POSTGRADUATE PROGRAMMES BY RESEARCH
POSTGRADUATE PROGRAMMES BY RESEARCH
1.0 PREAMBLE
The Faculty of Business and Economic Sciences offers the following programmes across the full range of disciplines within business and economics at postgraduate level by research: -
Masters
- Master of Philosophy in Accounting Sciences
- Master of Philosophy in Banking and Investment Management Sciences
- Master of Philosophy in Finance
- Master of Philosophy in Fiscal Sciences
- Master of Philosophy in Business Management Sciences
- Master of Philosophy in Actuarial Science
- Master of Philosophy in Risk Management and Insurance Sciences
- Master of Philosophy in Marketing and Consumer Sciences
- Master of Philosophy in Development Sciences
- Master of Philosophy in Disaster Risk Management Sciences
Doctorates
- Doctor of Philosophy in Accounting Sciences
- Doctor of Philosophy in Banking and Investment Management Sciences
- Doctor of Philosophy in Finance and Investment Sciences
- Doctor of Philosophy in Fiscal Sciences
- Doctor of Philosophy in Business Management Sciences
- Doctor of Philosophy in Risk Management and Insurance Sciences
- Doctor of Philosophy in Marketing and Consumer Sciences
- Doctor of Philosophy in Development Sciences
- Doctor of Philosophy in Disaster Risk Management Sciences
- Doctor of Philosophy in Business Administration
- Doctor of Philosophy in African Leadership Development
2.0 POSTGRADUATE BY RESEARCH REGULATIONS
These regulations and guidelines should be read in together with the specific Departmental regulations and guidelines and the general University guidelines, regulations and policies governing postgraduate research degrees. The following guidelines are intended to help MPhil/PhD students, supervisors, funders and stakeholders on the different administrative and academic issues relating to doctoral studies.
3.0 DEFINITION OF TERMS
Dissertation A dissertation is a comprehensive and in-depth research project typically undertaken as a requirement for obtaining a doctoral degree. It is a substantial piece of original scholarly work that contributes new knowledge or insights to a specific
field of study.
PhD or Doctoral Studies In most fields of study, doctoral studies, also known as PhD studies and Doctor of Science, Doctor of Education, Doctor of Engineering, Doctor of Technology, represent the pinnacle of academic education and research. A PhD degree is usually sought after by those who want to advance knowledge through original research and become authorities in a particular field.
Mentorship A relationship between a PhD student (the mentee) and a more seasoned academic or researcher (the mentor) is called mentorship. The mentor offers direction, encouragement and advice throughout the mentee's PhD journey to help with academic and professional growth.
Supervisor A supervisor is an experienced academic or researcher who mentors and supports a doctoral student during their doctoral research. They are also called research advisors, promoters, or doctoral supervisors.
Co-Supervisor A co-supervisor sometimes referred to as a co-advisor or secondary supervisor, is an additional researcher or academic who works with a PhD student to guide and support them during their doctoral research in addition to the primary Supervisor.
Ethical clearance Also known as research ethics approval or ethical approval, is a Procedure that guarantees that research carried out for doctoral degrees complies with ethical norms and guidelines. It entails obtaining formal approval from an ethics review
board or committee to guarantee that the research will be carried out ethically and with consideration for the rights, well-being and dignity of the study participants.
Examiner An examiner refers to an individual who assesses and evaluates a candidate's PhD thesis. Examiners play a crucial role in the final examination process and in determining whether the candidate has met the requirements for the award of a PhD degree.
External Examiner Refers to an individual not affiliated with the candidate's Institution or academic Department and is appointed to assess and evaluate the PhD thesis. The external Examiner is crucial in providing an impartial and independent evaluation of the
candidate's research work.
Internal Examiner Refers to an individual affiliated with the candidate's institution or academic Department and is appointed to assess and evaluate the PhD thesis or Dissertation. The internal Examiner is critical in evaluating the candidate's research work and
providing an expert perspective from within the institution.
PhD Student Refers to an individual pursuing a doctoral degree and actively engaged in doctoral-level research and academic activities.
Doctorateness Is explained using four core competencies, i.e.,
(a) reflective practice (the demonstration of subject mastery, knowledge of theory, concepts and practices),
(b) productive knowledge (demonstration of creative, practical, and informed
decisions essential to address a problem)
(c) situational knowledge (demonstration of knowledge, skills, and attributes to examine and understand complex scenarios) and
(d) professional skills (demonstration of soft skills to manage a complex project and communicate complex results).
Attendees Refer to individuals present during the defence or presentation of the Thesis.
4.0 ADMISSION
- Criteria and admission procedure
4.1.1 Normally, to enrol in PhD studies, one should hold a good Master's Degree in that field or closely related field in which they want to pursue studies.
- In special circumstances, a student pursuing a Master of Philosophy Degree/ research based Master’s Degree may apply for conversion of their studies to PhD after they have spent at least TWO years and there is novelty in the research as recommended by the supervisor, higher degrees committee and Academic Board and approved by the Senate.
