Advanced Search

Regulations Concerning The Philosophiae Doctor Degree (Phd) At Vid University College

Original Language Title: Forskrift om graden philosophiae doctor (ph.d.) ved VID vitenskapelige høgskole

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now for only USD$40 per month.
Regulations concerning the philosophiae doctor degree (PhD) at VID scientific college

Date FOR-2015-12-11-1666

Affairs Ministry

Published In 2015 Booklet 15

Commencement 01/01/2016



FOR-2011-08-27-1547, TO-2014-04-25-953



LOV-2005-04-01-15-3-3, LOV-2005-04-01-15-section 3-5, LOV-2005-04-01-15-§3-6, legislation 2005-04-01-15-§3-7, LOV-2005-04-01-15-§3-9, LOV-2005-04-01-15-§4-7, LAW-2005-04-01 -15-§4-13, LOV-2005-04-01-15-5-2, LOV-2005-04-01-15-5-3

23.12.2015 kl. 15.30

Short Title
Regulations for PhD degree by VID

Chapter Overview:

Part 1. Introductory provisions (§§ 1-4)
Part 2. Admission, appointment and termination before the agreed date (§§ 5-6)
Part 3. Implementation (§§ 7-11)
Part 4. Completion (§§ 12-22)
Part 5. Appeals (§23)
Part 6. Joint degrees and cotutelle agreements (Section 24)
Part 7. Guidelines, supplementary provisions and entry into force (§§ 25-26)

Adopted by the Board of VID university college 11 December 2015 pursuant to Act 1 April 2005 no. 15 relating to Universities and Colleges (Universities and Colleges Act) § 3-3, § 3-5, § 3- 6, § 3-7, § 3-9, § 4-7, § 4-13, § 5-2 and § 5-3.

Part 1. Introductory provisions

§ 1. Scope of the Regulations These regulations apply to all education leading to the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) at VID university college. The regulations pertain to admission to, and completion of the PhD program, including joint degrees and cotutelle.

§ 2. Objectives, scope and content of the PhD program PhD program at VID scientific college to qualify for research activities of international standard and for other kinds of work that requires a high level of scientific insight and analytical thinking, consistent with good scientific practices and ethical standards.
PhD program will provide doctoral students with the knowledge, skills and competencies in line with the 3rd cycle in the national qualifications framework for higher education.
PhD education is standardized to three (3) years full-time study and includes an educational component of at least 30 credits.
PhD education main component is an independent research project conducted under active supervision.
PhD degree is awarded on the basis of:

recognized scientific thesis

Approved completion of the course section, or any other approved academic training or qualification

approved trial lecture on a given topic

Approved public defense (disputation).

§ 3. Responsibility. for the PhD program, the Board of VID university college has the overall responsibility for the PhD program. BUC Rector of the Board delegated authority to administer PhD studies and make the decisions necessary within the scope of this regulation.

§ 4. Quality assurance PhD program covered by the college's quality system, cf. § 9.

Part 2. Admission, appointment and termination before the agreed time

§ 5. Admission, contract period and ending before the agreed time § 1.5. Conditions for admission
For admission to the PhD program normally requires applicants to have at least five-year basic education (ie at least master's or equivalent qualification); compare the descriptions in the qualification framework's second cycle. The college may after special consideration approve other equivalent education for admission. There may be a requirement that applicants undergo special courses and / or pass a special test before admission.
The application should include:

Documentation for the education that will form the basis for recording.

Project comprising:

Professional presentation of the project



Documentation of specific needs for technical and material resources

Plans for visits to other institutions

Academic communication

Information concerning any intellectual property restrictions to protect the rights of others.

Plan for training component, including training that is aimed at general competence in accordance with the qualifications framework.

Proposal at least one supervisor and the nature of association with active research.

An account of any legal and ethical issues that the project site and how these can be clarified.

The college determines application and may lay claim to additional documentation.

