16.1    Regulations Governing the Appointment and Duties of Examiners for Research Degrees (excluding PhD by Published Work) ! (to be replaced from 1 October 2009 - see updated regulation)!

Specific provisions concerning the appointment of examiners and the available recommendations for some higher degrees are made under Regulation 14.

(1)    The examiners shall be appointed by Senate on the recommendation of the Head of the appropriate Department or School.

(2)    One external examiner and one internal examiner shall be appointed, except where the candidate is, or has recently been, a member of the academic staff, research staff, administrative or library staff of the University, when the examination shall be conducted by two external examiners. The internal examiner shall not be the candidate’s supervisor. The external examiner shall not normally be a former member of staff at the University unless at least three years have elapsed since his/her resignation from the University.

(3)    Where two examiners but no internal examiner are appointed to conduct the examination, an examination advisor shall be appointed, and may be appointed in other cases. The examination advisor shall be a member of staff other than a supervisor from the candidate's Department, School or Faculty and shall be appointed by the Senate on the recommendation of the Head of the appropriate Department or School. The advisor shall advise and assist the examiners on University and departmental procedures for the examination and may chair and maintain a record of the oral examination but shall not otherwise participate in the examination process.

(4)    Where the examiners are unable to agree on the recommendation to be made, or if for any other reason a further opinion is required on the work submitted, an external adjudicator shall be appointed. The adjudicator shall be appointed by the Senate on the recommendation of the Head of the appropriate department after consultation with the original external examiner. The adjudicator shall consider the work submitted and will also be sent the reports of the original examiners. The adjudicator shall make an independent report which shall conclude with one of the recommendations under Regulation 16.1(9). The report shall be sent, together with the original examiners’ reports, to the Academic Registrar for consideration by the appropriate Graduate Studies Committee. The recommendation of the adjudicator shall normally be expected to prevail.

(5)    A further external examiner shall be appointed where recommendation (9)(c) or (d) below is made.

(6)    Examiners and the external adjudicator shall be paid the appropriate fee, but where the supervisor is appointed as an examiner, he/she shall not be paid a fee for acting as examiner.

(7)    A supervisor shall not be entitled to attend the oral examination and may normally only be present at the request of the examiners. If present, the supervisor shall play no part in the oral examination.

(8)    Each examiner shall make an independent report on the work submitted, both shall be present at any oral examination, and shall sign the joint report on the oral (if held), and the final recommendation. The reports shall be sent to the Academic Registrar for consideration by the appropriate Graduate Studies Committee. The examiners' reports shall be treated at all times as confidential to the Academic Registrar, the appropriate Graduate Studies Committee, an external adjudicator where one is appointed under Regulation 16.1(4), the members of the Preliminary Review Panel and the Chair of the Graduate Appeals Committee where a candidate exercises the right of appeal under Regulation 16.3, the Head and Director of Graduate Studies (or equivalent) of the relevant Department or School, the supervisor, and the student.

(9)    The joint report of the examiners shall conclude with one of the following recommendations:

(a)    that the work submitted be approved for the degree in question.

(b)    that the work submitted be approved for the degree in question, subject to minor amendments or corrections specified by the examiners. The minor amendments or corrections to be made will be indicated fully to the candidate by the examiners. The internal examiner shall ensure that the Library copies are corrected or amended. The minor amendments or corrections must be completed by the candidate to the satisfaction of the internal examiner within one month of the candidate receiving notification of the work required.

(c)    (MA, MSc and LLM by research) that the thesis (or exceptionally a revised thesis to be submitted within a prescribed period) be re-examined for the degree of MPhil.

(d)    (MPhil only) that the thesis (or exceptionally a revised thesis to be submitted within a prescribed period) be re-examined for the degree of PhD.

(e)    (MA, MSc, LLM only) that the degree be awarded with Distinction.

(f)    that the degree be not awarded, but that the candidate be permitted to submit a revised thesis within a prescribed period.

