phd project approval

• eSignatures
• Product updates
• Document templates

How to nail your PhD proposal and get accepted

Bethany Fagan Head of Content Marketing at PandaDoc

Reviewed by:

Olga Asheychik Senior Web Analytics Manager at PandaDoc

• Copy Link Link copied

A good PhD research proposal may be the deciding factor between acceptance and approval into your desired program or finding yourself back at the drawing board. Being accepted for a PhD placement is no easy task, and this is why your PhD proposal needs to truly stand out among a sea of submissions.

That’s why a PhD research proposal is important: It formally outlines the intended research, including methodology, timeline, feasibility, and many other factors that need to be taken into consideration.

Here is a closer look at the PhD proposal process and what it should look like.

→DOWNLOAD NOW: FREE PHD PROPOSAL TEMPLATE

Key takeaways

• A PhD proposal summarizes the research project you intend to conduct as part of your PhD program.
• These proposals are relatively short (1000-2000 words), and should include all basic information and project goals, including the methodologies/strategies you intend to use in order to accomplish them.
• Formats are varied. You may be able to create your own formats, but your college or university may have a required document structure that you should follow.

What is a PhD proposal?

In short, a PhD research proposal is a summary of the project you intend to undertake as part of your PhD program.

It should pose a specific question or idea, make a case for the research, and explain the predicted outcomes of that research.

However, while your PhD proposal may predict expected outcomes, it won’t fully answer your questions for the reader.

Your research into the topic will provide that answer.

Usually, a PhD proposal contains the following elements:

• A clear question that you intend to answer through copious amounts of study and research.
• Your plan to answer that question, including any methodologies, frameworks, and resources required to adequately find the answer.
• Why your question or project is significant to your specific field of study.
• How your proposal impacts, challenges, or improves the existing body of knowledge around a given topic.
• Why your work is important and why you should be the one to receive this opportunity.

In terms of length when writing a PhD proposal, there isn’t a universal answer.

Some institutions will require a short, concise proposal (1000 words), while others allow for a greater amount of flexibility in the length and format of the proposal.

Fortunately, most institutions will provide some guidelines regarding the format and length of your research proposal, so you should have a strong idea of your requirements before you begin.

Benefits of a strong PhD application

While the most obvious benefit of having a strong PhD application is being accepted to the PhD program , there are other reasons to build the strongest PhD application you can:

Better funding opportunities

Many PhD programs offer funding to students , which can be used to cover tuition fees and may provide a stipend for living expenses.

The stronger your PhD application, the better your chances of being offered funding opportunities that can alleviate financial burdens and allow you to focus on your research.

Enhanced academic credentials

A strong PhD application, particularly in hot-button areas of study, can lead to better career opportunities in academics or across a variety of industries.

Opportunities for networking and research

Research proposals that are very well grounded can provide footholds to networking opportunities and mentorships that would not be otherwise available.

However, creating an incredible proposal isn’t always easy.

In fact, it’s easy to get confused by the process since it requires a lot of procedural information.

Many institutions also place a heavy emphasis on using the correct proposal structure.

That doesn’t have to be the issue, though.

Often, pre-designed templates, like the PandaDoc research proposal templates or PhD proposal templates provided by the institution of your choice, can do most of the heavy lifting for you.

Research Proposal Template

Used 7990 times

4.2 rating (25 reviews)

Reviewed by Olga Asheychik

How to write a Phd proposal with a clear structure

We know that the prospect of writing a research proposal for PhD admission may appear the stuff of nightmares. Even more so if you are new to producing a piece such as this.

But, when you get down to the nitty gritty of what it is, it really isn’t so intimidating. When writing your PhD proposal you need to show that your PhD is worth it, achievable, and that you have the ability to do it at your chosen university.

With all of that in mind, let’s take a closer look at each section of a standard PhD research proposal and the overall structure.

1. Front matter

The first pages of your PhD proposal should outline the basic information about the project. That will include each of the following:

Project title

Typically placed on the first page, your title should be engaging enough to attract attention and clear enough that readers will understand what you’re trying to achieve.

Many proposals also include a secondary headline to further (concisely) clarify the main concept.

Contact information

Depending on the instructions provided by your institution, you may need to include your basic contact information with your proposal.

Some institutions may ask for blind submissions and ask that you omit identifying information, so check the program guidelines to be sure.

Research supervisor

If you already have a supervisor for the project, you’ll typically want to list that information.

Someone who is established in the field can add credibility to your proposal, particularly if your project requires extensive funding or has special considerations.

The guidelines from your PhD program should provide some guidance regarding any other auxiliary information that you should add to the front of your proposal.

Be sure to check all documentation to ensure that everything fits into the designated format.

2. Goals, summaries, and objectives

Once you’ve added the basic information to your document, you’ll need to get into the meat of your PhD proposal.

Depending on your institution, your research proposal may need to follow a rigid format or you may have the flexibility to add various sections and fully explain your concepts.

These sections will primarily be focused on providing high-level overviews surrounding your PhD proposal, including most of the following:

Overall aims, objectives, and goals

In these sections, you’ll need to state plainly what you aim to accomplish with your PhD research.

If awarded funding, what questions will your PHd proposal seek to answer? What theories will you test? What concepts will you explore in your research?

Briefly, how would you summarize your approach to this project?

Provide high-level summaries detailing how you mean to achieve your answers, what the predicted outcomes of your PhD research might be, and precisely what you intend to test or discover.

Significance

Why does your research matter? Unlike with many other forms of academic study (such as a master’s thesis ), doctorate-level research often pushes the bounds of specific fields or contributes to a given body of work in some unique way.

How will your proposed PhD research do those things?

Background details

Because PhD research is about pushing boundaries, adding background context regarding the current state of affairs in your given field can help readers better understand why you want to pursue this research and how you arrived at this specific point of interest.

While the information here may (or may not) be broken into multiple sections, the content here is largely designed to provide a high-level overview of your PhD proposal and entice readers to dig deeper into the methodologies and angles of approach in future sections.

Because so much of this section relies on the remainder of your document, it’s sometimes better to skip this portion of the PhD proposal until the later sections are complete and then circle back to it.

That way, you can provide concise summaries that refer to fully defined research methods that you’ve already explained in subsequent areas.

3. Methodologies and plans

Unlike a master’s thesis or a similar academic document, PhD research is designed to push the boundaries of its subject matter in some way.

The idea behind doctoral research is to expand the field with new insights and viewpoints that are the culmination of years of research and study, combined with a deep familiarity of the topic at hand.

The methodologies and work plans you provide will give advisors some insights into how you plan to conduct your research.

While there is no one right way to develop this section, you’ll need to include a few key details:

Research methods

Are there specific research methods you plan to use to conduct your PhD research?

Are you conducting experiments? Conducting qualitative research? Surveying specific individuals in a given environment?

Benefits and drawbacks of your approach

Regardless of your approach to your topic, there will be upsides and downsides to that methodology.

Explain what you feel are the primary benefits to your research method, where there are potential flaws, and how you plan to account for those shortfalls.

Choice of methodology

Why did you choose a given methodology?

What makes it the best method (or collection of methods) for your research and/or specific use case?

Outline of proposed work

What work is required for PhD research to be complete?

What steps will you need to take in order to capture the appropriate information? How will you complete those steps?

Schedule of work (including timelines/deadlines)

How long will it take you to complete each stage or step of your project?

If your PhDproject will take several years, you may need to provide specifics for more immediate timelines up front while future deadlines may be flexible or estimated.

There is some flexibility here.

It’s unlikely that your advisors will expect you to have the answer for every question regarding how you plan to approach your body of research.

When trying to push the boundaries of any given topic, it’s expected that some things may not go to plan.

However, you should do your best to make timelines and schedules of work that are consistent with your listed goals.

Remember : At the end of your work, you are expected to have a body of original research that is complete within the scope and limitations of the PhD proposal you set forth.

If your advisors feel that your subject matter is too broad, they may encourage you to narrow the scope to better fit into more standardized expectations.

4. Resources and citations

No PhD research proposal is complete without a full list of the resources required to carry out the project and references to help prove and validate the research.

Here’s a closer look at what you’ll need to submit in order to explain costs and prove the validity of your proposal:

Estimated costs and resources

Most doctoral programs offer some level of funding for these projects.

To take advantage of those funds, you’ll need to submit a budget of estimated costs so that assessors can better understand the financial requirements.

This might include equipment, expenses for fieldwork or travel, and more.

Citations and bibliographies

No matter your field of study, doctoral research is built on the data and observations provided by past contributors.

Because of this, you’ll need to provide citations and sources referenced in your PhD proposal documentation.

Particularly when it comes to finances and funding, it might be tempting to downplay the cost of the project.

However, it’s best to provide a realistic estimate in terms of costs so that you have enough of a budget to cover the PhD research.