PhD student and supervisor should as quickly as possible and no later than three (3) months after the shootings go through the project description and assess the need for adjustments. The project description should explain issues are the choice of theory and method.
Academy may establish requirements for residency.
Must normally apply for admission to the PhD program within three (3) months after the commencement of the research project that will culminate in the PhD degree. If there is less than one (1) year of full-time work on a research project at the application stage, the applicant must be rejected, cf. § 5-3.
§ 5-2. Infrastructure
doctoral student must have the necessary infrastructure for the research program. The decision of what is considered necessary infrastructure for implementation, taken by the college. For PhD students with external funding or workplace, the agreement between the institution and the external party in connection with the research project. Such agreement shall normally be present at the time the formal decision of the relevant doctoral student made, or immediately thereafter.
§ 5-3. Admissions Decisions
Decisions on admission are based on an overall assessment of the application. By advertised recruitment positions may stipulate criteria for ranking qualified applicants.
In the decision, at least one supervisor is appointed, responsible for dealing with other needs outlined in the application, and the period determined by start and end date. Any extension of the contract period must be related to the rights of employees or clarified in particular in relation to the candidate's funding base.
Admission shall be denied if:

agreements with external third parties to prevent publication and public defense.

The intellectual property agreements that have been signed are so unreasonable that the university should not participate in the project.

The applicant will not be able to fulfill the requirement that at least one year of the project will be implemented after the person is admitted to the PhD program, cf. § 5-1.

§ 5-4. Term
PhD education is standardized to three (3) years full-time study. The college may lay down rules on maximum amount of time for carrying out statutory leave and compulsory labor.
By lawful disruption extended contract period accordingly.
The college can extend the contract period upon application.
By granted extension college may impose further conditions.
After recording period terminates the rights and obligations in accordance with the PhD agreement, so that the student may lose their right to supervision, course participation and access to university college's infrastructure. Doctoral student can still apply for permission to submit the thesis for evaluation for the PhD degree.
§ 5-5. Termination before the prescribed time
Voluntary termination
It may be agreed with the PhD student the PhD program before the prescribed time. Upon such termination of the PhD program shall specify in writing how issues related to employment, funding, rights to results. to be arranged.
If voluntary termination is due to the candidate's desire to change projects or transfer to other doctoral study, he shall apply for admission on the basis of the new project.
Force Quit:
Academy may decide to terminate the PhD education before the agreed time. Such termination may be imposed if one or more of the following conditions exist:
1. Force Quit by delay or lack of progress
When one or more of the following conditions are satisfied, the institution may decide to terminate the PhD education:

Material delay in the implementation of the training component.

Repeatedly or materially breaches by the candidate in information, follow-up or reporting requirements, including failure to submit a progress report, cf. § 9.

Delay in the progress of the research project is of such a nature as to raise doubts about the candidate's ability to complete the project within the agreed time.

Force Quit pursuant to these rules can only be adopted if the propulsion failure or delay is caused as a doctoral student has control.

Decision on involuntary termination by delay or lack of progress made by the college. Appeals against decisions dealt with by the HUC Appeals.

2. Involuntary termination of cheating on examinations or tests during the PhD program

By cheating on examinations or tests during the PhD program, the institution may adopt annulment, ref. Universities and Colleges Act § 4-7. If the situation or conditions are so severe that it is regarded as misconduct, cf. Same Act § 4-13 (1), cf. Ethics Act § 5, second paragraph, the institution may decide to terminate.
Decision on involuntary termination of cheating made by the HUC Appeals.
Appeals Tribunal's decision may be appealed to the Joint Appeals Board, ref. Universities and Colleges Act § 5-1 (7) and associated regulations.
3. Involuntary termination of academic dishonesty
If a doctoral student who is guilty of scientific misconduct, cf. Universities and Colleges Act § 4-13 (1), cf. Ethics Act § 5, paragraph 2, the college decide to terminate.
Decision on involuntary termination due to academic misconduct made by the HUC Appeals.
Appeal against such decisions handled by the Ministry or a special appeals committee appointed by the Ministry in accordance. Universities and Colleges Act § 4-13 (1).
Termination and dismissal
Fellows may be dismissed from his position when it is objectively justified in undertaking, the employer or the employee, cf.. Working Environment Act.