(g)    that the work be not approved for the degree in question but be approved for a degree of a lower status.

(h)    (LLM only) that the work be not approved for the degree in question, but be approved for the Diploma in Legal Studies.

(i)    that no degree be awarded.

(10)    The referral of a thesis in accordance with recommendation 9(f) above shall be permitted on one occasion only.

(11)    The period prescribed for the resubmission of a thesis in accordance with recommendation 9(c), (d), (f) or (i) above shall not normally exceed twelve months from the date on which the candidate is notified by the University of the decision of the examiners.

(12)    If, at any point during the examination process, the examiners suspect a candidate of cheating as defined under University Regulation 11 governing the Procedure to be Adopted in the Event of Suspected Cheating in a University Test, the examination process shall be stopped and the case referred to an Investigating Committee as set out in Regulation 11.

16.2    Regulations Governing the Constitution and Duties of Boards of Examiners for Master’s Degrees by Examination and Dissertation

(1)    Boards of Examiners shall be appointed annually by the Senate on the recommendation of the Head of the appropriate Department(s) or School(s), not later than the end of the Spring term.

(2)    Boards of Examiners shall consist of the external examiner(s) and of such other members as may be appointed by the Senate on the recommendation of the Head of the appropriate Department or School.

(3)    The Chair of the Board of Examiners shall be appointed by the Senate on the recommendation of the Board of the appropriate Faculty.

(4)    The Chair of the Board of Examiners may appoint a Secretary and delegate duties to him/her. The Chair, or Secretary if appointed, shall be responsible for transmitting the decision of the Board of Examiners to the Academic Registrar. The decisions of the Board shall be signed by the Chair, the external examiner(s) and the Secretary (if appointed).

(5)    The quorum of the Examining Board shall be two-thirds of the full membership. The decision of the Board is not valid without the assent of an external examiner.

(6)    In the case of Master’s degrees examined in two or more parts, a candidate shall normally be required to satisfy the examiners separately in respect of each part. Compensation as between the parts may be permitted, however, where such an arrangement has been approved by the Senate and has been published in the appropriate course regulations.

(7)    In those courses where the examination is conducted in two or more parts, the report of the Board of Examiners on each part shall be submitted immediately to the Academic Registrar and shall make one of the following decisions on each candidate, subject in the case of re-examination to the Regulations in paragraph (9):

(a)    that the candidate be permitted to proceed to the second or next part of the examination;

(b)    that the candidate be required to pass further specified tests before he/she can be deemed to have completed that part of the examination;

(c)    That the candidate be required to withdraw from their course.

(8)    The final report of the Board of Examiners shall normally be made to the Registrar before the last ordinary meeting of the Senate in the Autumn term following the end of the candidates period of study or within six months of the candidate’s period of study (whichever is the sooner) and shall make one of the following decisions on each candidate, subject in the case of re-examination to the Regulations in paragraph (9):

(a)    that the candidate be awarded the degree;

(b)    that the candidate be awarded the degree with Distinction;

(c)    that the candidate be required to be examined again in certain specified papers and/or to submit certain specified essays, or to re-submit his/her dissertation in a revised form within a stated period;

(d)    that the candidate be not awarded the degree;

(e)    that, subject to the Programme Regulations for the degree in question permitting such a qualification, the candidate be awarded a Postgraduate Diploma or Postgraduate Certificate.

(9)    The Board of Examiners shall normally specify re-examination as follows:

(a)    subject to (b) below, candidates who fail part of an examination for the Master’s degree may, at the discretion of the examiners, be permitted to take part, or the whole, of the examination in a final attempt;

(b)    in the case of a Master’s degree by examination only, a candidate failing half or more than half of the papers shall normally not be permitted to take the examination again;

(c)    in the case of a Master’s degree by examination and dissertation, a candidate failing either of both parts may, subject to the discretion of the examiners, be permitted to resit the examination and/or the dissertation within a stated period in a final attempt.

