Instructions for the pre-examiners and opponents

1. Pre-examiners’ statements
2. The official opponent’s statement
3. Grading of dissertations
4. The progression of public defence of doctoral thesis

I    Pre-examiners’ statements

The purpose of the preliminary examination procedure is to ensure before permission for public defence granted that the dissertation meets the scientific and formal requirements set for it. In addition, it also enables the Faculty and the pre-examiners nominated by it to propose changes to the dissertation or even suggest its rejection. It is therefore extremely important that the preliminary examination should be performed in a careful manner and that the author be requested to make all the necessary corrections and any additional or control experiments before any statement is submitted. The eventual statement should not contain any reservations but indicate either approval or disapproval, nor should any statement be submitted for an incomplete or formally deficient paper. The statement should be issued within three months of the date on which the Faculty Council appointed the pre-examiners.

The following aspects should be considered in the statement

1.  General impression of the dissertation

A brief account of the dissertation’s scientific content and scientific level.

The dissertation must show the author’s capability to independently and critically apply scientific research methods within his/her discipline and in-depth familiarity with the field of research, the related disciplines and the general theory of science, and an ability to independently create new information.

2.  Topic and formulation of the research task

• originality and scientific value of the research task
• what is known of the research topic and what the present opinion is
• how the investigation contributes to the existing knowledge
• significance and topicality
• evaluation of the rationality and scientific relevance of problems stated for investigation

3. Material and methods

• candidate’s participation in the collection of material, preliminary observations and their processing
• collection of the material in a scientifically reliable manner
• applicability of the material to the solution of the stated problems
• relevance of the methods to the material and the research problem
• development of new methods

4. Results and conclusions

• evaluation of the reliability and scientific importance of the observations made
• evaluation of the extent to which the dissertation involves verification of earlier findings or includes new findings; the scientific role of these
• justification of the conclusions reached on the basis of the results
• suitability of the techniques used for statistical processing and presentation of the results and applicability of the statistical methods to the topic and the material

5. Organisation and presentation of the dissertation

• evaluation of the organisation and scope of the dissertation, the distribution of material within it and the subheadings used
• evaluation of the scientific style of the work, its language and the quality of the printing

6. Survey of the literature

• scope and factual content of the survey
• topicality and comprehensiveness of the survey
• familiarity of the candidate with the literature and an ability to express the main observations expressed in the literature   
• candidate’s critical mastery of the literature and his/her ability to link his/her own research with the existing knowledge

7. Maturity shown in the discussion

• factual accuracy, critical perceptiveness and clarity of discussion
• relevance of the conclusions to the problems identified for investigation, the results obtained, to the scientific and practical significance of the results and to earlier knowledge available in the field
• evaluation of the candidate’s ability to relate his/her results to existing data and to perceive new topics for research
• evaluation of the candidate’s maturity as a researcher and ability to reach a synthesis in the research topic

8. Summary
 
It is hoped that the pre-examiners’ statement will conclude with a short summary that contains

• a brief description of the nature of the investigation
• the most significant results and the most outstanding achievements of the paper
• quality of the manuscript
• defects and possibilities for their elimination
• comments regarding the suitability of the work for publication

The pre-examiner can discuss minor defects and errors with the candidate and make suggestions for their elimination. If the defects are major ones and concern fundamental parts of the dissertation (e.g. the reliability of the methods), the statement should be submitted to the Faculty without recommending that permission for public defence be granted. The Faculty will then decide on what further steps to take. The candidate should also be given an opportunity to reply to the pre-examiners' statements.

II   The official opponent’s statement

The opponent shall follow the Faculty’s instructions that describe the formalities of the public examination

The Faculty shall not restrict in any way the matters that the opponent may pay or can pay attention to in the public examination or in his/her statement.

The opponent's statement shall contain evaluations of both the manuscript itself and the actual public discussion. It should be considered the final characterisation of the scientific value of the dissertation.

The opponent's evaluation of the dissertation should pay attention to the same factors as listed in the instructions for a pre-examiners’ statement (points 1–8), while that of the public discussion should contain an evaluation of the scientific importance of the work and a brief description and assessment of the public examination and of the contributions of the other participants to it.
 
