Research Degree Examiners’ Joint Final Report

The examiners complete the form jointly after the oral examination has ended. Examiners may
make their joint recommendation known to the candidate at the end of the oral examination but
must make clear that the final decision rests with the Research Degrees Examination Board, which
may accept or revise the examiners’ recommendation. If, exceptionally, the examiners are unable
to agree on a joint report, separate final reports should be submitted.

The examiners are responsible for the completion of the form. When completed, the joint final
report together with the preliminary reports (and, if relevant, the Independent Chair report) must be
sent to the School PGR Director (this may be via the School PGR team). The School PGR Director
is required to complete the declaration at the end of the joint report and to send all reports to the
Academic Quality and Policy Office to arrive no later than two weeks after the date of the oral
examination. This report is formatted to allow cells to expand to match their content. Hand-written
reports will not be accepted.

Reports will be considered at the next scheduled Research Degrees Examination Board. Deadlines
for the receipt of reports are available at
http://www.bristol.ac.uk/directory/exams/research-degree/research-exam-board/.

Examiners are reminded that all examination reports become available to the candidate after the
Research Degrees Examination Board has reached a decision. All reports remain confidential and
must not be shared with the candidate or their supervisors until after the Board’s decision.

Full name of candidate

Student ID Number

Degree examined
Candidate's school
Supervisor(s)
Title of dissertation

Examiners’ names
(please specify whether
internal or external
examiner in each case)
Independent Chair’s
name, if appointed

Insert the date of the oral examination

Reports must be informative and specific to the candidate and their dissertation. Generic reports will
not be accepted.

You should make a joint recommendation in Section 1 and provide a supporting rationale for the
recommendation in Section 2. When deciding on your recommendation, you should consider the
criteria for the award of a research degree (as presented in Annex A of this report). Your guidance for
any corrections or a resubmission must be set out in Section 3.

You may, if you consider it appropriate, make a prize nomination for outstanding excellence in a
doctoral dissertation in Section 4. A reason for the nomination must be included.

Page 1 of 8
UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL RESEARCH DEGREE EXAMINERS’ JOINT FINAL REPORT

Section 1: Examiners’ recommendation to the Research Degrees Examination Board

We recommend that: Please tick one box only
A The degree sought be awarded unconditionally

B The degree sought be awarded, subject to the correction of minor errors to the
satisfaction of the internal examiner. (In examinations where there is no internal
examiner, an external examiner, the Independent Chair, or another University of
Bristol academic nominated by the School will perform this role.)
C The degree sought be awarded once errors or omissions of substance have been
corrected to the satisfaction of the examiners.
D The degree sought be not awarded but that the candidate may be permitted to
resubmit a revised form of the dissertation or published work for examination.
E (doctoral candidates only)
The relevant degree of Master by research be awarded unconditionally.
F (doctoral candidates only)
The relevant degree of Master by research be awarded subject to the correction of
minor errors to the satisfaction of the internal examiner. (In examinations where
there is no internal examiner, an external examiner, the Independent Chair, or
another University of Bristol academic nominated by the School will perform this
role.)
G (doctoral candidates only)
No degree be awarded, but that the candidate may be permitted to resubmit a
revised form of the dissertation or published work for examination for the relevant
degree of Master by research.
H No degree be awarded and permission be not granted to resubmit the dissertation or
published work.

Notes:
1) For minor errors (recommendations B or F), examiners must provide the candidate with
written details of the corrections required and must complete Section 3 of this report.
2) For errors of substance or resubmission (recommendations C, D or G), examiners must
provide clear and comprehensive written guidance for the candidate and must complete
Section 3 of this report.
3) Resubmission (D or G) will normally require a full re-examination including a further oral
examination. Examiners must provide clear and comprehensive written guidance for the
candidate and must complete Section 3 of this report. Resubmission can only take place
once.

Page 2 of 8
UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL RESEARCH DEGREE EXAMINERS’ JOINT FINAL REPORT

Section 2: Supporting rationale for the examiners’ recommendation

Explain the reasons for your joint recommendation:
 give specific justification of why the degree should, or should not, be awarded;
 consider the criteria for a research degree (as set out in Annex A of this report),
o confirm which criteria have been satisfied, and
o provide feedback on any of the criteria that have not been satisfied;
 include appropriate reference to the written submission and to the performance in the oral
examination; and
 if relevant, include the reason why your final recommendation differs from any recommendations in the
preliminary reports.