16.3    Regulations Governing Academic Appeals at Postgraduate Research Level

(1)    Regulations Governing Appeals Against MPhil/PhD Upgrade Decisions

(a)    Where the department makes a recommendation under Regulation 14 (F) (43) that a student be allowed to continue his/her registration only for the degree of MPhil, a candidate has the right to make representations in writing, within 28 days of the date of the letter of formal notification of the department’s recommendation, via the Academic Registrar for consideration by a Preliminary Review Panel comprising two of the following: a Pro-Vice-Chancellor; the Chair (or Deputy Chair) of a Faculty Graduate Studies Committee or Faculty Board other than that in which the candidate is based.

(b)    The Preliminary Review Panel will consider the appeals of students against decisions made under (a) above where:

(i)    A student is in possession of evidence not available to the department when the decision of the upgrading panel was reached and can provide good reasons for not having made the department aware of issues affecting their performance or

(ii)    there appear to have been procedural irregularities in the conduct of the upgrading process or

(iii)    there appears to be evidence of prejudices or bias during the upgrading process or

(iv)    there is evidence of inadequacy of supervisory or other arrangements during the period of study, noting that an appeal on these grounds may only be considered where the candidate can provide good reasons for not having made known their complaint at an earlier stage.

(c)    An appeal will not be considered where the Preliminary Review Panel considers that the evidence provided by the candidate does not constitute grounds for an appeal, and the candidate will be notified of the reasons for the decision. If, in undertaking its consideration, the Preliminary Review Panel seeks written comments from a third party, then these will be passed to the candidate for further comment before a decision is made on whether adequate grounds for an appeal exist; likewise, any written comments provided by a candidate may be made available at this stage to the department for comment.

(d)    Where the Preliminary Review Panel considers that the evidence provided by a candidate constitutes grounds for an appeal, the case will be considered at the next practicable meeting of the Graduate Appeals Committee.

(e)    The Graduate Appeals Committee shall be appointed by the Vice-Chancellor (or his/her nominee) and shall be chaired by the Chair (or Deputy Chair) of a Faculty Board other then that of the appellant's Faculty, the Chair (or Deputy Chair) of the Board of Graduate Studies or a Pro-Vice-Chencellor, together with not fewer than two members drawn from a panel of up to 20 members appointed by the Senate on the recommendation of the Faculty Boards. The Chair of the Graduate Studies Committee of the candidate's Faculty shall be in attendance. Where any member of the Graduate Appeals Committee is already involved in an appeal in another capacity, the Vice-Chancellor (or his/her) nominee) shall appoint another member to the Committee is his/her place.

    The membership of the Graduate Appeals Committee will include at least one person from the Preliminary Review Panel.

    The dates of the meetings of the Graduate Appeals Committee shall be published by the University (along with the dtes by which a candidate must submit their appeal via the Academic Registrar for it to be considered at each particular meeting). The appellant will receive no less than 10 days formal notice of the meeting at which their appeal will be considered. The appellant may, if he/she chooses, appear in person before the Graduate Appeals Committee and may invite any one other person to attend the hearing. The name and status of the person accompanying the appellant must be notified via the Academic Registrar to the Chair of the Graduate Appeals Committee in advance of the hearing. The Graduate Appeals Committee shall take evidence from the Head of the student's Department, the appellant's supervisor, the Chair of the upgrading panel and such other persons as it deems appropriate. The Head of Department, or his/her authorized deputy, must be available when the appeal is being considered to advise the Committee on departmental procedures and other relevant matters arising in the course of the hearing.

Where any written evidence is subsequently submitted by the department to the Committee, this should also be made available to the appellant.

