Review of progress guidelines

1. Objectives
2. Eligibility
3. Timing
4. Doctoral Study Plan
5. Content/suggested components
6. Failure to submit
7. Outcomes
8. Reporting and Records

1. Objectives

• The Objective of a review of progress is to review the goals that have been set for the student for the semester, to highlight any issues or problems that need to be addressed and to set new goals for subsequent semesters.

2. Eligibility

• All currently enrolled part time and full time students are required to submit each half year a report for review of progress.
• Students who are currently on Leave of Absence or who have submitted a thesis for examination are not required to submit a report for review on progress.
• Review of progress includes a review from the Principal supervisor. If the principal supervisor is unable to report on progress, then a delegated member of the supervisory panel is responsible for completing the review.

3. Timing

• A review of progress must be completed each half year for all eligible students.
• A review of progress is submitted to the Faculty each half year.
• Annual reviews of progress are a summary of each half year review and are submitted to the University Graduate School after submission to the Faculty.

4. Doctoral Study Plan

• The Doctoral Study Plan (DSP) is a key component of the UTS Framework for Doctoral Education and is a tool for planning and reviewing student progress.
• The semesterly review of the DSP may be used as the review of progress for each half year.
• The DSP may be used with all Higher Degree by Research students and not only those Faculties in 2011 rolling out the Framework.

5. Content/suggested components

Student
Review of progress should cover but is not limited to the following components:

• Review on goals set/activities planned for the semester which may include central and faulty subjects and modules. These would be the agreed activities recorded on the DSP or other planning document.
• Any problems or issues which may have affected progress and how these have been managed.
• The involvement of external or industry supervisors where applicable.
• Goals and activities planned for the forthcoming semester to be articulated on the DSP in cases where the DSP is used
• Intended submission date.

Supervisors
The Principal Supervisor in consultation with members of the supervisory panel should cover but is not restricted to the following:

• Progress against the goals set and activities planned for the semester including knowledge and skills gained from the activities and modules.
• Any areas of development, knowledge and skills which might need attention.
• Any difficulties experienced beyond the control of the student (eg, equipment failure, funding delays, etc).
• Comment on the suitability of the student's work environment.
• Any issues that may impact future progress.
• Strategies to resolve matters impeding progress, such as action plans to ensure future progress is satisfactory.
• An assessment of whether the student will be able to complete on time.
• A recommendation (satisfactory, conceded satisfactory or unsatisfactory).

6. Failure to submit

• Failure to submit a progress report in any half year will normally be deemed as unsatisfactory progress for that semester. In such circumstances, the procedures for unsatisfactory progress outlined in section 7 will be followed.
• The RAO may deem progress as satisfactory or conceded satisfactory in the absence of a progress report where there is confirmation from the Principal Supervisor that the progress report has not been submitted due to exceptional and unforeseen difficulties.
• In such a circumstance, the Principal Supervisor should provide a written statement of progress made by the student during the semester, confirming also that the progress is satisfactory, or conceded satisfactory.

7. Outcomes

The outcome of the review of progress will be:

• Satisfactory
• Conceded Satisfactory
• Unsatisfactory

End of stage assessment outcomes and consequences will be taken up in the Guidelines for Assessment.

7.1 Mid Year review

• Outcomes of satisfactory or conceded satisfactory at mid year review do not need to be reported to the University Graduate School.
• Outcomes of unsatisfactory at mid year review must be reported to the University Graduate School.
• Consequences for outcomes are set out in the Table below.

7.2 Annual review

• Outcomes of each half year review will be recorded on the Annual review of progress and submitted to the University Graduate School.
• Consequences for outcomes are set out in the Table below.

8. Reporting and Records

• The University Graduate School is responsible for recording all outcomes of Annual Review of Progress.
• The Faculty is responsible for keeping a record of Mid-year Review of Progress.

UGSB 2011