§ 6. PhD Admission to the College PhD program formalized in a written agreement entered into between the PhD student, supervisors and college. The agreement regulates the rights and duties of the admission period and shall ensure that the student participates actively in a research environment and facilitate the PhD program to be implemented on time. It prepared a private agreement form.
For doctoral students with funding, employment or similar contribution from an external party, will be entered into a separate agreement between the PhD student, the college and the external party to regulate working conditions, including time to doctoral work, assets and the need for equipment.
In cases where the PhD student to be affiliated with foreign institutions shall be drawn up an agreement on the rights, duties and expectations the two parties themselves.

Part 3. Implementation

§ 7. Supervision The work on the doctoral dissertation shall be conducted under individual supervision. The college and the supervisor (s) shall together ensure that the student can participate in an active research.
§ 7-1. Appointment of supervisors
doctoral student should normally have two supervisors, one appointed principal supervisor. Supervisor should be appointed at the time of shooting.
The principal supervisor has the main academic responsibility for the PhD student. If appointed external supervisor shall be appointed supervisor of the college.
Supervisors are professionals who provide supervision and share the academic responsibility for the doctoral student with the main supervisor.
Disqualification in the Public Administration Act second chapter "About disqualification" (§ 6 - § 10) applies to supervisors.
All supervisors must hold a doctoral degree or equivalent qualification in the field and be active researchers. At least one of the appointed supervisors should have previous experience or training as supervisor of doctoral students.
Doctoral student and the supervisor may request that it appoint a new supervisor for the student. The supervisor may not withdraw until a new supervisor has been appointed. Disputes concerning the supervisor and the doctoral student's academic rights and duties may be brought by the parties for consideration and decision by the college.
§ 7-2. Supervisory
PhD student and supervisors should have regular contact. Supervisor is responsible for following up the doctoral student's academic development. The frequency of contact should be stated in the annual progress report, ref. § 9.
Supervisor is obliged to keep abreast of the progress of the doctoral student's work and consider it in relation to the project description schedule, ref. § 5-1.
Supervisor is obliged to follow up on technical matters that may cause a delay in the implementation of the research program, so that this can be completed within the stipulated time.
The supervisors will advise on the formulation and definition of topics and issues, discuss and assess hypotheses and methods, discuss results and their interpretation, discuss various aspects of production, including disposition, language, documentation, etc., And provide help for orientation in the literature and data in libraries, archives, etc. Moreover, supervisors should provide doctoral student guidance in ethical issues related to the thesis.

§ 8. Lesson § 8-1. Purpose, content and scope
PhD program should be structured so that it can be completed within the stipulated time frame. The contract period may be extended due to leave imposed by the doctoral student's rights of employees, cf. § 8-2.

VID university college is responsible for the training component, along with the thesis work, provide education of a high academic level and in accordance with international standards, with the implementation of a scientific work, training of scientific knowledge and introduction to research ethics, philosophy of science and scientific methods. Training shall together with the research work contribute to the achievement of the expected learning outcomes according to the national qualifications framework.
The college will offer doctoral student guidance on future career opportunities within and outside academia, including raising awareness about the skills doctoral student obtained through research work.
If the college does not provide all training, the conditions are right for the doctoral student participation in comparable courses at other institutions.
The training component must equal at least 30 credits, of which at least 20 credits should be taken after admission. Items to be included in the training, should not be more than two (2) years prior to admission.
The college determines the content of the training component. The training component must be completed and approved before submission of the dissertation. Application to change the approved training plan shall be prepared in consultation with the supervisor.
It may be exempted from part of the training component if the corresponding requirements are met by another unit or institution approved training.
Courses at PhD level at another institution must be approved in accordance with the provisions of the Act relating to universities and colleges, § 3-5, first paragraph.
§ 8-2. Doctoral student's rights during leave
Doctoral students who have parental leave from the PhD program, you can still attend classes and sit for exams in courses to be included as part of the doctoral student's academic training during the leave, in line with the National Insurance Act (the National Insurance Act ), Chapter 14, § 14-10, fourth paragraph, and NAV circular to § 14 to 10, the fourth paragraph of 18 December 2006 [R14-00-2-F15], as last amended on 1 June 2015.

