates are required to submit to their supervisor a thesis proposition of approximately 4,000-5,000 words in length.

    As part of their second progress report (at 12 months full-time candidature), research Masters candidates are required to submit at least two chapters of approximately 10,000 words to be reviewed by an academic (who is not the supervisor/s) in the student’s department. Should the academic reader indicate concerns regarding the student’s progress, Faculty will convene a Progress Panel with the student, supervisor/s and a member of the Research and Graduate Studies Committee.

    PhD candidates

    PhD candidates are required to submit a confirmation report at 12 months full-time candidature, a 2nd year progress report, and a completion report at 3 years full-time candidature. PhD candidates complete progress reports through the School of Graduate Research. Candidates should refer to the PhD handbook available from School of Graduate Research. From 2007 there has been a change in the requirements.

    Faculty Requirements for PhD Progress

    2.5 yr Review by Circulation

    This review applies only to students that have completed more than 1.5 yrs (Equivalent Full Time Load) by end of Sept 2007.
    For these students the Faculty of Arts requires a further review of progress for PhD candidates at 2.5 years (full-time candidature). PhD candidates are required to submit at least two chapters of approximately 20,000 words to be reviewed by an academic (who is not the supervisor/s) in the student’s department. Should the academic reader indicate concerns regarding the student’s progress, Faculty will convene a Progress Panel with the student, supervisor/s and a member of the R&RT Committee.

    PhD Advisory Committees
    This review applies only to students that have completed less than 1.5 yrs (Equivalent Full Time Load) by end of Sept 2007 - it replaces the 2.5 yr review which is being phased out.

    From 2007 the Faculty introduced the annual PhD advisory committees in line with the rest of the University. The goal of this is for academic staff to meet with students to assist with progress in the PhD.

    Where possible the timing of these committees and most of the written requirements are integrated with the SGR annual progress reports as detailed above. With the current School reviews, PhD Advisory Committees will meet with each PhD student (both full-time and part-time) PhD candidates as follows:

    PhD Advisory Committee meeting Full-time students Part-time students Minimum written requirement for presentation at the Committee
    School Review * 12 months 2,000 (max.)
    SGR PhD Confirmation Report 9-12 months 18-24 months 8-10,000 (includes draft chapters)
    School Review   36 months As appropriate
    SGR PhD Progress Report 2 24 months 48 months 20,000 (includes draft chapters)
    School Review   60 months As appropriate
    SGR Completion Report 33-36 months 68-72 months 2,000 (if requiring an extension)

    * Some schools have opted to include a School review for full-time students at about 6 months, to prepare the candidate for Confirmation. Please contact your School for more information.

    Please note that the above meeting schedule and the written requirement is the minimum University & Faculty requirement for PhD progress – Schools may have further requirements. Please contact your school for further information.

    All PhD students due for Faculty progress reports will be contacted well in advance of deadlines for submission of written work and appointment dates (where necessary) with information on exactly what is required.

    Confirmation of PhD Candidature and Conversion from the MA to the PhD

    Confirmation of PhD Candidature

    Confirmation is a key point in PhD candidature. Its purpose is to determine whether or not work to date on the PhD research proposal indicates a strong likelihood that it will result in a high quality thesis, completed in the required time.

    PhD candidates are first admitted as 'probationary' candidates, except those who have converted from a Masters by Research, or in some cases, have transferred from RHD enrolment at another institution.

    Probationary candidature is normally for a minimum of 6 months and a maximum of 12 months (or 12 and 24 months for part-time students) ending once confirmation is confirmed. After 6 months (full-time) enrolment the School of Graduate Research sends a Confirmation Report Form to prompt the candidate to commence preparation for the confirmation process. For more information, please read the School of Graduate Research' "Probationary Status and Confirmation of Candidature" guidelines (PDF only).

    The form needs to be signed by the Convenor of Postgraduate Studies and Head of School once they are satisfied that the confirming student meets the following requirements:

    1. That the proposed topic is a feasible PhD thesis
    2. That the applicant has exhibited the ability and progress necessary to achieve the standard expected of a PhD candidate.
    3. The School of Graduate Research has set out guidelines detailing what is required in order for probationary students to confirm their candidature. This is available from SGR and the PhD handbook.

    The Arts Faculty's additional requirement for the confirmation of PhD candidature, is a sample of writing of between 8,000-10,000 words.

    This should include:

    PhD Fieldwork: If a fieldwork component is envisaged, candidates must include a fieldwork plan (basic methodology and timetable) and a tentative fieldwork budget as part of the Confirmation work plan to be eligible to apply for the Faculty's Fieldwork funding scheme after confirmation. This Fieldwork documentation must be submitted to: the Arts & Music Student Centre (Room 104, Old Arts Building) along with a copy of the School of Graduate Research Confirmation Report Form.

    Conversion from MA to PhD

    For many reasons students may enrol in the first instance as Masters candidates, and later apply for conversion to PhD candidature. Students applying for conversion from a Masters to PhD must obtain two forms:

    The application for conversion must be supported by the supervisor and the head of school (or, if the head is the supervisor, the deputy head), and forwarded to the Dean of the Faculty for approval. In supporting an application for conversion to PhD candidature, the supervisor and head of school must assure themselves that the candidate has undoubted research ability and is likely to complete the PhD degree.

    When assessing your application for conversion, schools are asked to assess whether the proposed student has the ability and skills necessary to do research at doctoral level, and whether the topic is demonstrably of doctoral dimensions. The questions schools are asked to consider are set out on the conversion application form available from SGR.

    PhD Fieldwork: If a fieldwork component is envisaged, candidates must include a fieldwork plan (basic methodology and timetable) and a tentative fieldwork budget as part of the Conversion work plan to be eligible to apply for the Faculty's Fieldwork funding scheme after conversion to the PhD. This Fieldwork documentation must be submitted to: the Arts & Music Student Centre (Room 104, Old Arts Building) along with a copy of the School of Graduate Research Confirmation Report Form.

    Intellectual property

    All material produced by a student belongs to that student with the exception of patentable material where the University has first option to file a claim with the student. When a student receives a scholarship or funding from sources where other intellectual property conditions apply, the student should be aware of these conditions. More information on the University’s IP-related policies, processes and support services can be found on the University's research website.

    Health and safety guidelines

    Students and supervisors are expected to be familiar with the University's Environmental Health and Safety Guidelines, particularly in relation to off-campus study such as fieldwork, research and conference trips.

top of page