(f)    The Graduate Appeals Committee may take one of the following decisions:

(i)    to reject the appeal, in which case the appellant shall be notified of the Committee's reasons for rejecting the appeal;

(ii)    where the grounds for the appeal were that there appeared to have been procedural irregularities in the conduct of the upgrading process or that there existed circumstances of which the members of the upgrading panel were not aware when their decision was taken to recommend to the department that, for reasons stated, the upgrading panel should reconsider their decision;

(iii)    to permit the student to submit a revised and final version of the upgrading proposal within a specified period of time;

(iv)    to determine that the work should be re-considered by an upgrading panel with the same or an alternative membership. Where the decisions of the two upgrading panels do not agree, any agreed decision of the new panel shall normally be expected to prevail.

(g)    The decision of the Graduate Appeals Committee is final.

(2)    Regulations Governing All Other Academic Appeals at Postgraduate Research Level

(a)    Where the joint report of the examiners or of the external adjudicator for work submitted for examination for a research degree makes a recommendation under Regulations 16.1 (9), 14(C), 14(E), 14(G) or 14(H) (Regulations Governing the Appointment and Duties of Examiners for Research Degrees) either that no degree be awarded, or that a lower degree than that for which the work was submitted be awarded, or that the work be not approved for the degree in question, but that the candidate be permitted to submit revised work for a degree of lower status, within a prescribed period, a candidate has the right to make representations in writing, within three months of the date of the letter of formal notification of the examiners’ recommendation, via the Academic Registrar for consideration by a Preliminary Review Panel comprising two of the following: a Pro-Vice-Chancellor; the Chair (or Deputy Chair) of the Board of Graduate Studies; the Chair (or Deputy Chair) of a Faculty Graduate Studies Committee or Faculty Board other than that in which the candidate is based.

(b)    The Preliminary Review Panel will consider the appeals of students against decisions made by examiners under Regulations 16.1 (9), 14(C), 14(E), 14(G) or 14(H) where:

(i)    a student is in possession of evidence which was not available to the examiners or the external adjudicator when their decision was reached and can provide good reasons for not having made the examiners or external adjudicator aware of the circumstances affecting their performance; or

(ii)    there appear to have been procedural irregularities in the conduct of the examination; or

(iii)    there appears to be evidence of prejudice or of bias on the part of one or more of the examiners.

(iv)     there is evidence of inadequacy of supervisory or other arrangements during the period of study, noting that an appeal on these grounds may only be considered where the candidate can provide good reasons for not having made known their complaint at an earlier stage.

(c)    An appeal will not be considered where the Preliminary Review Panel considers that the evidence provided by the candidate concerned does not constitute grounds for an appeal, and the candidate will be notified of the reasons for the decision. If, in undertaking its consideration, the Preliminary Review Panel seeks written comments from a third party, then these will be passed to the candidate for further comment before a decision is made on whether adequate grounds for an appeal exist; likewise, any written comments provided by a candidate may be made available at this stage to the department/examiners for comment.

(d)    Where the Preliminary Review Panel considers that the evidence provided by a candidate constitutes grounds for an appeal, the case will be considered at the next practicable meeting of the Graduate Appeals Committee.

(e)    The Graduate Appeals Committee shall be appointed by the Vice-Chancellor (or his/her nominee) and shall be chaired by the Chair (or Deputy Chair) of a Faculty Board other than that of the appellant’s Faculty, the Chair (or Deputy Chair) of the Board of Graduate Studies or a Pro-Vice-Chancellor, together with not fewer than two members drawn from a panel of up to 20 members appointed by the Senate on the recommendation of the Faculty Boards. The Chair of the Graduate Studies Committee of the candidate’s Faculty shall be in attendance. Where any member of the Graduate Appeals Committee is already involved in an appeal in another capacity, the Vice-Chancellor (or his/her nominee) shall appoint another member to the Committee in his/her place.

The membership of the Graduate Appeals Committee will include at least one person from the Preliminary Review Panel.