§ 9. Reporting and mid-term evaluation § 9-1. Reporting
college's system of quality control includes measures to detect lack of progression to the dissertation and of educational products and deficiencies in supervision and procedures for following up any deficiencies in the PhD program. It should be reported by doctoral student and supervisor at least once per year.
PhD student and supervisor have an equal responsibility for reporting. Missing or insufficient progress reports by PhD student can lead to compulsory termination of doctoral program period, cf. § 5-5. Supervisors who fail to comply with their reporting requirements may have their supervisory responsibility rescinded.
The college may occasionally require special reporting.
§ 9-2. Midway evaluation
A mid-term evaluation of the doctoral thesis should normally take place in the third or fourth semester, or somewhat later for part-time projects. The PhD student will present their work and be evaluated by a group of at least two persons appointed by the college. Evaluation Group shall decide on the doctoral work professional status and progress, and will provide feedback to the doctoral student, the supervisor and the college.
If the evaluation group reported significant weaknesses of the research work shall be implemented to correct the situation.

§ 10. The PhD thesis § 10-1. Thesis requirements
dissertation must be an independent, scientific work that meets international standards with regard to ethical requirements, academic standards and methodology in the field.
Dissertation shall contribute to develop new knowledge and be at a level that it could be published or made public in a suitable format as part of the discipline's research-based knowledge.
Thesis may consist of a monograph or a compilation of several smaller works. If the dissertation consists of several smaller works, it will explain the relationship between them.
The college determines whether a thesis that is produced jointly by several, can be submitted for evaluation if the individual contributions can be identified.
If the dissertation or parts of it is the product of collaboration with other authors or collaborators, the doctoral student follow the norms for co-authorship that are generally accepted in the scientific community and in accordance with international standards. If the dissertation consists mainly of articles, the doctoral student normally be the first author of at least half of the articles.
In dissertations comprising works by several authors or collaborators, it shall be accompanied by a signed statement describing the candidate's efforts in each work.

The college determines which languages ​​may be used in the dissertation.
§ 10-2. Work not eligible
work or a part of a work that has been accepted as the basis for previous examinations or degrees, can not be accepted for evaluation unless it constitutes a minor part of a dissertation consisting of several related works. Data, analyzes or methods from previous degrees may be used as a basis for working with the PhD project.
Case of published papers can not be accepted as part of the thesis if the admission date is older than five (5) years from the date of publication. The college may grant exemptions from this requirement if absolutely extraordinary circumstances.
Thesis may be submitted for evaluation by only one educational institution, cf. § 13-1.

§ 11. Duty to report work results that have the potential for commercial exploitation Regulation of rights between collaborating institutions must be regulated by contract.
Employer Institution prevailing regulations shall form the basis for the notification doctoral students employed at the institution for research results with commercial potential made in employment.
For doctoral students with an external employer corresponding obligation stipulated in an agreement between the institution, the doctoral candidate and the external employer.
For doctoral students without an employer corresponding obligation stipulated in the admission agreement between the college and doctoral student.
The parts of the dissertation as a doctoral student alone holds the copyright and any other academic work resulting from the thesis and doctoral candidate alone holds the copyright, can gratuitously used in the preparation of copies for use in the college's research and teaching activities. For doctoral students who are not appointed by VID scientific college entered into a separate agreement on equivalent use. By such use shall doctoral student named such legislation and good practice.

Part 4. Completion

§ 12. Verdict § 12-1. Basis for evaluation
PhD degree is awarded on the basis of:

recognized scientific thesis

Approved completion of the course section, or any other approved academic training or qualification

approved trial lecture on a given topic

Approved public defense (disputation).

§ 12-2. Timings from filing for defense
Academy must strive that the time between submission of the dissertation are as short as possible. You should rarely go more than five (5) months from filing for disputation.
It is supervisor's responsibility to inform that the filing is imminent so that necessary preparations can start.

§ 13. Submission § 13-1. Thesis submission
Application for evaluation of the dissertation can be submitted until the training component is approved. Applications must be made to college.
As an application shall be accompanied by:

thesis in an approved format, in the form (paper, electronic) in the form that is determined and in sufficient number of copies, usually four (4).

Documentation of completed training component.