Adjustments can be made at a later date, particularly as you conduct more research and dive further into the project.

Resources are often presented in the form of a table to make things easier to track and identify.

Using PhD proposal templates

Aside from any guidelines set forth by your institution, there are no particularly strict rules when it comes to the format of PhD proposals.

Your supervisor will be more than capable of guiding you through the process.

However, since everything is so structured and formal, you might want to use a PhD proposal template to help you get started.

Templates can help you stay on track and make sure your research proposal follows a certain logic.

A lot of proposal software solutions offer templates for different types of proposals, including PhD proposals.

But, should you use Phd proposal templates? Here are some pros and cons to help you make a decision.

• Expedites the proposal process.
• Helps you jumpstart the process with a flexible document structure.
• Often provides sections with pre-filled examples.
• Looks better than your average Word document.
• May be limiting if you adhere to it too much.
• Might not be perfectly suited to your specific field of research, requiring some customization.

In our PhD research proposal template , we give you just enough direction to help you follow through but we don’t limit your creativity to a point that you can’t express yourself and all the nuances of your research.

For almost all sections, you get a few useful PhD research proposal examples to point you in the right direction.

The template provides you with a typical PhD proposal structure that’s perfect for almost all disciplines.

It can come in quite handy when you have everything planned out in your head but you’re just having trouble putting it onto the page!

Writing a PhD proposal that convinces

Writing and completing a PhD proposal might be confusing at first.

You need to follow a certain logic and share all the required information without going too long or sharing too much about the project.

And, while your supervisor will certainly be there to guide you, the brunt of the work will still fall on your shoulders.

That’s why you need to stay informed, do your research, and don’t give up until you feel comfortable with what you’ve created.

If you want to get a head start, you might want to consider our research proposal template .

It will offer you a structure to follow when writing a PhD proposal and give you an idea on what to write in each section.

Start your 14 days trial with PandaDoc and check out all the tools you’ll have at your disposal!

Research proposals for PhD admission: tips and advice

One of the most important tips for any piece of writing is to know your audience. The staff reviewing your PhD proposal are going through a pile of them, so you need to make sure yours stands within a few seconds of opening it.

The way to do this is by demonstrating value and impact. Academic work is often written for a niche community of researchers in one field, so you need to demonstrate why your work would be valuable to people in that area.

The people reviewing your proposal will likely be in that field. So your proposal should be a little like a sales pitch: you need to write something engaging that identifies with the “customer”, speaks to a problem they’re having, and shows them a solution.

Taking some inspiration from the former University of Chicago professor Larry McEnerney , here are some ideas to keep in mind…

• It’s common for undergraduates and even seasoned academics to write in a specific format or style to demonstrate their understanding and signal that they’re part of the academic community. Instead, you want to write in such a way that actually engages the reader.
• Identify an uncharted or underexplored knowledge gap in your field, and show the reader you have what it takes to fill in that gap.
• Challenge the status quo. Set up an idea that people in your field take for granted — maybe a famous study you think is flawed — and outline how your project could knock it down.
• This is why it’s important to understand who your audience is. You have to write your proposal in such a way that it’s valuable for reviewers. But within your proposal, you should also clearly define which community of researchers your project is for, what problems they have, and how your project is going to solve those problems.
• Every community of researchers has their own implicit “codes” and “keywords” that signal understanding. These will be very different in each field and could be very subtle. But just by reading successful PhD research proposal examples in your field, you can get a sense of what those are and decide how you want to employ them in your own work.
• In this model authors start “at the bottom of the glass” with a very narrow introduction to the idea of the paper, then “fill the glass” with a broader and broader version of the same idea.
• Instead, follow a “problem-solution” framework. Introduce a problem that’s relevant to your intended reader, then offer a solution. Since “solutions” often raise their own new problems or questions, you can rinse and repeat this framework all the way through any section of your proposal.

But how can you apply that advice? If you’re following something like our research proposal template , here are some actionable ways to get started.

• Your title should be eye-catching , and signal value by speaking to either a gap in the field or challenging the status quo.
• Your abstract should speak to a problem in the field, one the reviewers will care about, and clearly outline how you’d like to solve it.
• When you list the objectives of your proposal , each one should repeat this problem-solution framework. You should concretely state what you want to achieve, and what you’re going to do to achieve it.
• While you survey your chosen field in the literature review, you should refer back to the knowledge gap or status quo that you intend to work on. This reinforces how important your proposed project is, and how valuable it would be to the community if your project was successful.
• While listing your research limitations , try to hint at new territory researchers might be able to explore off the back of your work. This illustrates that you’re proposing boundary-pushing work that will really advance knowledge of the field.
• While you’re outlining your funding requirements , be clear about why each line item is necessary and bring it back to the value of your proposed research. Every cent counts!

Frequently asked questions

How long should a phd proposal be.

There really isn’t a specific rule when it comes to the length of a PhD proposal. However, it’s generally accepted that it should be between 1,000 and 2,000 words.

It’s difficult to elaborate on such a serious project in less than 1,000 words but going over 2,000 is often overkill. You’ll lose people’s attention and water down your points.

What’s the difference between a dissertation proposal and a PhD proposal?

There seems to be some confusion over the terms “dissertation” and “PhD” and how you write proposals for each one. However, “dissertation” is just another name for your PhD research so the proposal for a dissertation would be the same since it’s quite literally the same thing.

Does a PhD proposal include budgeting?

Yes, as mentioned, you need to demonstrate the feasibility of your project within the given time frame and with the resources you need, including budgets. You don’t need to be exact, but you need to have accurate estimates for everything.

How is a PhD proposal evaluated?

This will change from one institution to another but these things will generally have a big impact on the reviewers:

• The contribution of the project to the field.
• Design and feasibility of the project.
• The validity of the methodology and objectives.
• The supervisor and their role in the field.

PandaDoc is not a law firm, or a substitute for an attorney or law firm. This page is not intended to and does not provide legal advice. Should you have legal questions on the validity of e-signatures or digital signatures and the enforceability thereof, please consult with an attorney or law firm. Use of PandaDocs’ services are governed by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

Originally published June 9, 2023, updated February 6, 2024

Related articles

Proposals 24 min

Sales 5 min

Document templates 13 min

Capstone Documents: Doctoral Prospectus Resources

• Supplemental Resources for the PhD Social Work
• DBA Capstone: Traditional Capstone Options
• DBA Capstone: Portfolio Project Options
• DBA Capstone: Consulting Capstone Option
• DHA Doctoral Study (Summer 2021 or before)
• DIT Doctoral Study
• DNP Doctoral Project
• Doctor of Nursing Program Capstone Resources
• DNP Capstone Resources NURS 8702 and NURS 8703
• DPA Doctoral Study
• DrPH Doctoral Study
• DSW Doctoral Study
• EdD Doctoral Study
• PsyD Doctoral Study
• Doctoral Prospectus Resources This link opens in a new window
• Oral Defense
• Capstone Committee Process
• Doctoral Prospectus Resources
• DHS Doctoral Study
• DHA Doctoral Study Landing Page
• DHA Doctoral Study (Fall 2021 or after)
• Previous Page: Capstone Committee Process
• Next Page: DHS Doctoral Study

Doctoral Prospectus Form Video

Doctoral Prospectus Form Overview

The Doctoral Prospectus Form is a brief and intuitive form for students to complete a discipline-specific, feasible, and aligned plan for their doctoral capstone or project. 

This all-in-one prospectus form provides:

• Step-by-step directions with links to key resources 
• Detailed content guidance and  examples in the appendix
• Research design alignment content and support
• Quality rubric standards

Students complete the form,   submit to their committee members for formative assessments, and then upload into MyDR for formal rubric evaluation by the committee and the PD Designee Reviewer.

The form should be used as a working document between the student and committee; therefore, iterations should be documented. A clean copy of the prospectus form should be sent for PD Designee review only when the committee members have reviewed it and any revisions requested have been made by the student.

Prospectus Forms by Doctoral Program

Prospectus Forms can be found on your doctoral program's resource page .

Writing Support

Bookmark the Walden Writing Center’s Preproposal Starter Kit , which contains advice and resources to help you prepare your prospectus and transition from coursework to doctoral capstone writing. Review the Writing Center’s APA resources and Ask OASIS  for any scholarly writing questions you have. You can even make a  paper review appointment  to get writing feedback on your prospectus draft. For more intensive support, consider enrolling in SKIL’s Preproposal Doctoral Writing Workshop .

Also visit the Form and Style Page  for other capstone resources.  Students should review the Form and Style SMRTguides on Alignment ,   Formatting RQ’s and Hypotheses , and Writing the Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations .

Library Support

If you need help researching your problem, broadening or narrowing your topic, or searching the literature, visit the Walden Library pages: Decide on a Topic , Choosing Your Topic , or schedule a Library appointment , which allows you to have a one-on-one session with a librarian in your subject area to brainstorm and develop effective research strategies for your capstone.You may also wish to bookmark the Library’s Guide to Capstone Literature Reviews which will help as you collect your literature.