- It should be noted that the conversion process is not an automatic entry process and the student should demonstrate work covered in the first two years has scope to be broadened and meets PhD thresholds in terms of doctorateness of the material covered.
4.2 Application and Selection Process
4.2.1 The application process is open throughout the year.
4.2.2 The applicant submits a concept note to the department/ school they wish to enrol with and the Departmental/ School boards consider this and make recommendations to the applicant who will then be invited to pitch their
ideas orally to these boards.
4.2.3 The Departmental Board deliberates on the presentation and makes a decision to either accept the concept note or request for further revisions before recommending to the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee.
4.2.4 The Faculty Higher Degrees Committee shall deliberate on the concept note before forwarding to the Academic Board.
4.2.5 If the concept note is approved by the Academic Board the prospective student is granted provisional registration while working on the full proposal.
4.3 Registration
4.3.1 The applicant, completes an application form and is provisionally registered with the University through the formal admission processes.
4.3.2 The provisionally registered student, shall submit a full proposal within six months to be fully registered as a doctoral student
4.3.3 The doctoral student shall register once every year
4.3.4 The doctoral student shall submit a progress report every six months.
4.4 Appointment of Supervisor (s)
4.1.1 On provisional registration the Student shall be allocated a supervisor (s)
4.1.2 The Academic Board shall ratify the appointment of the Supervisor (s) recommended by the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee
4.5 Duration of PhD Studies
4.5.1 The full-time PhD shall NORMALLY take a minimum of THREE (3) years and a maximum of FIVE (5) years to complete
4.5.2 The part-time PhD studies shall normally take a minimum of FOUR (4) years and a maximum of SIX (6) years to complete.
4.5.3 Where necessary, The PhD student shall be allowed to formally apply for a one-year extension beyond the stipulated timeframes through the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee and the Academic Board.
5.0 STUDENT ORIENTATION AND MENTORSHIP
5.1 PhD Students' Orientation
5.1.1 The Department shall conduct an orientation session for all PhD candidates enrolled with the University
5.1.2 The orientation shall equip candidates with the knowledge, tools, and assistance they need to successfully navigate their PhD studies and make them aware of the available support services at their disposal.
5.2 Rules, Regulations and Code of Conduct for PhD Training
PhD candidates shall be bound by the general University rules and regulations and the code of conduct as outlined in the University General Regulations.
5.3 Mentorship
The appointed Supervisor(s), shall become the student's academic mentor and should engage the student and provide a conducive environment for the student to develop into an independent researcher.
6.0 MONITORING AND FEEDBACK MECHANISMS
6.1 The student supervisor agreement
6.1.1 The PhD student and the Supervisor(s) shall sign an agreement to guide conduct
6.1.2 Any grievances that arise between the two parties would be reported to the Department and if no resolution is reached, escalated to the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee and if it is not resolved, further escalated to Academic Board, which would make a recommendation to Senate that would be adopted.
6.2 Work plans and Feedback
6.2.1 The student and the Supervisor (s) would develop and agree on a feasible and realistic work plan with timelines for feedback.
6.2.2 Both parties shall abide by this agreed work plan and perhaps have plans to make up for lost time in case of eventualities beyond both parties' control.
6.3 Progress Reports
A registered student shall submit progress reports every six months signed by the Supervisor (s), using a prescribed format to the Department for subsequent discussion at the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee to inform progress and challenges faced by the student.
7.0 TYPES OF PHD THESES
To note that for all the three types of PhDs, a Thesis, in a prescribed format, shall be submitted for examination
7.1 Traditional Monograph
The student presents their research question, methodology, analysis, findings and conclusions in an extensive document. It usually consists of multiple chapters arranged into sections and has a linear narrative structure.
7.2 Publication
7.2.1 A particular kind of thesis in which the main body of the thesis is a compilation of the PhD student's published or accepted articles in peer reviewed accredited journals.
7.2.2 Usually, based on their research, these papers have either been published already or are in press peer-reviewed accredited journals.
7.2.3 A student using this format should have published at least two papers of/from their work for them to be awarded the doctorate.
7.3 Hybrid (Combination of Monograph and Publication)
7.3.1 Blends components from the traditional monograph and some manuscripts based on the results to produce a special structure that best fits the goals and subject of the study. In this format, at least TWO manuscripts should be published for one to be awarded the degree.
7.4 Submission for Examination
7.4.1 Presentation format
The format for drafting and presenting a thesis would vary with the requirements of the Faculties/Departments where the student is enrolled. Therefore, the student must access and read the faculty/departmental guidelines.
7.5 Submission of Thesis
7.5.1 The student is expected to submit a draft thesis to the Supervisor(s) for review and guidance.
7.5.2 Once the Supervisor (s) are satisfied that all the requirements have been met, they give the go-ahead for the student to submit the final thesis to the Department/School where the student is registered.