Documentation of necessary permits, cf. § 5-1.

Co-author declarations where this is required under § 10-1.

statement doctoral work submitted for evaluation for the first or second time.

statement that the dissertation has not been submitted for evaluation at another institution.

The application for the dissertation may be rejected if it is obvious that the thesis does not hold high enough scientific quality and will be rejected by a committee.
Thesis must be publicly available at least two weeks before the defense, ref. § 18-2.
§ 13-2. Processing the application
Academy will handle applications for evaluation of the dissertation. Applications that do not meet the requirements of § 13.1 shall be rejected.

§ 14. Appointment of evaluation committee when the application for the dissertation is approved, appoint the college an expert committee of at least three members who shall evaluate the dissertation and the disputation. Disqualification in the Public Administration Act § 6 applies to committee members.
Composition of the committee should normally be clarified by the filing date.
Appraisal committee shall normally be composed so that:

Both sexes are represented

At least two of the members are unrelated to VID scientific college

least one member does not have positions at Norwegian institutions

All members have a doctorate or equivalent qualification

The majority of the evaluation committee's external members.

If the criteria waived shall be given separately.
The college establishes procedures for the appointment. Committee will be justified and show how the composition covers the relevent fields. Chairman appointed from among its members or in addition to the committee members.
Appointed supervisor and others who have contributed to the dissertation may be a member of the committee or administer it.
Where required college may appoint a member to the adjudication.
Doctoral student shall be notified of the proposed composition of the committee and have the opportunity to submit written comments no later than one week after the proposal for the composition is the doctoral student.

§ 15. The adjudication committee § 15-1. Obtaining supplementary information
evaluation committee may require that the PhD student's source material and supplementary or clarifying information.
Evaluation committee may ask the supervisor to explain the supervision and thesis work.
§ 15-2. Revision of a submitted dissertation
evaluation committee may on the basis of the submitted thesis and any additional material, ref. § 15-1, recommending that it be authorized to minor revisions before a final recommendation is submitted. The Committee shall provide a concrete overview of the PhD student must restate in writing.
Permitted to a minor revision of the dissertation, shall be given a deadline for such revision which shall normally not be longer than three (3) months. It should also set a new deadline for submission of the committee's final recommendation. Adoption of the new deadline is final.
If the committee finds that fundamental changes to theory, hypotheses, material or methods are necessary for the work to be recommended for defense, the Committee shall reject the thesis.
§ 15-3. The evaluation committee
evaluation committee presents its recommendation as to whether the work is worthy of being defended for the PhD degree. Setting and any dissenting opinions must be substantiated.
Evaluation committee shall normally be within three (3) months after receiving the thesis. Committee allows reworking of the dissertation, a new period from the date the thesis again.
Evaluation committee submitted the college, which informs the doctoral student. Doctoral student given a deadline of ten (10) business days to submit written comments on the report. If the doctoral student does not wish to comment, the college immediately be notified in writing.
Doctoral student any comments should be sent college who make a decision in accordance with § 16
§ 15-4. Correction of formal errors in the dissertation
The submitted work can not be withdrawn until it is determined whether it is worthy of being defended for the PhD degree.
Doctoral student may after submission apply for permission to correct formal errors in the dissertation. The application must include a complete overview of the errors (errata) who wishes to correct. An application to correct formal errors must be submitted no later than four (4) weeks before the committee's deadline for delivering the setting and may only happen once.

§ 16. Treatment of the evaluation committee Academy decides, on the basis of the evaluation committee, decisions concerning the PhD thesis is worthy of defense.
Unanimous recommendation
If the committee is unanimous and college support this, decisions are made in accordance with the unanimous recommendation.
If the college finds that there are reasonable doubts as to whether the committee's unanimous recommendation shall be based shall be applied further clarification from the evaluation committee and / or appointed two new experts to make individual statements on the dissertation. Such clarifications or individual reports must be submitted to the PhD student, who is given the opportunity to comment.
Academy make a decision based on the committee and statements obtained.
Shared setting
If the committee is unanimous and the college supports the majority opinion, made decisions in accordance with the majority recommendation. If the committee is unanimous and the college supports minority opinion, it sought further clarification from the evaluation committee and / or appoint two new experts to make individual statements on the dissertation. Such clarifications or individual reports must be submitted to the PhD student, who is given the opportunity to comment. If even the experts agree with the majority in the original committee, this setting should be followed.