If a Covid-19 statement is present in the dissertation, this report must include a consideration of the
statement and the examiners’ deliberation of the impact on the scope and volume of the dissertation within
the context of maintaining the academic standards for the award – see http://www.bristol.ac.uk/academic-
quality/pg/pgrcode/annex17/).

Page 3 of 8
UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL RESEARCH DEGREE EXAMINERS’ JOINT FINAL REPORT

Section 3: Guidance from examiners on corrections or a resubmission

Examiners must provide comprehensive guidance to the candidate on any required corrections or for a
resubmission. The guidance must set out the specific improvements needed and must give appropriate direction
so that the candidate is able to make the necessary changes to meet the requirements for the award. Annex B of
this report provides advice for examiners on how to present their guidance.

Guidance on corrections or for a resubmission must be supplied separately to the candidate as soon as possible
after the oral examination so that the candidate may begin their revisions. This is on the understanding that the
Research Degrees Examination Board may require enhanced guidance, or the outcome changed, when it
considers the examiners’ reports.

For errors of substance or a resubmission, please cut and paste the guidance provided to the candidate into
the box below.

Minor errors and typographical errors can be returned to the candidate as annotation on the dissertation if
appropriate. Any other specific corrections and changes should be listed in the box below and also provided
separately to the candidate.

Please make sure that you give clear guidance on what must be changed. Changes that are only suggestions for
improvement and not required changes should not be listed.

Page 4 of 8
UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL RESEARCH DEGREE EXAMINERS’ JOINT FINAL REPORT

Section 4: Prize nomination for outstanding excellence in a doctoral dissertation*

The Research Degrees Examination Board is pleased to award an annual prize to one student from each Faculty
for outstanding excellence in a doctoral dissertation. If you feel that the dissertation you have examined is of an
exceptionally high quality, you are invited to nominate it for a prize
Yes No

Do you wish to nominate the candidate for the annual prize for outstanding ☐ ☐
excellence in a doctoral dissertation*? Please click on the relevant box.
If yes, please provide a supporting statement in the box below.

* If you are examining a Master of Science by Research (MScR) degree in the Faculty of Life Sciences, you may
use the box below to nominate for a Faculty prize for best MScR dissertation. For an MScR nomination, the criteria
set out below relate to masters-level achievement.

A doctoral prize nomination should be made where the examiners agree that the candidate has met these
criteria:
1. The candidate’s achievement is exceptional as demonstrated in the substance and presentation of the
dissertation.
2. The dissertation contains a high level of originality and makes an important contribution to the research
area or discipline/s.
3. The candidate has excelled in the use of research methods and/or techniques.

A doctoral degree by published work is not eligible for a prize nomination.

Please set out the reasons for your nomination including in relation to the three criteria above. Providing detail on
the nomination will enable the Board to make an informed judgement of the academic worth of the dissertation.

Page 5 of 8
UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL RESEARCH DEGREE EXAMINERS’ JOINT FINAL REPORT

Declaration

We individually declare that we do not have any connection with the candidate, the supervisors, the research
project or (external examiners only) with the University, which might impair our ability to make a fair and impartial
assessment of the candidate's work.

External examiner
Print name Date

Internal examiner
In addition to the declaration above, the internal examiner also declares the following:
Subject to any comments or observations below, I am satisfied that the examination was conducted in
accordance with the University of Bristol’s regulations and procedures.
(Where an Independent Chair has been appointed, a separate report from the Independent Chair is required.)

Print name Date

Second internal/external examiner, if appointed (please delete as appropriate)

Print name Date

Once completed by the examiners, the joint report (or exceptionally separate final reports) together with the
examiners’ individual preliminary reports (and, if relevant, the Independent Chair report) must be sent to the
candidate’s School PGR Director (this may be via the School PGR team). The School PGR Director is required to
complete the declaration below and to send the set of reports to the Academic Quality and Policy Office to arrive no
later than two weeks after the date of the oral examination.

If the School PGR Director is the candidate’s supervisor, the internal examiner or the Independent Chair, an
alternative senior member of the School’s academic staff must sign the report.