7.6 Appointment of Examiners
7.6.1 The Department where the student is registered would identify THREE (3) suitable potential examiners, preferably, TWO (2) of whom will be external and ONE (1) internal.
7.6.2 The THREE (3) examiners' names and detailed Curriculum Vitaes will be forwarded to the Faculty Higher Degrees Committees for discussion and recommendation to the Academic Board for approval.
7.6.3 Upon approval, the Examination Office would draw up contracts and engage the services of the examiners.
7.6.4 It should be noted that to speed up appointing examiners, the student, with the guidance of the Supervisor(s), should submit an "intention to submit a dissertation for examination" at least THREE (3) months before the submission date to kick start the process of soliciting for examiners.
7.6.5 Upon submission, examiners are given a maximum of SIX (6) weeks to assess the Dissertation and give recommendations.
7.6.6 The Examiners would remain anonymous to the candidate.
7.7 Examiners Reports and Recommendations
After examining the thesis, examiners should give ONE (1) recommendation chosen from the following FIVE (5) outcomes:
- a) Pass without any corrections
- b) Pass subject to minor Corrections to the satisfaction of the Supervisor.
- c) Pass subject to major corrections to the satisfaction of the Supervisor and the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee.
- d) Deferred for resubmission and re-examination.
- e) Fail
7.8 Discussion of Examiners’ Reports
7.8.1 The examiners’ reports will be tabled at the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee.
7.8.2 The examination outcome and recommendations made by the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee shall be forwarded to the Academic Board.
7.8.3 For a candidate to be called for an oral examination, TWO (2) of the THREE (3) examiners should have passed the thesis under categories (a) to (c).
7.8.4 A PhD candidate who fails shall not be allowed to repeat.
7.9 Attending to the Examiner's Comments
A candidate who would have been awarded category: -
- a) by two examiners would be called for oral examination comments raised by Examiners would be forwarded to the Candidates and if granted, a student who has been invited to revise their Thesis under b-d by at least TWO (2) of the THREE (3) examiners would be allowed to revise their work and resubmit as per the outcomes
stipulated in the specific categories.
7.10 Oral Examination
7.10.1 A student who has been deemed to have provisionally passed under categories (a) to (c) by at least TWO of the THREE examiners would be called for Oral Examination after the revisions have been done to the satisfaction of the different Boards, Faculty Higher Degrees Committees and Academic Board.
7.10.2 A candidate provisionally passed under categories (a) to (c) shall be given a maximum of THREE (3) months to attend to corrections.
4.10.3 The oral Examination panel shall comprise one Examiner the Dean of the Faculty, The Chairperson of the Department, a supporting member from that Department and at least ONE member from a supporting Department, other Experts within the Faculty knowledgeable about the subject area.
7.10.4 The oral examination would have two sessions:
7.10.5 The candidate would be given between 30 to 45 minutes to present, and after the presentation, the general attendees would be allowed to ask and comment on the student's research.
7.10.6 The second session would involve the examination of the candidate behind closed doors with the appointed Panel of Examiners.
7.10.7 The Supervisor(s) shall not be allowed to make any contributions in the oral examination of the candidate
7.10.8 The Examiner in the panel shall ascertain whether the candidate indeed did the work and guide the panel on the final decision.
7.11 Completion and Graduation
After the Oral examination the Panel makes a recommendation to the Faculty Higher Degrees Committee which shall make final recommends to the Academic Board.
8.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE
8.1 Research Ethics
8.1.1 High research integrity standards are expected as the student attains set thresholds through the PhD journey.
8.1.2 Set principles on best practices for studies dealing with humans and animals should be observed.
8.1.3 The University has an Institutional Review Board that would grant ethical clearance for such studies.
8.2 Plagiarism
8.2.1 In PhD studies, plagiarism is strictly forbidden and is considered a serious academic integrity breach that can result in disciplinary actions and programmer termination.
8.2.2 Every candidate shall be required to subject their work to a recognized and acceptable an anti-plagiarism software and the report generated there from shall accompany the submission.
8.3 Institutional Repository
8.3.1 The passed and corrected final Thesis will be uploaded to the NUST Institutional Repository and made accessible to the general public.
8.3.2 The candidates are encouraged to maintain high standards of integrity and not put the institution's name into disrepute.
9.0 COMPLAINTS AND APPEALS
9.1 Withholding or Revocation of a PhD Degree
9.1.1 A qualification can be withheld if there are suspicions of academic dishonesty pending a full investigation by the University.
9.1.2 The awarded qualification may be revoked if suspected cases of academic dishonesty are proved beyond reasonable doubt.
9.2 Appealing a decision made by the Academic Board
9.2.1 The aggrieved student shall have the right to appeal the decision of the Academic Board.
9.2.2 Such appeals shall be lodged within 14 days after the publication of the PhD results
9.2.3 The appeal would be considered by an independent Appeals Committee set up by the University to decide on the matter.