Doctoral student shall be notified of the outcome after treatment of new expert opinions.

§ 17 Resubmission A doctoral dissertation that has found worthy of defense may be resubmitted in a revised edition first six (6) months after the institution's decision. New evaluation can only take place once.
Doctoral student at resubmission statement that the dissertation had been evaluated previously and not been found worthy of defense.

§ 18. Publication of the dissertation § 18-1. Requirements for the printed thesis
When the dissertation is found worthy of defense, the doctoral student shall submit the dissertation to college in the approved format and the number of copies college decides. The PhD student must submit a brief summary of the thesis in electronic form in English and Norwegian. If the thesis is neither written in English or Norwegian, must also be accompanied by an abstract of the thesis language. The summary shall, like the thesis, published publicly.
§ 18-2. Publication
thesis must be publicly available no later than two (2) weeks before the date of the public defense. The thesis is made available in the form it was submitted for evaluation, or after revision based on the committee's preliminary comments, cf. § 15-2.
There shall be no restrictions on the publication of a doctoral thesis with the exception of a previously agreed to postpone the date of publication. External party may not require that all or part of the PhD thesis may not be published, cf. § 5-3.
When publishing dissertation, doctoral students follow current guidelines for crediting institutions. The general rule is that an institution should be entered as address in a publication if it has given an essential and significant contribution to or basis for an author's contribution to the published work. Same author must also other institutions that address if these in each case meets the requirements for participation.

§ 19. The PhD examination § 19.1. Trial lecture
After the thesis has been submitted, cf. § 15, the doctoral student lecture. The lecture is an independent part of the doctoral examination and should be on a given topic. Purpose is to test the candidate's ability to acquire knowledge beyond the thesis topic and the ability to convey in a lecture situation.
Title for the lecture announced to the PhD student ten (10) business days prior to the lecture. The topic of the lecture will deal with themes that may be related to, but go beyond the theme of the dissertation.
If the college chooses to hold the trial lecture in conjunction with the defense, provide adjudication theme for the lecture and conducts self assessment. If the two samples are judged separately, appoints college a committee for this which determines the subject of the trial lecture. At least one of the committee members shall be appointed in lecture committee.
The lecture will take place at the language of the dissertation unless the college approves another language.
HUC decides whether the trial lecture is approved or not. It shall be justified if the trial lecture is recommended fail.
Trial lecture must be passed before the defense can be held.
§ 19-2. Public defense (disputation)
public defense will take place after the trial lecture has been held and approved, and within two (2) months after the institution thesis worthy of defense.
Time and place of the public defense shall be announced at least ten (10) working days in advance.
The committee that originally evaluated the dissertation also the public defense. The public defense of the thesis language unless the college approves another language.
There are normally two opponents. These two shall be members of the evaluation committee, appointed by the college. In special cases, the appointment of opponents who have not been members of the committee.
The defense chaired by the Rector or the person authorized. The chairperson is a short account of the submission and evaluation of the thesis. Then the doctoral candidate for the purpose and results of the scientific research.
First opponent initiates opposition. Other opponent concludes the opposition.

It may fix a different tasks between opponents and between the candidate and the first opponent. After the first opponent has completed his opposition, given the other present opportunity to comment ex auditorio. Other opponent concludes the opposition and chairperson closes the proceedings. The adjudication committee submits a recommendation where it provides an account of the defense of the dissertation is considered. The setting must conclude that the defense has been approved or not approved. The setting should be justified if the defense is not recommended approved.

§ 20. Approval of the doctoral examination The college makes decisions on the approval of the doctoral examination on the basis of the evaluation committee.
If the trial lecture not be approved, it must be held a new trial lecture. A new trial lecture must be held on a new topic and no later than six (6) months after the first attempt. A new trial lecture may be held once. The lecture is assessed as far as possible by the same committee as the original, unless otherwise decided
If defense is not approved, the doctoral candidate may defend the dissertation once. New defense can be held no sooner than six (6) months and evaluated, if possible by the same committee as the original.

