Thesis review and final examination
SUPERVISORS & COORDINATORS
Thesis review and final examination
Coordinate completion of the doctoral career, external thesis evaluation, appointment of the final examination committee and organisation of the public defence.
IMPORTANT
Verify the rules applicable to the candidate’s cycle and Programme
Deadlines, thesis-submission requirements, reviewer arrangements, committee composition and examination procedures may differ for earlier cycles, National PhD Programmes, joint programmes, co-tutelle arrangements and programmes governed by specific international agreements.
01 — Final verification of the doctoral career
Before adopting the final academic decision, verify that the candidate has completed the research, training and other requirements applicable to the doctoral position.
| Area to verify | Required check |
|---|---|
| Research activities | Completion of the research project and achievement of the expected scientific objectives. |
| Training requirements | Completion of the required transversal and Programme-specific activities and credits. |
| Mobility | Completion and certification of any mobility requirement applying to the candidate. |
| Annual evaluations | Completion of the annual reports and positive progression decisions required during the Programme. |
| Funding obligations | Completion of reports, milestones or additional obligations attached to the funded position. |
| Administrative position | Resolution of any pending suspension, extension or other career issue affecting completion of the Programme. |
02 — Academic decision at the end of the Programme
At the end of the final year, the Academic Board evaluates the research activity carried out during that year and throughout the entire PhD Programme and decides whether the candidate may proceed to the final examination procedure.
| Decision content | Information to record |
|---|---|
| Candidate | Name, cycle, PhD Programme, curriculum and research topic. |
| Career completion | Confirmation that the applicable research, training and mobility requirements have been fulfilled. |
| Overall assessment | Overall written assessment of the activities carried out throughout the doctoral Programme. |
| Admission decision | Formal admission or non-admission to the final examination procedure. |
| Transmission | Communication to the candidate through the Programme Coordinator and transmission of the decision to SAS. |
THESIS SUBMISSION
03 — Preparation and electronic submission of the thesis
The Supervisor should verify that the thesis is scientifically complete and complies with the academic, editorial and funding requirements applicable to the candidate.
| Thesis element | Requirement |
|---|---|
| Content | Written dissertation or graphic work presenting the doctoral research and its original contribution. |
| Language | Usually written in English or, in any case, accompanied by a detailed summary in English. |
| Title page | Use the current UNICAM title-page model and include the required institutional information. |
| Funding information | Include any mandatory logos, acknowledgements, project codes and funding statements. |
| Activity report | Attach the descriptive report of activities completed during the PhD and the list of publications or research outputs. |
| Cycle XLI deadline | Within 45 days following the end of the final year, under the Regulations applicable from Cycle XLI. |
| Earlier cycles | Verify the deadline established by the regulation applicable to the candidate’s admission cycle. |
The Advanced Studies Office communicates the operational submission procedure and any additional documents required for the relevant examination cycle.
Open the Thesis Submission portal → Thesis guidance and template →
04 — Identification of external evaluators
The thesis must be evaluated by at least two professors or expert researchers with appropriate scientific expertise who do not belong to UNICAM’s tenured staff.
The Programme Coordinator and Academic Board should provide the information required by the applicable procedure so that the proposed reviewers can be assessed and formally identified by the competent SAS body.
| Information required | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Full name and academic role | Correct identification for the formal procedure and communications. |
| Institution and department | Verification of institutional affiliation and external status. |
| Institutional email | Formal transmission of the thesis and review instructions. |
| Scientific profile | Verification of high-level expertise relevant to the thesis. |
| Independence | Identification of relationships or circumstances that could compromise the independence of the review. |
When the reviewer’s affiliation, qualification or independence is uncertain, check the proposed name with the Advanced Studies Office before the Academic Board completes the proposal.