Methodology Support for Students

Make a one-on-one doctoral research appointment with a ORDS statistics tutor for assistance with data analysis, SPSS, or interpretation of results. Attend Quantitative or Qualitative Methodology Office Hours with questions related to research methodology (e.g., research design, collecting data, analyzing data, writing up results).

For These and All Other Doctoral Skills and Capstone Resources and Support

• Doctoral Degree Coach Website

Go to the Doctoral Degree Coach

Students: Please contact your doctoral committee chair.

Faculty: Contact  [email protected]

Social Media

Connect with the office of research and doctoral services.

• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services
• Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Cost of Attendance
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

• Current Students
• News & Press
• Register as a student
• Student Portal
• Applying for a Student Visa
• Your Responsibilities
• INTO Newcastle Students
• Undergraduate Students
• Postgraduate Taught Students
• Postgraduate Research Students
• Change of Circumstances
• Standard Visitor Visa
• Your Visa and Right to Study
• Academic Technology Approval Scheme (ATAS)
• Bringing your Family to the UK
• Travelling Outside of the UK
• Lost/stolen passport, visa and BRP
• Graduate Route
• Working in the UK after your studies
• EU, Swiss and non-EU EEA students
• Register with the Police
• Access External Visa Advice
• Guide to your Visa
• Registration
• Learning agreement
• Faculty Research Training
• Project Approval
• Meeting Records
• Attendance Engagement
• Annual Progression Review
• Examination
• Council Tax
• Publications and Regulations
• Forms and Policies
• Covid-19 Mitigations
• Doctoral College
• Personal Extenuating Circumstances (PEC)
• Regulations
• Student Procedures
• Student Charter

A key activity at an early stage of a research degree is the completion of the project proposal

• Newcastle University
• Student Progress
• Guidance for PGR Students
• Key Activities

Before you can be allowed to progress with your research, your project proposal must be considered by an impartial Project Approval Panel and approved by the Dean of Postgraduate Studies.

Your Project Approval documents should be submitted within three months of  your initial registration for full-time students and six months for part-time students.

The project approval process is completed online using the  PGR CoP System .

Project proposal contents

You should consult with your supervisors when preparing your research project proposal to ensure it is achievable within the available timescale and that sufficient resources are available to support it.  You and your supervisors should also aim to address the criteria against which your project proposal will be assessed by the Project Approval Panel (see below).

Ethical approval

The Project Approval form in PGR Code of Practice System includes a section on ethical approval which asks you to provide evidence that ethical approval has been obtained or to give a reason why such evidence cannot be provided.

Ethical Approval is applied for using an on-line ethics form (outside of the PGR Code of Practice System) and further information, including a link to the on-line ethics form can be found on the  Research Ethics website .

Data Management Plan

You are expected to create a Data Management Plan (DMP) and upload this as part of your Project Approval submission. A DMP is a document that outlines a project’s practical approach to what data will be created, how it will be processed, analysed and how data of long-term value will be archived and shared. The DMP plays an ever increasingly important role given the centrality of digital data to practically all research activity. Further information on DMPs and guidance is available  here .

Approval process

The approval process involves the following stages:

Students initiate the approval process by entering their research project title in the PGR CoP system and uploading their research proposal plan.  Once all sections of the form have been completed and relevant documents uploaded, the student should submit the form.  The form will then be routed to the supervisor who will be prompted to complete the next stage.

Supervisors are asked to provide a supporting statement.  In addition, they must confirm the membership of the full supervisory team and provide details of their roles and the percentage split in terms of supervision.

The student and supervisor’s submissions are then reviewed by an independent School/Institute panel, consisting of at least two independent members of academic staff with relevant skills and knowledge.  The student’s research project and plan and the supervisor’s statement are evaluated against the following criteria:

• Does the project have clear aims and objectives;
• Does the student possess or can they acquire the knowledge, skills and aptitudes to complete the project successfully;
• Does the proposed supervisory team possess or can it acquire the skills, knowledge and aptitudes necessary to supervise the project to a successful conclusion;
• Is the project suitable for the programme of study and for the award;
• Can it be completed within the timescale for the programme;
• Are sufficient resources available to complete the project;
• Is ethical approval required;
• If the project involves extended absence from the University on fieldwork or work in collaborating organisations, have appropriate arrangements been made to support and monitor the student’s progress?

The panel is required to complete a written report and to make a recommendation to the Head of School and Dean of Postgraduate Studies.  The panel can either recommend the approval of the research project or require the student to re-submit, usually within three months.  Where a re-submission is recommended the panel should provide details of the action that should be taken or the additional information that should be provided.

The Head of School/Institute (or nominee) has the opportunity to comment on the project proposal and the panel’s recommendation before submitting the forms to the Dean of Postgraduate Studies.

The Dean of Postgraduate Studies has the final sign off on a project approval.  Once the Dean has made their recommendation, the panel, the Head of School and the Dean’s reports become visible to the student and the supervisor.

Notification of approval

You will receive an automated email from the PGR CoP system once your research project has been approved by the Dean of Postgraduate Studies.

• Utility Menu

Psychology Graduate Program

• Psychology Department

The dissertation prospectus is a proposal for the PhD student’s dissertation work. The purpose of the prospectus process is to help the student formulate and refine the contents of the dissertation. The faculty aim is to be constructive in considering the scope, viability, and details of the students’ planned research. An approved dissertation prospectus signifies that there is a shared understanding between the student and the committee of the scope of work that (assuming it is completed to a high quality) would result in the successful completion of a PhD.

This guide describes the components of the dissertation prospectus, and the steps that need to be completed during the prospectus process. We will also comment on the timeline of the dissertation prospectus, although there is substantial variability across students in exactly when these steps are completed.  

I. Establish Dissertation Advisory Committee (DAC).  S tudents will identify a committee of at least three faculty members to comprise their Dissertation Advisory Committee (DAC). The DAC participates in both the prospectus and dissertation processes. Additional member(s) of the DAC can be added before or after the prospectus is complete.  

The GSAS DAC guidelines can be found here . In considering committee members, the student’s primary faculty mentor is always included and will serve as the DAC Chair. At least two committee members, including the Chair, must be ladder faculty at Harvard. The third committee member may also be a non-Harvard faculty of equivalent appointment rank to Harvard ladder faculty, or a non-ladder faculty member at Harvard (such as Senior Lecturer). DACs must be approved by the DGS.   

Action item : Students should invite potential committee members to join your dissertation committee, following consultation with your primary mentor. When inviting faculty members, note that their agreement entails a) evaluating your dissertation prospectus, b) reading your dissertation and taking part in your eventual dissertation defense, and c) being available for guidance/input on your dissertation work. Please note that faculty members are not required to say yes. There are valid reasons a particular faculty member might not be available for your committee (e.g., an impending leave). If any student is having difficulty finding committee members, please consult with the Director of Graduate Studies (DGS).

Students should submit your planned committees for DGS review using this form at least two weeks before the prospectus meeting. Students will need to submit a CV for any requested non-Harvard committee members. After submitting the form, students will receive confirmation of approval or other follow-up from the DGS before the prospectus meeting. If students choose to change or add committee members post-prospectus, you should complete the form again to revise your committee composition.  

Timeline : Students must submit their planned committees for approval at least two weeks before the prospectus meeting.

II. Prepare and submit written dissertation prospectus. The prospectus itself should be in as polished form as possible, using APA journal article style. The goal of the prospectus is to provide the committee a full plan of the scope of research activities the student plans to complete as their dissertation. Students should discuss the scope of research that should comprise a dissertation with their mentor. A typical prospectus will not exceed 30 pages (excluding appendices), but the length should be sufficient to cover the steps detailed below.

• Describe the general context. How does the area of study fit into broader issues, and why are they significant? The review of literature starts here. 
• Describe the particular area in detail. This section should state the need for research in the area. 
• Pose the specific research question and hypothesize the results that will be found. 
• Describe the proposed methodology, including all important details: what needs to be controlled for, what kind of data analysis will be used, etc. Give information on the characteristics of subjects to be recruited. Any pilot data should be included here. The proposals in the methods section should be specific, rather than options; it is recognized that many changes may happen in the prospectus meeting, but committee members need to be given the student's best ideas rather than several avenues that could be taken. Include as an appendix copies of any measures planned.
• Predicted results and theoretical interpretation

Action item : Students should write a dissertation prospectus and disseminate it to their committee and to the Graduate Program. Students are welcome to seek feedback on drafts of the proposal and engage in discussions with their mentor and/or committee members (or others) as they are preparing the proposal.

Timeline : Students should submit the written proposal to their advising committee at least two weeks before their scheduled prospectus meeting (see Item III).

