Mid-Point Review - Milestone 2
The purpose of the Mid-Point Review (Milestone 2) purpose is to:
- ensure the HDR Candidate's progress since Confirmation remains satisfactory, and that they have met any requirements agreed to as part of the Confirmation process;
- confirm the HDR Candidate is able to demonstrate command of their research both in written and oral forms;
- ensure the HDR Candidate receives independent written feedback and direction on any issues that may need to be addressed.
- ensure the HDR Candidate remains on track to complete their research project by their thesis submission date;
- assess whether the HDR Candidate's research skills are developing appropriately, and where applicable, the candidate has completed, or is in the process of completing, training activities or coursework units as per their program requirements;
- confirm whether any changes to the HDR Candidate's research program necessitate changes to ethics approvals, IP assignment etc.;
- confirm that the HDR Candidate continues to demonstrate understanding of, and the capacity to adhere to, the University's applicable policies and procedures as they relate to research and academic integrity; and
- ensure the resources available to the HDR Candidate, including supervision and facilities, are adequate for the purpose of completion of the degree within the required time frame
All candidates should refer to the document requirements as listed in the Milestone Required Documents section. Documents are to be received by the Milestone Review Panel twenty (20) working days prior to the panel meeting. To demonstrate that you are mid-way to finishing your thesis, all candidates must submit an updated progress report and a timetable for completion. The Milestone Review Panel considers the report in relation to goals set, obstacles encountered, and disciplinary standards. You must also submit evidence that you have received feedback on at least one piece of written work (minimum 2,500 words) from a discipline representative. The writing sample submitted for review must be new work produced since confirmation milestone and it must be material from or directly relevant to the thesis. For example, this might take the form of a referee’s report on a journal article based on a thesis chapter, editorial feedback on a book chapter or a sample of creative writing from the thesis, or an email containing feedback on a draft thesis chapter from an academic mentor or a member of a disciplinary research network. This demonstrates that you have been developing your ability to communicate your research to a wider audience and you have received feedback on your research project and writing from outside the supervision team. The writing sample itself does not need to be submitted to the committee for review. For Master of Philosophy candidates applying to transfer to the PhD program or where further input is recommended, the milestone panel may require you to submit a thesis chapter for review by an expert reader. The oral presentation demonstrates that you are developing your ability to communicate your research to a wider audience. It provides the opportunity to receive constructive feedback on your research project and presentation skills from outside the supervision team. Between confirmation and mid-point review, you must make at least one oral presentation of your research to a wider audience than the supervision team. For example, this might include presenting at a school seminar, participating in the Three Minute Thesis competition, the Research Pathways postgraduate conference, or another conference or symposium, delivering a lecture or talk related to your research, or presenting work at another meeting of scholarly or professional associates.Progress Report Information
The milestone review panel do not have to attend the oral presentation, but you must submit evidence of the presentation (e.g., conference program) and report on the feedback you received and how it informed the development of your project.
