Adjudication committee

The composition of the adjudication committee will normally take the following into account:

• both genders are represented
• at least one of the members is not affiliated with UiO
• at least one of the members is not affiliated with a Norwegian institution
• all members hold a doctoral degree or equivalent academic qualification

The evaluation committee must be impartial and each individual member must confirm that:

• they do not have any close relationships with the PhD candidate or any of the PhD candidate's supervisors
• they have not served as a supervisor for the PhD candidate
• they have no shared financial interests or scientific collaborations with any of the PhD candidate's supervisors in the past five years
• they have no shared financial interests or scientific collaborations with the PhD candidate
• they have no co-publications with the PhD candidate
• they have not contributed in any way to the dissertation
• they have no co-publications with any of the PhD candidate's supervisors in the past five years

One member (the third member) of the adjudication committee represents the unit and acts as the administrator of the committee. This member must ensure that deadlines are met, that the adjudication meets the required academic standard and that the external committee members are informed of the entire adjudication process. The administrator of the committee must actively participate in the assessment of the thesis.

The adjudication committee’s recommendation must be submitted on a special form, and contain the following:

• name of candidate
• final title of the thesis
• full name, title, place of employment and address of all members
• reason for choice of adjudication committee members
• declaration that the proposed committee members have been asked and have agreed to undertake the task
• declaration of impartiality form for each committee member
• the third member must work at the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences/Natural History Museum
• two of the members must not be affiliated with the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences /Natural History Museum

The committee will be assessed and approved by the faculty, which will inform the unit of the outcome of the assessment. The unit will inform the PhD candidate and the adjudication committee members about the appointment. The unit must ensure that the adjudication committee members are sent a copy of the thesis and a copy of the current regulations. The unit is responsible for offering to train the third member in public defence procedures so that these can be communicated to the opponents.

Deadlines

The adjudication committee has six weeks to make its recommendation.

Adjudication

The adjudication committee makes decisions as follows:

• The thesis is worthy of defence without changes.
• The thesis is worthy of defence, but minor changes need to be made before the public defence. The PhD candidate must normally be able to do this within two months. In this case, no new adjudication is necessary.
• The thesis has a significant number of shortcomings that need to be corrected/revised before the public defence can be held. The PhD candidate must normally be able to do this within six months. The revised thesis must be re-assessed by the original adjudication committee
• If the adjudication committee finds that a thesis cannot be revised within six months, it must be rejected. The PhD candidate is entitled to, and must receive, a detailed written account/justification of the rejection.

If the thesis requires a revision that requires the adjudication committee to assess the revised thesis in order to determine whether it is worthy of defence, the adjudication committee will have a new deadline of six weeks to submit its final recommendation from the date it receives the revised thesis. The PhD candidate is not entitled to appeal the faculty's decision on the revised thesis. The PhD candidate has a deadline of 10 working days to submit written comments on the recommendation. If the PhD candidate does not wish to submit comments, the PhD candidate must immediately notify the department of this in writing.

The adjudication committee may ask the PhD candidate to submit source material and supplementary or explanatory information. Supervisors may be called to adjudication committee meetings in order to explain the supervision and thesis work.

Appeals

Rejection of an application for assessment of a thesis or a decision to reject a thesis, trial lecture or public defence may be appealed pursuant to section 28 et seq. of the Public Administration Act. A substantiated appeal must be submitted to the faculty. The faculty may revoke or change the decision if it upholds the appeal. If the faculty does not endorse the appeal, it will be submitted to UiO's appeals committee in order for it to make a final decision. The appeals committee may review all aspects of the decision appealed.

If the faculty or the appeals committee deems it necessary, it may appoint individuals or a committee to conduct a review of the decision under appeal and the criteria on which it is based, or to undertake a new or supplementary expert assessment.