The dates of the meetings of the Graduate Appeals Committee shall be published by the University (along with the dates by which a candidate must submit their appeal via the Academic Registrar for it to be considered at each particular meeting). The appellant will receive no less than 10 days formal notice of the meeting at which their appeal will be considered. The appellant may, if he/she chooses, appear in person before the Graduate Appeals Committee and may invite any one other person to attend the hearing. The name and status of the person accompanying the appellant must be notified via the Academic Registrar to the Chair of the Graduate Appeals Committee in advance of the hearing. The Graduate Appeals Committee shall take evidence from the Head of the student’s Department, the appellant’s supervisor, the internal examiner (where there is one), the external examiner(s), and such other persons as it deems appropriate. The Head of Department, or his/her authorised deputy, must be available when the appeal is being considered to advise the Committee on departmental procedures and other relevant matters arising in the course of the hearing.

Where any written evidence is subsequently submitted by the examiners or the external adjudicator to the Committee, this should also be made available to the appellant.

(f)    The Graduate Appeals Committee may take one of the following decisions:

(i)    to reject the appeal, in which case the appellant shall be notified of the Committee’s reasons for rejecting the appeal;

(ii)    where the grounds for the appeal were that there appeared to have been procedural irregularities in the conduct of the examination or that there existed circumstances of which the examiners were not aware when their decision was taken, to recommend to the examiners that, for reasons stated, they should reconsider their decision;

(iii)    to permit the student to submit a revised and final version of the work for examination within a specified period of time;

(iv)    to determine that the work should be re-examined.

(g)    Where the decision of the Graduate Appeals Committee is that the work should be re-examined ((f)(iv) above), new examiners shall be appointed to conduct the re-examination, in number not fewer than on the original Board, and including at least one external examiner, by the Chair (or Deputy Chair) of the Board of Graduate Studies acting on behalf of the Senate. Where the recommendations of the two Boards do not agree, any agreed recommendation of the new Board shall normally be expected to prevail.

(h)    The decision of the Graduate Appeals Committee is final.

16.4    Regulations Governing Appeals at Taught Postgraduate and Post-Experience Level

(1)    Where the Board of Examiners for a taught postgraduate or post-experience qualification decides under Regulation 16.2 (7) or (8) (Constitution of Duties of Examiners for Masters Degrees by Examination and Dissertation) either:

(a)    that the candidate be required to withdraw from his/her course;

or

(b)    that the candidate be not awarded a qualification;

or

(c)    that the candidate be awarded a lower qualification than that for which he/she was registered.

A candidate has the right to make representations in writing, within 10 days of the date of the letter of formal notification of the Board of Examiners’ recommendation, via the Academic Registrar, for consideration by a Preliminary Review Panel comprising: the Chair of the Graduate Studies Committee of the candidate’s Faculty and one of the following: the Chair (or Deputy Chair) of a Faculty Board other than that in which the candidate is based; the Chair (or Deputy Chair) of the Board of Graduate Studies; or a Pro-Vice-Chancellor. No member of the candidate’s department or anyone who has acted as examiner for the candidate’s work may serve on the Preliminary Review Panel.

(2)    Appeals from candidates against decisions made by the Board of Examiners under Regulation 16.2 (7) and (8)  will be considered where:

(a)    a candidate is in possession of evidence which was not available to the Board of Examiners when its decision was reached and can provide good reasons for not having made the Board of Examiners aware of the circumstances affecting his/her performance; or

(b)    there appear to have been procedural irregularities in the conduct of the examination process; or

(c)    there appears to be evidence of prejudice or of bias on the part of one or more of the examiners; or

(d)    there is evidence of inadequacy of supervisory or other arrangements during the period of study, noting that an appeal made on these grounds may only be considered where the candidate can provide good reasons for not having made known their complaint  at an earlier stage.

An appeal will not be considered where the Preliminary Review Panel considers that the evidence provided by the candidate concerned does not constitute grounds for an appeal, and the candidate will be notified of the reasons for the decision.