III. Hold prospectus meeting. Students should hold a prospectus meeting attended by their advising committee (remote attendance such as via Zoom is allowable, especially for out-of-town committee members or during COVID surges). This meeting is an opportunity for students to receive feedback from their committee about the content, quality, and scope of their dissertation. The meeting is also intended for faculty to evaluate whether the dissertation, as proposed, is well-suited for attainment of a PhD or whether it needs to be revised. Faculty will have read the written proposal before the meeting (having received it two weeks before the meeting).

The meeting starts with a short presentation by the student describing the proposed research and including any "fine tuning" that the student has done since the written prospectus was submitted. The presentation should be considered semi-formal, and students may find slides helpful. Students often bring discussion about specific questions or challenges associated with the project for committee input. Committee members often bring questions they had when reading the proposal for clarification or open discussion. Note that there is some variability in this meeting’s length and format, so students should consult their mentors on specific expectations.

At the conclusion of the meeting, the committee will judge whether the project is satisfactory for a dissertation, and what kinds of revisions the student should consider to their research plan. Since the purpose of the prospectus meeting is to help students do as high-quality research as possible, it is likely that at least some modifications will be made. In some cases, the modifications will be so extensive that the committee needs to reconvene for another meeting with the student, but it is expected that only in extreme cases will the student have to "go back to the drawing board." The committee will complete and sign a Prospectus Approval Form , which will also list any required modifications. After the meeting, the student will draft a memo of understanding describing the results of the prospectus meeting and stating how they will incorporate the modifications and suggestions made by the committee. This memo will be reviewed and signed by the student's mentor.

If a student takes a leave of absence or withdraws from graduate study after getting the prospectus approved, they should consult with the CHD to make certain that the previously approved prospectus still stands. Action item s: a. Schedule meeting. Students are responsible for scheduling the meeting and providing confirmation of the meeting’s date, time, and location. If remote participation is needed, students should coordinate that as well. Note that coordinating faculty schedules can be challenging, and faculty often schedule meetings weeks in advance. Therefore, students should work to schedule this meeting several weeks before the target meeting date.

b. Prepare for meeting. Students should speak with their mentors about the expected format for their meeting and prepare accordingly. Students are expected to answer questions about all details of their proposed project, report on its progress to date, any roadblocks, and comment on a timeline for the project’s completion. Students should also expect to receive extensive feedback from their committee which often entails revisions to the dissertation prospectus.

c. Paperwork. Students should bring the Prospectus Approval Form to the meeting and should collect their advising committee’s signatures indicating whether they “sign off” on the proposal as-is or require revisions. This form should be returned to the Graduate Program Office.

Timeline : The timeline for prospectus completion depends on the student’s planned timeline for completing the program. Many students apply for the Dissertation Completion Fellowship (DCF) to fund their final year in the program. The DCF pays full year tuition and a 10-month living stipend, typically August - May. Students must obtain dissertation prospectus approval before they can apply for the DCF. As such, the timeline for DCF application often guides students’ prospectus timelines. Note that prospectus meetings often do result in same-day approval (with or without revisions), but some meetings result in approval pending the need for more extensive revisions that would need to be re-reviewed by the committee. Students should consider this possibility when setting their dissertation prospectus timeline and should appreciate the substantial risk involved with holding their committee meetings in very close proximity to the DCF application deadline.

The deadline to apply for the DCF is typically in February of the penultimate year of study in the program. For example, if a student wishes to obtain a DCF for the 2024-2025 year and graduate in 2025 (May or November), then students will need to apply for the DCF by February 9, 2024 . Students should consult the Graduate Program or the Harvard Griffin GSAS website for the specific DCF deadline as it varies from year to year.

VI. Committee evaluation. During the prospectus meeting, after the student presentation and discussion, the committee will ask the student to leave the room and discuss the work and level of student preparedness. They will use the Prospectus Approval Form to guide this discussion. The committee can decide among the following actions:

• The prospectus is approved without required revisions.
• The prospectus is approved with required revisions, as detailed on the form. The primary mentor will be responsible for overseeing these revisions. No subsequent meetings or committee-level reviews are necessary.
• The prospectus has potential but is not approved yet as it requires major revisions, as detailed on the form. The committee will need to meet again once the revisions have been addressed by the student. At this subsequent meeting, the committee will judge the revisions and whether they have resulted in an approvable prospectus.
• The prospectus is not approved and is not on track to be approvable even if revisions were made. In this case, the Prospectus Committee Chair will work with the CHD to determine the appropriate next-steps.

If students would like to make substantive changes to the content and/or format of the dissertation after prospectus approval, they must revise their prospectus and obtain approval of the revised version from all committee members. Another meeting of the prospectus committee may be required if the changes are substantial.

• Required Courses
• First Year Project
• Second Year Project
• Master's in Passing
• Dissertation & Defense
• Graduating & Commencement

How to write a PhD in a hundred steps (or more)

A workingmumscholar's journey through her phd and beyond, moving from your proposal to chapter the first.

You have written a proposal that has been approved, possibly revised a few times, and now you have been given the green light to get going and do the doctorate. This is an exciting moment in a doctoral candidate’s life, and one that brings both relief and feelings of ‘uh oh, now what?’ with it. What now, indeed? Once the proposal is approved, what next? What to write, or read, first, second and so on? Do you forget the proposal exists and start your thesis, or have you, in fact, already started it?

My proposal was a fairly lengthy 20 pages, which is pretty standard in the social sciences and humanities, certainly in South Africa (as far as I can make out). It contains within it all of the parts that would need to be in the final thesis – literature review, methodology, theoryology, details about the data and the proposed analysis of it, and of course, the research questions and objectives. I was told by one of the supervisors in our programme, in my first year of the PhD while I was working on my proposal, that about 1/4 of your thinking needs to be apparent in the proposal. In other words, the proposal is not separate from the thesis – it is a fairly significant first step towards the thesis that indicates your ability to do research at this level, and your ability to complete this one viable, valuable research project.

After my proposal was approved I felt, simultaneously, elated and freaked out. The proposal was a difficult genre to write , and I felt a bit at sea, not really sure what I was supposed to be doing, exactly. It can be argued that it is not terribly difficult to show your proposal readers what you have read thus far, where the gaps are and what your research questions therefore are. It is not even terribly difficult to explain, quite abstractly, the theory that will help you to answer these questions. But the methodology? The data and how you will build a ‘translation device’ or analytical framework to interpret the data and answer those research questions? Yikes. I really had no idea what I was doing in this part of the proposal. I mean, I could tell you it would be case studies, and qualitative data generation and analysis, and I could tell you I would generate data from documents, participant interviews and observations of teaching. But as to how I would organise all of that, or analyse it, I was pretty clueless. That was over a year away! I had no idea what I would even find, and while I had a grip on the theory, it was a fairly shaky one, and I was still making sense of how the theory, data and method pieces would fit together.

The struggles in writing significant parts of the proposal meant that coming out of that phase of the doctorate into actually beginning the thesis, and doing the actual research, was quite stressful, and I felt quite lost, initially. I started with more reading, but the more I read, the more I confused myself (at least initially), and I kept losing my research questions and my basic plot, which was alarming. I thought, for a while, that all this meant I was a fraud, and that the committee at my university had approved my research plans in error. It took me a while to realise that I was mainly freaking myself out because I had forgotten the comment from one of the supervisors in our group: that about 25-30% of your thinking is within your proposal, which is your blueprint for the doctorate. I had already started my PhD – I wasn’t just starting now .

Along with this realisation, which was comforting, what helped me past this was my own supervisor’s advice to begin the writing of the thesis by copying and pasting a chunk from my proposal – from the theory or literature review – into a new file and to start writing around it, modifying, adapting and obviously adding and extending it. This advice helped me to physically see that I had made a start on the writing, and I had a basis to build on. Very few of the actual words from my proposal are in the final version of my thesis – much of my thinking and expression of that thinking changed over the course of doing the research – but the parts of the proposal I copied into new files gave me ‘holding texts’ to work with towards creating chapter the first, and then the second, before I was up and running and could leave the proposal behind.

While a PhD or MA proposal is often seen as a hurdle to be vaulted in progressing from candidate to graduate, and while some supervisors may even advise their students to leave the proposal behind so as not to be limited by it, I think it might be helpful to see a proposal as some of the supervisors on my doctoral programme do: as a significant, although early, step towards the PhD thesis, and as more than just a ‘test’ to be passed. The proposal, ideally, should be your PhD’s holding text – not the final thing, of course, but a document that gives readers a fairly clear idea of what the final thesis could or may well be. As with all blueprints, there is and must be room for change, modification, improvement – but the research you actually do and write about shouldn’t be wildly different from the research you proposed to do.