The statement should preferably conclude with a separate summary that should indicate

• whether the scientific standards of the dissertation are sufficient,
• whether the topic was conceived of by the candidate himself/herself and whether it was formulated in an original manner,
• whether the dissertation involves supplementation of earlier scattered, uncertain findings or
• whether it introduces essentially new information regarding the field concerned, and whether the theme is discussed in an original, comprehensive manner with respect to its form and the scientific method employed.

Attention should be paid to observations that are of major relevance to the field of research or of paramount international significance.

If the opponent is of the opinion that the dissertation cannot be accepted, or if any member of the Faculty suggests its rejection on the basis of the opponent's comments or on other grounds, which should be stated in writing, the candidate should be allowed the opportunity to make a written reply within a period of time to be laid down by the Faculty.

III   Grading of dissertations

After the public defence, the Faculty Council makes the decision about approving and grading the doctoral dissertation. This will be based on the statement of the board of examiners and the opponent’s statement. The grades used for assessment of the doctoral dissertation are 5 (excellent), 4 (very good), 3 (good), 2 (satisfactory), 1 (sufficient)

IV The progression of public defence of doctoral thesis

The defence ceremony of a doctoral thesis is a public occasion. Those concerned arrive in the hall in succession so that the doctoral candidate enters first, then the custos followed by the opponent. The audience stands up.

The doctoral candidate, custos and opponent wear tailcoats and dark waistcoats, while women use black dresses (not long ones). If the participants wish to wear the academic gowns that are in use in some faculties, or a dark suit, they should agree on this beforehand. A foreign opponent may wear the gown of his/her own university. The custos and the opponent, if they have the doctor's degree, hold their doctoral hats in their hands when they enter or leave the hall. For the duration of the ceremony, the hats are laid on the table, with the lyre signs facing the audience.

When the candidate, the custos and the examiner(s) have arrived in the hall, all persons shall remain standing and the custos shall begin the examination as follows: "This is a public examination of N.N.'s doctoral thesis in the field of (field of study) entitled (title of thesis). The opponent is/opponents are (Professor X/Dr Y) from (the University of Z). Having been appointed by the Faculty of Humanities custos of these proceedings, I now declare the examination open."

The candidate shall remain standing, all others shall be seated.

The candidate, standing, gives his/her lectio praecursoria, which shall not last longer than 20 minutes. He/She starts his/her speech by saying: “Dear Custos, Dear Opponent, Ladies and Gentlemen”. If needed, the custos will advice him/her on the content and nature of this speech.

After this opening lecture, the candidate says: “I am asking your, Professor/ Docent/Doctor N.N., as the opponent appointed by the Faculty of Humanities, to put forward the comments occasioned by my dissertation.”

The opponent, standing, presents a brief statement dealing with the scientific position and significance of the topics of the dissertation and other general questions of the same nature. After the statement, the opponent and the doctoral candidate are seated.

In the beginning of the actual examination, the opponent will first focus on formal and general matters, followed by a more detailed scrutiny.

The opponent may use a maximum of four hours for his/her examination to allow sufficient time for the potentiality of further opponents. If the examination lasts longer than four hours, there will be a break announced by the custos. The whole ceremony shall not last longer than six hours. At the end of his/her examination, the opponent stands up presents his/her final statement, with the doctoral candidate standing and listening. The doctoral candidate, standing, gives his/her thanks to the opponent.

The doctoral candidate turns to the audience and says: "I now request that anyone present having objections to my doctoral thesis ask Mr/Mrs custos for permission to speak."

The custos acts as moderator, making sure that the doctoral candidate is allowed to respond to every point of criticism immediately and that those speaking keep to the point. In his/her statement to be given to the Faculty, the opponent will also consider the points raised by the audience in the defence ceremony.

Standing, the custos closes the ceremony by saying: "I declare this defence ceremony closed."

The custos and the opponent will carry their doctoral hats when leaving the auditorium in the same order in which they entered: the doctoral candidate will leave first, followed by the custos and the opponent.