If, in undertaking its consideration, the Preliminary Review Panel seeks written comments from a third party, then these will be passed on to the appellant for further comment before a decision is made on whether adequate grounds for an appeal exist; likewise, any written comments provided by an appellant may be made available at this stage to a Department/Board of Examiners for its comment.

(3)    Where the Preliminary Review Panel considers that the evidence provided by a candidate constitutes grounds for an appeal, they may make one of the following decisions:

(a)    to refer the appeal to the next practicable meeting of the Graduate Appeals Committee.

(b)    to recommend to the Board of Examiners that the Board reconsider its decision.  This decision will only be made where the Head of Department has already acknowledged that the appellant has established a satisfactory case for appeal and he/she is willing to ask the Board to reconsider its decision.

The Graduate Appeals Committee shall be appointed by the Vice-Chancellor (or his/her nominee) and shall be chaired by the Chair or (Deputy Chair) of a Faculty Board other than that of the appellant’s faculty, the Chair (or Deputy Chair) of the Board of Graduate Studies or a Pro-Vice-Chancellor, together with not fewer than two members drawn from a panel of up to 20 members appointed by the Senate on the recommendation of the Faculty Boards. No teacher of any module studied by the appellant shall be a member of the Graduate Appeals Committee and the Graduate Appeal Committee shall not include any member of the appellant’s department. The Chair of the Graduate Studies Committee of the candidate’s Faculty shall be in attendance. Where any member of the Graduate Appeals Committee is already involved in an appeal in another capacity, the Vice-Chancellor (or his/her nominee) shall appoint another member to the Committee in his/her place. The membership of the Graduate Appeals Committee will include at least one person from the Preliminary Review Panel.

The dates of meetings of the Graduate Appeals Committee shall be published by the University (along with dates by which a candidate must submit their appeal via the Academic Registrar for it to be considered at each particular meeting). The appellant will receive no lessthan 10 days formal notice of the meeting at which their appeal will be considered. The appellant may, if he/she chooses, appear in person before the Graduate Appeals Committee and may invite any one other person to attend the hearing. The name and status of the person accompanying the appellant must be notified via the Academic Registrar to the Chair of the Graduate Appeals Committee in advance of the hearing. The Graduate Appeals Committee shall take evidence from the Chair of the Board of Examiners and such other persons as it deems appropriate. The Head of Department, or his/her authorised deputy, must be available when the appeal is being considered to advise the Committee on departmental procedures and other relevant matters arising in the course of the hearing. Any written evidence which is considered by the Committee should also be made available to the appellant.

(4)    The Graduate Appeals Committee may make one of the following decisions:

(a)    to reject the appeal, in which case the appellant shall be notified of the Committee’s reasons for rejecting the appeal;

(b)    to recommend to the Board of Examiners that, for the reasons stated in the Committee’s report, the Board should reconsider its decision. The Graduate Appeals Committee may advise the Board of Examiners as follows:

(i)    to permit the candidate to proceed to the second or next part of the examination;

(ii)    to permit the candidate to be re-examined on certain specified papers or to resubmit certain specified assessed work within a specified period;

(iii)    to permit the candidate to proceed with his/her dissertation;

(iv)    to permit the candidate to submit a revised dissertation within a specified period;

(v)    to take into account any other advice the Graduate Appeals Committee deems appropriate to the candidate’s circumstances.

(5)    Where the Graduate Appeals Committee recommends that the Board of Examiners reconsider its decision, the Board of Examiners should do so as soon as possible after the meeting of the Graduate Appeals Committee and within a maximum period of three months.

(6)    After considering the recommendation and advice of the Graduate Appeals Committee, the decision of the Board of Examiners shall be final.

(7)     At any point in the above process, provision shall exist for mutual agreement to be reached between the appellant and his/her department to resolve the appellant’s concerns.