A good place to start your thesis, therefore, is your proposal : your thinking – at least part of it – is already in there, and proposal approval indicates that it is solid and useful thinking thus far. So, begin with what you have already written and write and think from that base, building upwards and outwards as you modify, adapt and hone your research going forward.

Share this:

Thank you for this – this has been my struggle for a while now, and this just reiterates what I need to do 🙂

Thanks for the feedback, Martina – all the best with the ongoing writing and thinking 🙂

[…] “Once the proposal is approved, what next? What to write, or read, first, second and so on? Do you forget the proposal exists and start your thesis, or have you, in fact, already started it?” […]

I found the advice very useful, i had been struggling and quite overwhelmed with the decision on what the next step from proposal to thesis should be, considering all the work invested into the proposal . Thank you

Leave a comment Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

• The PhD Journey - Stages of a Doctoral Degree

The PhD Journey

Written by Mark Bennett

A PhD typically involves between three and four years of full-time study, culminating in a thesis which makes an original contribution to your field.

The process of getting a PhD is made up of quite a few components and milestones, from the literature review and writing up your dissertation right through to the viva examination at the end.

This section is a guide on how to do a PhD, providing in-depth advice and information on some of the main challenges and opportunities you’ll meet along the way!.

Get funding updates straight to your inbox

Sign up to our weekly newsletter for the latest funding advice and guidance from our team of experts.

7 stages of the PhD journey

A PhD has a few landmark milestones along the way. The three to four year you'll spend doing a PhD can be divided into these seven stages.

• Preparing a research proposal
• Carrying out a literature review
• Conducting research and collecting results
• Completing the MPhil to PhD upgrade
• Participating in PhD teaching, conferences and publications
• Writing your thesis
• Defending your PhD results at a viva voce

We've expanded on what you can expect from each stage below.

1. Preparing a research proposal

Strictly speaking, your research proposal isn’t part of your PhD. Instead it’s normally part of the PhD application process.

The research proposal sets out the aims and objectives for your PhD: the original topic you plan to study and / or the questions you’ll set out to answer.

It also explains why your work is worthwhile and why it fits with the expertise and objectives of your university.

Finally, a PhD proposal explains how you plan to go about completing your doctorate. This involves identifying the existing scholarship your work will be in dialogue with and the methods you plan to use in your research.

All of this means that, even though the proposal precedes the PhD itself, it plays a vital role in shaping your project and signposting the work you’ll be doing over the next three or more years.

2. Carrying out a literature review

The literature review is normally the first thing you’ll tackle after beginning your PhD and having an initial meeting with your supervisor.

It’s a thorough survey of work in your field (the current scholarly ‘literature’) that relates to your project or to related topics.

Your supervisor will offer some advice and direction, after which you’ll identify, examine and evaluate existing data and scholarship.

In most cases the literature review will actually form part of your final PhD dissertation – usually setting up the context for the project, before you begin to explain and demonstrate your own thesis.

Sometimes a literature review can also be evaluated as part of your MPhil upgrade .

Research vs scholarship

Research and scholarship are both important parts of a PhD. But they aren't the same thing - and it's helpful to know the difference. Research is the original work you produce with your thesis. Scholarship is the expert understanding of your subject area that enables you to conduct valuable research.

3. Conducting research and collecting results

Once you’ve carried out your literature review, you’ll move from scholarship to research .

This doesn’t mean you’ll never read another academic article or consult someone else’s data again. Far from it. You’ll stay up to date with any new developments in your field and incorporate these into your literature review as necessary.

But, from here on in, your primary focus in your PhD process is going to be investigating your own research question. This means carrying out organised research and producing results upon which to base your conclusions.

Types of PhD research

The research process and the type of results you collect will depend upon your subject area:

• In Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subjects you’ll focus on designing experiments, before recording and analysing their outcomes. This often means assembling and managing complex numerical datasets – sometimes in collaboration with the rest of your laboratory or workshop.
• In Social Science subjects you’ll be more focussed on designing surveys or conducting case studies. These will produce quantitative or qualitative data, depending on the nature of your work.
• In Arts and Humanities subjects you’ll often have less raw data, but that doesn’t mean you won’t be working with ‘hard’ factual information. You’ll analyse texts, sources and other materials according to an accepted methodology and reflect upon the significance of your findings.

Whatever subject you’re in, this research work will account for the greater part of your PhD results. You’ll have regular meetings with your supervisor, but the day-to-day management of your project and its progress will be your own responsibility.

In some fields it’s common to begin writing up your findings as you collect them, developing your thesis and completing the accompanying dissertation chapter-by-chapter. In other cases you’ll wait until you have a full dataset before reviewing and recording your conclusions.

4. Completing an MPhil to PhD upgrade

At UK universities it’s common to register new PhD students for an MPhil before ‘ upgrading ’ them to ‘full’ doctoral candidates. This usually takes place after one year of full-time study (or its part-time equivalent).

Forcing you to register for a ‘lesser’ degree may seem strange, but it’s actually an important part of the training and development a PhD offers:

• As an MPhil student you’re able to comprehend your field and produce new research.
• As a PhD student you’re able to go that crucial step further and produce the significant original contribution to knowledge that defines a doctorate.

The MPhil upgrade is when you take the step from the former to the latter.

The MPhil upgrade exam

Upgrading from MPhil to PhD registration usually involves a form of oral exam – similar to the viva voce that concludes a PhD. But, unlike a full viva, the MPhil upgrade is less formal and only covers part of your thesis.

In most cases you’ll submit a small amount of the material you’ve produced so far. This could be a draft of your first chapter (or part of it) and / or your literature review. You could also be asked to reflect on your progress in general.

You’ll then sit down with your supervisor and someone else from your department (familiar with your field, but unrelated to your project). They’ll offer feedback on the quality of your work and ask questions about your findings.

The aim of the process won’t be to examine your drafts so much as to confirm that your project has the potential to justify a PhD – and that you’re on track to complete it on time.

‘Failing’ a PhD upgrade is actually quite rare. Your university may ask you to repeat the procedure if they are concerned that you haven’t made sufficient progress or established a viable plan for the rest of your project.

What is an MPhil?

The MPhil (Master of Philosophy) is also a research degree, but its scope is more limited than a PhD (Doctor of Philosophy). And no, just like a PhD, an MPhil isn’t necessarily a Philosophy qualification. Our guide covers all you need to know about the difference between a MPhil and PhD .

5. PhD teaching, conferences and publications

During the PhD process, you’ll have lots of opportunities to take part in extra-curricular activities, such as teaching, academic conferences and publications.

Although it isn’t usually compulsory to participate in these, they can be an incredibly rewarding experience and will look great on your CV.

Teaching during a PhD normally involves hosting undergraduate seminars or supervising students in the lab, as well as marking work and providing feedback.

Academic conferences are an excellent way to network with like-minded colleagues and find out the latest developments in your field. You might even be able to present your own work to your peers at one of these events.

Publishing during a PhD will help you increase your academic profile, as well as give you experience of the peer review process. It’s not normally a requisite of your PhD, but publications will certainly help if you plan on applying for postdoc positions.

6. Writing your thesis

As the culmination of three or more years of hard work, the thesis (or dissertation) is the most important part of the procedure to get your PhD, presenting you with the opportunity to make an original scholarly contribution to your discipline.

Our guide to writing your thesis covers everything you need to know about this lengthy research project, from structure and word count to writing up and submission.

We’ve also written a guide to the PhD dissertation abstract , which is an important part of any thesis.

7. Defending your PhD results at a viva voce

Unlike other degrees, a PhD isn’t normally marked as a piece of written work. Instead your dissertation will be submitted for an oral examination known as a viva voce (Latin for ‘living voice’).

This is a formal procedure, during which you ‘defend’ your thesis in front of appointed examiners, each of whom will have read your dissertation thoroughly in advance.

Examiners at a viva voce

A PhD is normally examined by two academic experts:

• One will be an internal examiner, usually appointed from elsewhere in your faculty and department. They won’t be directly associated with your project, but will have sufficient expertise to assess your findings.
• The other will be an external examiner. They will be a recognised expert in the area you are researching, with a record of relevant research and publication. Most universities in the UK allow you to invite an external examiner of your choice, provided there is no existing conflict of interest.

Your supervisor will help you prepare for the viva and will offer advice on choosing an external examiner. However, they will not normally be present during the examination.

The PhD timeline

Ready to take the next step?

There's lots more information about how to get a PhD in our advice section . Or, if you're ready to start looking at different projects, why not check out one of the thousands of current PhD opportunities in our database?

Not sure how PhD study will differ from a Masters? In this guide, we take a look at how the two qualifications compare, including applications, course structure, assessment and more.

Every student will need to write an abstract for their PhD dissertation. Here's everything you need to know about what an academic abstract is and how to write one.

What can you expect from a PhD? What's life actually like as a postgraduate student? Read our guides to the doctoral research experience.

