Archie ClementsMember of SPH Research and RHD Committee, Confirmation Convener

Website

• http://www.sph.uq.edu.au/confirmation-process

• From SPH web page, click “Research Degrees” tab, and then “Confirmation process” link.

You and your supervisor need to TALK about:-When to time your confirmation-Who should be on the panel (two people external to the advisory team, but experts in the area)

Timing: 9–15 months into candidature (i.e. from enrolment) for full-time PhD-Aim for 12 months-9 months if anticipate early submission-15 months if ethics/data collection have delayed progress (try to avoid)

Divide by two for MPhilMultiply by two for part-time PhD

Use panel as an opportunity to learn, get ideas, clear up uncertainty, refine research questions and advise direction of the thesis.

Panel members are unlikely to be suitable examiners, so you might want to avoid nominating possible examiners at this stage.

Setting up the date• Your advisor should contact the confirmation convenor (me) to

determine rough dates that are suitable; if we cant find suitable date, RHD co-ordinator (Andrea Whittaker) or other member of Research/RHD committee can chair (ask Mary for list of names).

• S/he should contact the panellists to obtain their agreement to participate and to co-ordinate dates.

• S/he should also contact associate advisors to co-ordinate dates.

• S/he should then inform Mary Roset of agreed date and time so that a room can be booked.

• Schedule 3 hours for the session (most take 1.5-2 hrs).• OK for advisors/panellists from outside Brisbane to phone in.

Preparing the documents• The school form:– Candidate report (written by you); Before; Be Honest

and think about what you want/need from your advisor and SPH

– Advisor report (written by your primary advisor); Before

– Review panel chair report (written by me/chair); After– RHD coordinator recommendation (written by Andrea);

After• Attainment of milestone form– Signed by advisor, you and the RHD co-ordinator;

include your details and signatures Before, and give to Mary Roset so that Andrea cans sign After

The confirmation document• Title page Title of project, advisors• Introduction (2-4 pages) Aims, objectives, hypotheses, research

questions• Literature review (10-15 pages) Critical, concise, identifies gaps• Research plan/methods (6-10 pages) Study design, data collection tools,

analytical plan• Progress to date (2 pages) Include ethics; specify papers published, in

press, submitted or in preparation• Expected outcomes (2-3 pages) What will the research show/add?• Thesis structure (2 pages) Chapter headings and 2-3 sentences

describing each chapter• Timelines (1 page) Gantt chart• Appendices Papers, technical reports• If in doubt, phone a friend, or come see me – I have loads of old

confirmation documents you can look at• Send to panel, chair and advisors >2wks prior to confirmation meeting

The presentation• 20 minutes (only!)• Powerpoint presentation (any electronic media

acceptable)• 15-20 slides• Background (Intro and lit review)• Research questions/hypotheses• Research completed: aims, methods, results, discussion

and conclusions• Research plan for studies yet to be completed• General discussion and conclusions• Timelines for completion• Go over it with your supervisor, and do a dry run with your

PhD colleagues

The meeting• Introductions• Presentation (20 minutes)• Panellists and chair ask questions Literature; Methods and results; Research

plan – especially feasibility and cohesion (does it tell a story); Thesis structure (by papers? Traditional format?) YOU should answer and your advisor should only interject if necessary, perhaps to clarify a point, provide some context, or answer concerns about resources, funding, or access to data or target populations.

• You leave, we ask advisors about progress, problems, writing, analysis, intellectual contribution, funding, resources, communication, teamwork.

• Advisors leave, we ask you about supervision, resources, wants/needs, experience as a student, conferences, workshops or courses you want to attend. Think about what you want to say in this section. We will go in to bat for you if there are things you have identified that you want improved.

• Brief discussion just between panellists and chair – decide on outcome and recommendations

Possible outcomes• Pass with no conditions Vast majority• Pass with conditions (usually more detailed thesis

plan) Rare• Extension (usually 3 months, in which agreed

outcomes need to be achieved) Very rare• Conditions not met for confirmation of candidature;

goes to Graduate School; Exceedingly rarePossible outcomes– Conversion to MPhil– Student voluntarily withdraws (no academic penalty)– Termination of candidature (academic penalties)

Things to do to make unconditional pass very, very likely

• Interesting, cohesive story• Evidence of forward thinking with a feasible thesis plan• Coherent literature review, good scientific writing• Ethical clearance obtained• Evidence of good lines of communication with your primary

supervisor• Evidence that you are making use of your wider advisory

team• Evidence of critical thinking and strong intellectual leadership

of your research• Confident presentation; own your topic; know what you are

talking about• Home run: paper published/in press; data collection

completed for at least one study

Alarm bells• Insufficient detail in research plan• Unrealistic timelines (will you master multi-level modelling in

six weeks?)• Over-ambitious project plans (insufficient funding, time,

expertise, access to participants)• Lack of progress in literature review, ethics, design of

protocols/survey tools• Poorly presented scientific writing in your confirmation

document• Inability to answer basic questions on the study area and

research plan• Inadequate supervisory arrangements (e.g. where the

supervisor is leaving their post; or not all key methodological elements are covered in the team)

Things to think about

• What skills do I want from my PhD?• What do I want to do after my PhD? How will I badge

myself?• Should I build a relationship with the panellists? Use this

as a networking opportunity• Do I want to do a thesis by publication, or a traditional

thesis? Panellists typically ask about this; be prepared if, by papers, to explain contribution to multi-authored work

• Is that sixth paper really necessary for my PhD, or can I do it in my post-doc?

• My advisory team have made a commitment to me; I am therefore going to get the supervision that I deserve!