05 — Formal transmission and external review
The formal thesis version and the Academic Board’s overall assessment are transmitted to the external evaluators through the procedure managed by SAS.
| Participant | Responsibility |
|---|---|
| Advanced Studies Office / SAS | Coordinates formal transmission of the thesis and communicates the review procedure. |
| External evaluator | Examines the thesis independently and submits an analytical written assessment. |
| Supervisor and Programme Coordinator | Remain available for procedural clarification but should not independently transmit unofficial or different thesis versions once the formal review has started. |
| Candidate | Follows the formal instructions received concerning the outcome and any required revision. |
EXTERNAL REVIEW
06 — Outcomes of the external evaluation
Each external evaluator expresses an analytical written judgment on the thesis and proposes the procedural outcome.
| Formal outcome | Meaning | Next step |
|---|---|---|
| Admission to the final examination | The thesis may proceed to the public defence. The assessment may nevertheless contain comments or recommendations. | Prepare the version to be transmitted to the final examination committee, taking any comments into account where appropriate. |
| Postponement for significant revisions | The reviewers consider significant additions or corrections necessary. | Revise the thesis within the period indicated, which cannot exceed six months under the current Regulations. |
07 — Significant revisions and resubmission
Under the Regulations applicable from Cycle XLI, where significant additions or corrections are required, the public defence may be postponed for a period not exceeding six months.
| Step | Responsible person or body | Action |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Candidate and Supervisor | Plan the revision in response to the analytical assessments. |
| 2 | Candidate | Completes the requested additions and corrections within the permitted period. |
| 3 | Candidate / Advanced Studies Office | Submit and formally transmit the revised thesis through the procedure communicated by the Office. |
| 4 | Same external evaluators | Examine the revised thesis and issue a new opinion in light of the additions or corrections made. |
| 5 | SAS | Continues the final examination procedure with the updated evaluations. |
At the end of the permitted revision period, the thesis is in any case admitted to public discussion, accompanied by the new opinion of the same external evaluators.
08 — Proposal of the final examination committee
Once the external review has been completed, the Academic Board proposes the final examination committee in accordance with the rules applicable to the candidate’s Programme.
| Proposal requirement | Current general rule |
|---|---|
| Names proposed | At least four teachers: three full members and one alternate. |
| Personal details | Full name, academic title and role. |
| Affiliation | Institution, department, country and relationship with the PhD Programme. |
| Contact information | Institutional email and other information required for the appointment procedure. |
| Eligibility check | Composition rules and incompatibilities must be verified before the proposal is transmitted. |
FINAL EXAMINATION COMMITTEE
09 — Committee composition requirements
For standard UNICAM PhD Programmes governed by the Regulations applicable from Cycle XLI, the final examination committee must comply with the following composition rules.
| Requirement | Current rule |
|---|---|
| External to the institutional headquarters | At least two-thirds of the committee. |
| Members belonging to participating entities | No more than one-third of the committee. |
| Members of academic origin | At least two-thirds of the committee. |
| Gender balance | To be taken into account where possible. |
| Additional experts | The committee may be supplemented by no more than two experts from public or private research bodies or departments, including foreign institutions. |
National, joint and international PhD Programmes may follow the committee arrangements established by their specific agreements or regulations.
INCOMPATIBILITIES
10 — Who cannot be appointed to the committee?
| Person or relationship | Eligibility under the current Regulations |
|---|---|
| Supervisor or co-supervisor | Cannot be appointed. |
| External evaluator of the candidate’s thesis | Cannot be appointed. |
| Co-author with the candidate on scientific publications during the PhD Programme | Cannot be appointed. |
| Co-author with the candidate during the previous five years | Cannot be appointed. |
| Other possible conflict of interest | Must be reported and assessed before the proposal is completed. |
When the same committee examines more than one candidate, incompatibilities must be checked separately in relation to each thesis and each candidate.