The viva voce is the final oral exam at the end of a PhD degree. Our guide explains the usual viva format, covers common questions and explains how to prepare.

FindAPhD. Copyright 2005-2024 All rights reserved.

Unknown    ( change )

Have you got time to answer some quick questions about PhD study?

Select your nearest city

You haven’t completed your profile yet. To get the most out of FindAPhD, finish your profile and receive these benefits:

• Monthly chance to win one of ten £10 Amazon vouchers ; winners will be notified every month.*
• The latest PhD projects delivered straight to your inbox
• Access to our £6,000 scholarship competition
• Weekly newsletter with funding opportunities, research proposal tips and much more
• Early access to our physical and virtual postgraduate study fairs

Or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

*Offer only available for the duration of your active subscription, and subject to change. You MUST claim your prize within 72 hours, if not we will redraw.

Do you want hassle-free information and advice?

Create your FindAPhD account and sign up to our newsletter:

• Find out about funding opportunities and application tips
• Receive weekly advice, student stories and the latest PhD news
• Hear about our upcoming study fairs
• Save your favourite projects, track enquiries and get personalised subject updates

Create your account

Looking to list your PhD opportunities? Log in here .

• Work For Us
• Postgraduate Researcher Development

Usually a research degree will involve a programme of active research typically three years full-time or five years part-time, with the support of a supervisory team (including a specialist in the chosen research field).

Northumbria is committed to enabling students to develop their full potential, both in completing their research degree programme successfully, and in career planning for the future. Supervision, training and feedback are therefore central to each individual student’s research degree programme. A research degree will involve a programme of active research typically three years full-time or five years part-time, with the support of a supervisory team (including a specialist in the chosen research field). Additionally, all postgraduate research students have access to a structured training and development programme, to support development of research skills and techniques relevant to the student’s programme, so that they can undertake the research effectively.

Feedback is provided throughout the programme to support students towards the timely completion of their research programme. Formal supervision meetings take place between the student and their supervisors on a monthly basis. At project approval, the project and associated support required is considered in detail. At the end of each programme year, students will demonstrate their progress as part of the annual progression process. Submission readiness will be assessed six months prior to the expected submission of their thesis. The thesis will be assessed via a viva voce (oral examination).

Further information and documentation for current students can be accessed here .

Postgraduate Research Degrees

• Research Degree Opportunities
• Funded PhD Studentships at Northumbria University

How to Apply

• Fees and Funding
• Postgraduate Student Profiles

Upcoming events

DynaSun 2024

Northumbria University

TaPRA Conference 2024

Offence to Sentence: Sexual Violence and the Voice of the Victim

Interior Educators Conference 2024

The Great Hall

Back to top

This page has been archived and is no longer being updated regularly.

The IRB stamp of approval

For many students, obtaining Institutional Review Board approval is the first step they’ll take toward making their research idea a reality. Here’s how to make that process go smoothly.

By Lea Winerman

Print version: page 18

When University of Illinois at Chicago graduate student Jacklynn Fitzgerald first began working with her school's Institutional Review Board (IRB) back in 2009, she — like many other students — found the process frustrating. Fitzgerald, who uses fMRI, EEG and other brain-imaging techniques to study patients with mood disorders, discovered that her classes hadn't prepared her for the rigors of IRB review.

"There was very little formal training and you just learn as you go," she says. Her research proposal came back with what seemed like endless corrections from reviewers, and the process seemed cumbersome and slow.

But two years ago, Fitzgerald had a change of heart about the role of the IRB. It was prompted by every researcher's worst fear — the IRB ordered the lab that she was working in to suspend its research after realizing that its patient-record documentation was not up to par.

"Any time you have to stop research because of something administrative like this it is scary and embarrassing. But it changed how I felt about the IRB," she says. That's because the IRB gave Fitzgerald and her colleagues support, resources and training to overhaul their documentation system. The experience "helped me see that they were there as a resource and not a bureaucratic hassle," Fitzgerald says.

That's a perspective that more students should embrace, according to Virginia Commonwealth University psychology professor Thomas Eissenberg, PhD. He served on an IRB for 10 years and chaired APA's 2007 Presidential Task Force on IRBs and Psychological Science. Too often, he says, students — and even more experienced researchers — see IRB approval as an impediment or a hurdle to clear.

"But the IRB, just like you, is concerned with safe and ethical research," he says. "No one wants to harm participants or do something that's unethical. … So you should go into it thinking that ‘these people have the same interests as me, and we need to work together.'"

IRBs are volunteer boards that the federal government requires to review all behavioral and biomedical research projects, to help protect the welfare of human research participants. The boards are locally administered by universities and other institutions, and are regulated by the Department of Health and Human Services' Office for Human Research Protections. IRBs usually include researchers from various fields of study at an institution, as well as nonscientist faculty and community representatives.

It's important to keep that composition in mind during the review process, Eissenberg says.

"One major thing is to remember to be respectful of the reviewers," he says. "You may get questions that appear to come out of left field because the reviewers are not experts in your field — and there's nothing wrong with that. Something that might seem obvious to you may not be obvious to them."

Below, Eissenberg and others offer more advice on how to successfully navigate the IRB process.

IRB process advice

Prepare carefully and thoroughly. "Treat the [IRB] document as carefully as you would a manuscript or grant application because it's every bit as important," Eissenberg says. "Be very detailed. It's better to be more detailed than less detailed in a proposal."

That IRB proposal may include a comprehensive description of your research idea and methods, as well as consent forms, survey instruments and other pertinent documents. The description may include details that students might not realize are within the scope of IRB review, Eissenberg says — for example, justifying the number of participants in your study. Reviewers might want to know, if your study puts participants at any risk, even a minor one, then why include 100 people? Why not 50? Why put 50 more people at risk?

"All it takes to explain that is a power calculation," Eissenberg says. "So put that in. And that goes for pretty much any part of the research protocol. You should explain why you are doing it that way."

Citing examples of previous research that has used similar protocols can help. "If you present something that's new, the reviewers will be particularly attuned to any risks," he says. "If you show them it's been done before safely and ethically, they'll know it's likely to be safe and ethical at their university."

For example, a common way to induce stress in a study is to ask participants to deliver a short speech. So if you're using that technique, explain that it is a common research tool and reference some of the many studies that have used it in the past.

Rachel Becker Herbst, PhD, a pediatric psychologist at Children's Hospital Colorado, discovered the utility of citing past research when her research was up for IRB review a few years ago. As a graduate student at the University of Miami, Herbst was conducting a mixed-methods, community-based study of migrant farm workers. The protocol involved flexible, open-ended interviews of the workers and others in the community. The IRB initially had trouble with the proposal, she says, because the methodology didn't allow her to submit in advance all of the questions that she would ask participants.

"There was a lot of back and forth with the IRB," she says, "because this understandably didn't align easily with their review. I had to present the literature to explain that this was a respected, validated methodology."

Know your resources

In addition to the volunteer review board, many IRBs also have an administrative staff that coordinates the review process and interacts with researchers and the review board.

"Our university has a point coordinator for the IRB," Fitzgerald says. "She is an indispensable resource, and she's there for minor questions about formatting and major questions, too. She's been a lifesaver for me."

Many students may not realize that their first point of contact with the IRB doesn't have to come after they submit a proposal for the first time. Instead, Fitzgerald says, "start early in your communication, and don't be afraid to tap into those people who are there for your support."

Speaking of starting early, make sure that you leave yourself plenty of time to complete IRB review, says Eissenberg. "I tend to work backwards with students," he says. "You know you want to defend here, and it's going to take X number of months to collect data, so you need to get the IRB approval by X. If you wait, thinking that you're going to get approval as soon as you submit, you may be disappointed because there will be legitimate questions about any protocol."

Of course, he adds, if you submit an IRB application before your research plan is entirely thought out, you might find yourself submitting a lot of amendments later. In general, he says, the time to get the proposal in is as soon as you have a clear idea of what your research will entail.

Be willing to think flexibly

Sometimes, despite your best efforts, your original research plan does not pan out. Herbst discovered that when, as a graduate student, she submitted a research plan for IRB review. The study was to involve participants in a support program that she and her colleagues ran for undocumented immigrant youth who had been detained by U.S. immigration authorities and were living in a temporary detention shelter.

She soon found out that conducting research with this group involved a lot of complications. In addition to getting personal permission from the participants, she and her colleagues also needed to get official consent from the Office of Refugee Resettlement — which proved impossible.

"It was really a curveball for the IRB," she says. "They had not dealt with this issue before."

In the end, Herbst had to modify her plan to study only program development and outcomes, rather than individual factors that contributed to resilience among the youth, as she had originally intended.

If you hit such hurdles, she says, it's important to keep your ultimate research goals in mind and think flexibly about what is within the scope of possibility, rather than being married to one research methodology.