School PGR Director declaration:

I confirm that I have reviewed the examiners’ reports and completed this declaration as evidence of that
review. Where the examiners have been unable to agree on a joint report, they have completed individual
reports which will be sent to the Academic Quality and Policy Office.

Signature of School PGR Director

Signature Print name Date

AQPO September 2022

Page 6 of 8
UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL RESEARCH DEGREE EXAMINERS’ JOINT FINAL REPORT

Annex A: Criteria for the award of research degrees

For all research degrees
1) The dissertation should:
(a) embody the results of research, carried out by the candidate, which may reasonably
be expected of a capable and diligent student in the period of study specified in the
Regulations for the degree;
(b) consist of the candidate's own account of their investigations;
(c) make clear the sources from which information has been derived, the extent to which
the work of others has been used, and the areas which are claimed as original;
(d) show the exercise of critical judgment with regard to both the candidate's own work
and that of other scholars in the field; and
(e) be an integrated whole and present a coherent argument.

2) The dissertation and the oral examination together must demonstrate that the candidate has:
(a) an adequate knowledge and understanding of the discipline and the context within
which the research is grounded and of the literature relevant to the research; and
(b) the ability to put forward arguments in an appropriate form, both orally and in writing.

Masters degrees by research

3) In addition to the requirements in 1) and 2), the dissertation submitted for a Masters degree by
research should represent a contribution to knowledge.

Doctoral degrees
4) The dissertation submitted for a doctoral degree should, in addition to the requirements in 1) and
2), represent a significant and original contribution to knowledge, worthy of publication or
dissemination in whole, or in part, in a form appropriate to the discipline.

5) For candidature by published work, the work submitted should in addition:

(a) relate in a coherent way to the field of knowledge and represent a significant and
original contribution; and
(b) be accompanied by a substantial commentary in the candidate's own words linking
the published work and outlining its coherence and significance and making clear the
extent of the contribution of others to the work submitted.

6) For candidature by dissertation or by published work, the work submitted and the oral
examination together must, in addition to the requirements in 4), demonstrate that the candidate
has the capacity to pursue independently original research based on a good understanding of the
relevant techniques and concepts.

Page 7 of 8
UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL RESEARCH DEGREE EXAMINERS’ JOINT FINAL REPORT

Annex B: The guidance from research degree examiners on corrections and

resubmissions
1. Examiners must provide clear, comprehensive guidance on corrections and resubmissions to
candidates. The guidance must indicate the necessary conditions required from the candidate,
which – if met – will lead to the examiners making a recommendation for the award. The following
points aim to assist examiners in setting out their guidance.

2. The guidance must specify the parts of the work where improvement is needed. This must be
sufficiently detailed to give the candidate enough direction to achieve the required standard, while
allowing room for the candidate to use their initiative. Guidance for the correction of minor errors
will necessarily be narrower and more detailed, including specific editorial comments where
needed.

3. The guidance must be clear and explicit to provide appropriate direction to the candidate. It must
not include language to suggest that the improvements required are optional. Phrases such as
‘the candidate might wish to consider’ and general vague statements are to be avoided.

4. The guidance must define the limit of the changes required, which the examiners must deem to
be achievable within the time permitted for their recommended outcome (see Section 9.5).

5. There must be joint guidance from the examiners that represents their combined view of the
work. The examiners must agree exactly what the candidate is required to do and communicate
this in their combined guidance, which they must sense check to ensure that it is coherent and
complete. A separate list from each examiner is not permissible as this may lead to
inconsistencies and duplication. (If, exceptionally, the examiners cannot agree on a joint report,
they should submit separate final reports.)

6. Examiners should arrange the guidance appropriately in relation to the nature of the
improvements required based on, for example, chapters or specific aspects across the work.

7. Examiners must not direct candidates to undertake further work beyond the requirements of the
award. Publications, for example, are not part of the criteria for a research degree and so the
preparation of publications must not be included as part of the guidance.

8. When the candidate provides the revised dissertation, examiners must only consider whether the
corrections required by them, as set out in their guidance, have been satisfactorily completed.
Examiners should not raise new points at this stage unless the candidate has introduced a new
problem in undertaking the revisions.

Page 8 of 8