11 — Formal appointment and examination notice
The final examination committee is formally appointed by the Director of SAS following the Academic Board proposal and verification of its composition and eligibility.
| Formal step | Required action |
|---|---|
| Administrative verification | Check composition, affiliations, incompatibilities and completeness of the proposal. |
| Appointment | Adoption of the formal appointment measure by the Director of SAS. |
| Organisation | Coordinate member availability and determine the date, time, venue and arrangements for the session. |
| Official notice | The examination schedule must be communicated at least 20 days before the examination under the current Regulations. |
| Examination documents | The committee receives the thesis, the Academic Board’s overall assessment and the external evaluators’ judgments. |
12 — Public defence, minutes and final outcome
Under the current general Regulations, the final examination is held in person and consists of the public discussion of the written dissertation or graphic work.
| Examination phase | Committee action |
|---|---|
| Preliminary examination | Considers the thesis, Academic Board assessment and external evaluators’ judgments. |
| Public discussion | Conducts the discussion with the candidate and assesses the defence. |
| Final decision | Determines whether the candidate has passed the final examination. |
| Written assessment | Expresses a collective written opinion for each candidate. |
| Honours | May be awarded unanimously in the presence of results of particular scientific importance. |
| Minutes | Completes the official report on the examination procedure and the assessment of each candidate. |
EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
The ordinary final examination cannot be repeated. If documented illness or force majeure prevents the candidate from attending on the scheduled date, the candidate may request another examination date from the Director of SAS in accordance with the applicable Regulations.
13 — Confidentiality, intellectual property and embargo
The candidate and Supervisor should identify confidentiality, patent, industrial-property or intellectual-property issues before the thesis is formally submitted and transmitted to the external evaluators.
| Issue | Required action |
|---|---|
| Confidential research information | Verify whether confidentiality undertakings or special transmission arrangements are necessary. |
| Potential patent or protectable result | Contact the competent University office before public disclosure. |
| Funded or jointly developed results | Check the relevant project, partnership or co-tutelle agreement. |
| Embargo | Where justified for the protection and exploitation of intellectual or industrial property, delayed open access may be requested for a period not exceeding 18 months under the current Regulations. |
| Final deposit | Complete the institutional archiving procedure required for the degree documentation. |
Confidentiality and intellectual property → Embargo and thesis guidance →
14 — Doctor Europaeus
A possible Doctor Europaeus certification should be planned well before the external reviewers and final examination committee are identified.
Verify in advance:
- the international research period completed by the candidate;
- the institutional origin of the thesis evaluators;
- the international composition required for the final examination committee;
- the language requirements applying to the thesis and public defence;
- the documentation needed to demonstrate fulfilment of all applicable conditions.
The current UNICAM Regulations refer to the applicable European framework. The specific requirements should therefore be checked with the Advanced Studies Office before reviewers and committee members are formally identified.
International dimension → Verify Doctor Europaeus requirements →
15 — Operational workflow
| Step | Phase | Required action |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Career verification | Verify completion of research, training, mobility and position-specific obligations. |
| 2 | Academic Board decision | Adopt the overall assessment and decision concerning admission to the final examination procedure. |
| 3 | Thesis submission | Submit the thesis and required documentation through the dedicated procedure. |
| 4 | External evaluators | Identify at least two qualified external evaluators through the applicable SAS procedure. |
| 5 | External review | Receive the analytical assessments and manage any revision period. |
| 6 | Committee proposal | Verify composition and incompatibilities before Academic Board approval. |
| 7 | Formal appointment | Transmit the complete proposal in time for appointment by the Director of SAS. |
| 8 | Examination organisation | Define the session and allow the required minimum notice period. |
| 9 | Public defence | Conduct the examination and complete the formal minutes and collective assessment. |
| 10 | Final deposit | Complete institutional archiving and any authorised embargo procedure. |
OPERATIONAL PRINCIPLE
Coordinate every stage before the Academic Board meeting
Career completion, admission, reviewer eligibility, thesis submission, committee composition and examination arrangements are connected stages. Missing or incomplete information at one stage may delay the entire final examination procedure.
ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT
Need support before proposing reviewers or committee members?
Contact the Advanced Studies Office before the Academic Board meeting when deadlines, reviewer eligibility, committee composition, conflicts of interest, Doctor Europaeus requirements or examination arrangements are uncertain.