"It wasn't, in an ideal world, what we wanted to focus on, but at least in the end we were able to generate new knowledge about this population, which, at base, was what we wanted to do," she says.

Letters to the Editor

Browser does not support script.

Go to…

• Our schools
• Work for us
• Inaugural lectures
• Study with us
• Undergraduate
• Postgraduate taught
• Postgraduate research
• Professional training
• Centres & groups
• Research Projects
• Getting involved
• NIHR Biomedical Research Centre
• Research and Development office
• Our connections
• International
• Diversity & inclusion
• Code of conduct
• Inclusive Toolkits

Funded research opportunities

Applications are invited for a range of funded research studentships and awards. Studentships cover tuition fees and an annual stipend. They will be advertised here as and when they become available. Please check back regularly.

Available funding

Sleep health after sustaining serious physical combat injuries and the impact on mental/physical health: An analysis on the ADVANCE study cohort

We are looking for a PhD candidate who is interested in investigating the relationship between physical health, mental health and sleep by analysing complex, cross-sectional and longitudinal data in the context of serious physical injuries sustained by UK Armed Forces personnel in combat. Learn more about this ADVANCE study funding opportunity.

We regularly advertise details of available studentships here and on  findaphd.com.  Keep an eye on this page to find out what's new. You may also want to take a look at the Centre for Doctoral Studies Funding Database .

Application process for studentships

Applying for a studentship follows a different process than applying for a PhD or MD(Res) course. Therefore please read the advert carefully to ensure you apply to the correct department and with correct funding code.

It is likely that you will have to make an online application but the project approval form may have already been completed by the supervisors. If this is the case, then if successful, all you will need to do is to sign the project approval form, to confirm you are happy with the project. Otherwise, you will work with the supervisors to complete the project form.

A project approval form has to be completed in all cases as the project has to be approved as suitable for a PhD and feasible in the time allowed. 

Should you have any queries about the PhD studentship application process, please contact the Postgraduate Research Administrator by emailing [email protected] .

External funding sources

• Medical Research Council
• Economic and Social Research Council
• Research and Development Office (IOP)
• British Council
• Government Loans

Study at King’s

View a prospectus.

Learn more about the degree programmes on offer at King's. Download or view a prospectus in PDF format.

• Undergraduate prospectus
• Postgraduate guide

Sign up for further information

Receive email updates about our courses, events, fees and funding, studying in London, how to apply and more.

Upcoming events

Applying to university through UCAS

29 August 2024, 17:00

Discover more about applying to university at…

Graduate School of Health and Medical Sciences

• Approval of external c...

Approval of external courses for your PhD plan

If you complete a course that is not offered by the Graduate School of Health and Medical Sciences you must apply for approval. This also applies for courses completed at SCIENCE and other faculties at UCPH.

You can apply for approval of an external course after completion.

Please note that the Graduate School does not grant pre-approval of external courses.

Certain rules apply to external courses:

• The course must have scientific relevance to your PhD project
• The course must be at PhD level. Courses at Master’s level can be approved if they have a scientific relevance to your PhD project
• Your principal supervisor must approve your participation in the course
• The course must be of at least 0.5 ECTS/minimum 5 hours of teaching in order to be reviewed.
• You can apply for approval of courses completed up to 5 years before your enrolment date
• You can get up to 15 ECTS transferred for courses completed before enrolment
• The course program and course description must be issued by the course provider. If the documents are online, you can send a link with your application

All applications for approval of external courses will be assessed individually and the approval is granted on a case-by-case basis.

You can apply for approval by following the link below.

APPLY - Approval of external courses for your PhD plan

Welcome to the University of Southampton

Progression milestones.

Progression Milestones are key stages of your candidature. They comprise of One Month Plan, First Review, The Report (interim thesis) and Formal Progress Review.

This page will guide you through each Milestone.

This is a guide and does not link to PGR Tracker.

Academic Needs Analysis

The one-month plan is typically a one-page outline of your research topic, explaining why it is an interesting/challenging problem and the methods and techniques you are planning to use, particularly in your first year of research. A GANTT chart should also be attached outlining the project planning for the first year.

The writing of the research plan should be a joint effort between you and your supervisory team and the focus of early meetings. If the project initially only has one supervisor, a co-supervisor(s) should also be appointed during the writing up of the one month research plan. The research plan (in PDF format) should be submitted via PGR Tracker, accompanied by your Academic Needs Analysis, to the Graduate School Office (within one month of your start date). This will be approved by the supervisory team and the Graduate School.

iPhD students will also be expected to submit a one-month plan by the end of month 13 (i.e. at the start of the research component of their programme).

First Review

First review – milestone 1 (mphil, phd, iphd and engd).

The first major milestone is the First Review. For this review, you will be required to produce a progress report, which will be followed by a short viva examination.

A PDF copy of your report and an updated training record should be submitted via PGR Tracker to the Graduate School Office according to the following timings:

The First Review Report

The First Review report typically consists of a substantive initial literature review, a clear delineation of the research problem, a description of the approaches taken so far, preliminary results, analysis and discussion, together with a clear plan of future work. Around 5000 words is given as a target length, although supervisory discretion may be employed (and often a longer document will be required). You should check whether it is necessary for you to produce hard copies of your report for the panel (usually it is).

The Review Meeting

The review must be organised by the main/coordinating supervisor within one month of the report submission. The panel for the review will consist of at least three academics: the supervisory team, plus at least one independent assessor usually from within the Faculty. During the meeting, the review panel will discuss the report you have produced. Also you may be asked to prepare a 10-15 minute presentation of your work to start the review meeting. The review will provide you with the opportunity to practise answering technical questions on your research and defending your work in readiness for your final viva voce examination.

The assessment questions can be found on the SESG8003: FEE Graduate School site . You will also have the chance to read the examination form and make your own comments via PGR Tracker. If the outcome of the review is unsatisfactory you will normally be given a month to revise your report. The review panel will explain the reasons that the review was unsatisfactory and your supervisory team will give you guidance for the revision required.

Please note that successful and timely completion of your First Review is a condition for progressing to the next year of study. If you choose to withdraw from the programme at this point, having successfully completed the equivalent of 60 credits in a combination of taught courses and the nine-month progress report, you will be eligible for the award of a Postgraduate Certificate.

Upgrade Review

Upgrade review milestone 2 (phd, iphd and engd).

Please note that students registered on the EngD programme are required to follow the requirements for the Upgrade Review.

For this review, you will be required to produce a more substantial report than the first progression review report. You may be asked to prepare a 10-15 minute presentation of your work to start the viva examination, and during the viva the review panel will discuss the report you have produced. You will be provided with a further opportunity to practise answering technical questions on your research and defending your work in readiness for your final viva.

A PDF copy of your report should be submitted, along with a review of your academic needs analysis to the Graduate School via PGR Tracker at least one month before the date of the review meeting. You are encouraged to draft this report with support from your supervisory team. Drafts and thesis outlines should be given to the supervisory team before the submission deadline (~ 2 months) to give time for this process. Please check if the panel requires a hard copy of your report!

Students who commenced their studies prior to 1 August 2015

The Report (interim-thesis)

The report should consist of around 10,000 words (40 pages of text plus figures) although in some subjects, longer interim-theses may be appropriate, and this should be discussed with the supervisory team.

Typically the report will include an introduction to the research project (including a description of your research problem and the research objectives), a substantial literature review, a description of the methodology you have employed and your results, critical analysis and discussion of your research findings to date, and a clear, well-developed plan of your future work (including fieldwork and data analysis if applicable). It is recommended that the report includes a detailed contents page where the chapter headings to be used in the final thesis submission are used to structure the document.

You should now be able to show mastery of the general literature in the field, and that a significant body of research work has been completed. Evidence of paper publication/submission will be very clear indicators that this has been achieved. In addition a clear plan (including a GANTT chart) indicating future work to complete the doctoral thesis will be required.

The Viva Voce

The main/co-ordinating supervisor is responsible for arranging the time and location of the viva. The panel for the review will consist of at least two independent assessors usually from within the Faculty, one independent assessor will act as the Chair. Your supervisors can be present at the review meeting but will not play an active role in the examination. However, you can request the opportunity to meet the panel without a supervisor being present; this request should be made through the Faculty Graduate School Office.

As well as the interim thesis and viva, the review will require confirmation that you have attended all the required training (the review of your academic needs analysis will be helpful with this) and your publication strategy (papers in preparation, papers submitted, papers in press or published) will also be discussed.

Once the viva has taken place the examination form is completed by the panel and submitted via PGR Tracker. You will receive written feedback on the process and have the opportunity to write your own comments via PGR Tracker. Timely completion of this form is important to enable you to continue your registration on the degree programme.

The Recommendation of the Panel

The criteria for confirmation and guidance regarding recommendations from the panel can be found in the University’s Code of Practice, paragraph 70 – 79 .

If the outcome is reassess, you will normally be given up to three months from the date of the viva to re-submit your report.

Post Upgrade Review

Post upgrade review – milestone 3 (phd, iphd and engd).

The third milestone is the Post-Upgrade Review. The objectives of this review are to assess the progress towards the final thesis submission and that the candidate has had sufficient practice in defending their work in readiness for their PhD/EngD viva.

Requirements

Typically a successful major presentation of your work (for example at an international conference) and/or submission (or even better, publication) of conference or journal papers will form convincing evidence that you are making suitable progress. Having refereed journal or conference papers accepted prior to the viva is a very strong signal to the external examiner that you have satisfied one of the main requirements for award of a PhD (i.e. making an original contribution in the field). A journal publication is much stronger evidence of this than conference papers, although conference publications are also valuable in gaining recognition for your group in your field. If you already have conference papers published, that is useful, but choosing an area to prepare for journal publication will be very good preparation for a discussion chapter in the thesis, and at this stage in your studies you should be starting the writing up process of both journal paper(s) and your thesis. You should submit a thesis plan, list of publications (and evidence of the aforementioned documents) and an updated post-graduate training record to the Graduate School Office via PGR Tracker. Your supervisory team will then complete the review form on PGR Tracker.

Formal Progress Review Report

If none of the aforementioned events have occurred it may well trigger an additional formal review with your supervisory team and your independent reviewer(s)/assessor(s) where a substantial write-up will need to be assessed at a further formal progress review meeting, to ensure you are on track to complete your degree in time. The additional review will provide a further opportunity to practice defending your work in readiness for your viva. Your supervisory team will provide guidance on the format of the review report that is required. Normally a short report outlining progress since the upgrade review will be required. The report should include a thesis plan including a detailed contents page. This plan should indicate which parts of the research have been completed, and what work remains to be finished. This should enable your review panel to propose a target date for thesis submission and/or a target date to change to nominal registration. Your supervisory team will inform you if they deem it necessary to hold an additional review meeting, at which point you should upload your Post-upgrade Review Progress Report to PGR Tracker.

Normally transfer to nominal registration will not be approved until your Post-Upgrade Review has been completed.

Thesis Submission

Intention to submit.

You must inform your Faculty Graduate School Office of your intention to submit no later than two months before your date of submission. This should be done using the form on PGR Tracker. Information on decision and notification to submit can be found in paragraphs 84-85 in the Code of Practice for Research Candidature and Supervision .

Production and submission of the thesis

The requirements for the production of the thesis, and procedures for submission are set out in the Producing your thesis – a guide for research students and the Submitting your thesis – a guide for research students , both of which are available from the Quality Handbook. You should read this guidance carefully well in advance of preparing the final version of your thesis. Additional guidance for students submitting their thesis in an alternative format can be found in paragraphs 8-10 of the Code of Practice for Research Candidature and Supervision.

Thesis templates are available in Microsoft Word (PC and Mac) and LaTeX that match the required University specifications. Templates are available on the Library website .

Further information on thesis submission including: declaration of authorship; academic integrity; and thesis written in a language other than English, can be found in the Code of Practice for Research Candidature and Supervision , paragraphs 86-89.

You will retain access to library and computing facilities until your thesis has been examined and, where appropriate, any revisions requested by the examiners have been made.

You can find useful information to assist you in preparing your thesis on the Library’s Theses webpages , which should be read in conjunction with the University’s Guidance for Completion of Research Degree available on the Quality Handbook . You are advised to read these well in advance. It covers help on the electronic submission of your thesis and supporting materials, including copyright, intellectual property rights, restrictions, file formats, and research data. Thesis templates using Microsoft Word (PC and Mac) and LaTeX are also accessible here. Support in using the Word PC and Mac templates is provided by iSolutions.

Please note that this page and does not link to PGR Tracker, this is for information only.

Viva Voce Examination

Once you have given notice of intention to submit, at least two examiners (one internal and one external to the University) will be appointed and arrangements made for your examination. The following information on the examination can be found in paragraphs 90–104 of the Code of Practice for Research Candidature and Supervision : nomination of examiners; the role of the main supervisor in the examination process; the viva voce examination itself; the recommendations of the examiners; and consideration of the examiners’ recommendations.

Submission after a successful recommendation of an award

Information on the procedure for submission of your thesis after successful recommendation of an award can be found in the University’s Guidance for Completion of Research Degree .

Congratulations on your successful candidature! We look forward to seeing you at Graduation.

Full information can be found on the Graduation webpage .

Postgraduate research students are provided with Microsoft Office 365 alumni email addresses. Once you are awarded your [email protected] becomes [email protected] and any emails sent to your existing Southampton University email address will appear within your new account. Your alumni email account can be accessed via www.outlook.com/southamptonalumni.ac.uk .

• Postgraduate

PhD and Professional Doctorates

Ntu doctoral school.

The Doctoral School is at the heart of research at Nottingham Trent University. It's here to support you through your projects, guide you through innovative research and offer help however you need it - from enrolment, to academic advice, events and more.

Welcome to the Doctoral School

The NTU Doctoral School is your home while undertaking doctoral study. Whether you're working towards a PhD or Professional Doctorate, the Doctoral School can help you through every aspect of your research programme.

We will support you through admission and enrolment, during your project approval and annual monitoring, right up until the submission of your thesis and your viva voce examination. We’re here to provide professional development, a sense of community, and social and academic events that are open to researchers across all disciplines.

The Doctoral School is where you'll find the help you’ll need to become a confident, skilled NTU researcher, and it's the first point of contact for doctoral candidates and supervisors for advice, guidance and support in navigating the doctoral journey.

"I want to change the world"

Our Director of Research Culture and Environment, Rebekah Smith McGloin, explains why many people choose to study their research degree at NTU.

"Throughout my PhD at NTU, my work has been recognised and appreciated. I have met amazing people and talented professionals."

Valentina de Riso, PhD in Arts and Humanities

Erin Newman, PhD in History

"My postgraduate research journey has been fast-paced, challenging and well-supported."

Local researcher Erin enjoys tying her historical research back to the places she knows, using the past to help us understand today.

Hear her story.

Join our research community

Meet our postgraduate researchers.

Meet our postgraduate researchers. Be inspired by their work and learn more about the projects available to you as a postgraduate researcher.

Support for research students

The Doctoral School will support you through your entire research degree, helping you to develop professionally and make the most of your experience.

We offer opportunities to study for PhDs and Professional Doctorates. Come and be a part of our world-leading research.

How to apply for a PhD

Everything you need to know about applying to study at the NTU Doctoral School.

Meet the team

Sherran clarence, senior lecturer, research culture & environment, nicholas ray, doctoral school programmes manager, contact the doctoral school.

Email  [email protected] or chat online with the Doctoral School Administration Manager if you have any questions about doctoral study at NTU.

Dr Deborah Gabriel

PhD project: ethical approval

During the early stages of your PhD research project you will need to think about gaining ethical approval which is required before you can begin the actual research.

All higher education institutions have their own specific requirements in relation to research activity and are required to demonstrate ethical compliance.  Research methods that involve human subjects (such as interviews and focus groups) will have to satisfy an external committee that all the legal, social, ethical and political issues have been considered.

The aim of ethical approval is to protect the participants involved in your research project and to protect the university from the risks associated with conducting research that has social, political and financial implications for the institution.

You will have to complete ethical approval forms detailing the nature of your project, its purpose, focus and your methodology and you must submit drafts of your information guidance for participants, consent forms, questionnaires, interview guide and any advertisements you will be placing to recruit participants.

The external committee will examine your project closely and will play particular attention to the ethical soundness of your research, how you have managed the risks, how you will protect the confidentiality of your participants and how you will gain informed consent.

It is a lengthy process and you will need to be at a stage in your research project where you have already decided on your research methods and have already drafted a questionnaire if you are using one and interview questions.

You may not get approved on the first submission: it is not uncommon for the external committee to request amendments, so allow enough time for gaining ethical approval within your research schedule to ensure you keep to any deadlines that have been set for you, or that you have set for yourself.

You should discuss ethical approval at length with your research supervisor, who will guide you in this process.

You May Also Like

PhD Graduation Day: a moment to savour

It was hot, sunny day and after being fitted with my graduation robes there was time for a few photos before the last call to be seated.

The 5-year post-PhD research plan

Yesterday I received confirmation that the final version of my PhD thesis, amended in accordance with the Joint Examiners Report (issued after my viva in April) has been approved.

Surviving the Viva

In my last post I shared my elation at having finally submitted my PhD thesis; now I have another reason to be euphoric: I passed the viva voce!

2 thoughts on “ PhD project: ethical approval ”

After I have got my ethical clearance whats the next step. Just asking please help

Hi Tauya, Your supervisor should guide you through your research project and help you plan your research schedule.

Comments are closed.