§ 21. Conferment and diploma On basis of the report that the educational component, the thesis and doctoral examination is approved, conferred doctoral student Philosophiae Doctor of College Board, and diplomas issued. The transcript shall be provided about the professional training PhD student has participated in. The college determines what additional information to be included in the diploma.

§ 22. Appendix to the diploma (Diploma Supplement) shall issue a doctoral diploma in line with current guidelines for Diploma Supplement.

Part 5. Appeals

§ 23. Appeals § 23.1. Appeals against rejection of an application for admission, decisions on involuntary termination by delay or lack of progress, appeals against rejection of an application for approval of elements of the educational component
rejection of an application for admission, decisions on involuntary termination by delay or lack of progress and appeals rejection of an application for approval of elements of the educational component may be appealed pursuant to the Public administration Act § 28 et seq. shall be submitted college. If the rejection is upheld complaint will be referred without undue delay to the college's Appeals Committee.
§ 23-2. Complaints regarding examinations in the training component
Examinations are prepared under the educational component may be appealed under the Act 1 April 2005 no. 15 relating to universities and colleges, § 5-3 "An appeal - right to explanation" and § 2.5 " Complaints against procedural errors. "
Treatment of suspected cheating or attempting to cheat treated by law on universities and colleges, § 4-7 "Annulment of examinations or tests."
§ 23-3. Appeals against rejection of an application for evaluation, not to approve a dissertation, trial lecture or defense
Refusal of thesis evaluation and decisions not to approve a dissertation, trial lecture or defense may be appealed pursuant to the Public Administration Act § 28 et seq. Shall be submitted college . If the rejection is upheld complaint will be referred without undue delay to the college's Appeals Committee.
If the college finds it appropriate, may appoint individuals or a committee to conduct a review of the decision under appeal and the criteria are based on, or to undertake a new or supplementary expert evaluation.
§ 23-4. Complain. decisions concerning enforced termination due to academic dishonesty
Appeals against the decision of the HUC Appeals enforced termination of PhD education because of academic misconduct handled by the Ministry or a special appeals committee appointed by the Ministry in accordance. Universities and Colleges Act § 4-13 (1).

Part 6. Joint degrees and cotutelle agreements

§ 24. Joint degrees and cotutelle agreements § 24-1. Joint degrees and cotutelle agreements
University College may cooperate with one or more Norwegian or foreign institutions for cooperation in the form of joint degrees or cotutelle agreements.
In agreements on joint degrees and cotutelle exceptions can be made for the remaining provisions of this regulation, if it is necessary due to the regulations of the collaborating institutions. Such exceptions shall, both individually and collectively, appear to be fully satisfactory.
§ 24-2. joint degrees

With joint degrees meant a collaboration between several institutions, which all are jointly responsible for admission, guidance, awarding degrees and other as described in these regulations. The partnership is normally organized in a consortium and are regulated by agreement between the consortium members. For complete joint degree issued joint diploma in the form of: a) a diploma document issued by all konsortiemedlemmene, b) a certificate from each of the consortium members, or a combination of a) and b).
Joint degrees should normally only be entered into if there already is an established, stable technical cooperation between the institution and at least one of the other consortium. The College Board adopts detailed guidelines for joint degrees, including template agreements cf. Subsection.
§ 24-3. Cotutelle agreements
With cotutelle agreements are joint supervision of doctoral students and cooperation on education of doctoral student. Cotutelle agreement entered into for each student and should be built on a stable, professional institutional cooperation.
§ 24-4. Requirements for joint degrees and cotutelle
Eligibility for admission requirement that the dissertation will be publicly available, requirements for public disputation with a competent evaluation committee can not be waived.

Part 7. Guidelines, supplementary provisions and entry into force

§ 25. Policies and Guidelines Rector establishes guidelines and supplementary provisions to these regulations.

§ 26. Entry into force This regulation comes into force on 1 January 2016 and repeals the following previous regulations
Regulations 27. August 2011 no. 1547 on the philosophiae doctor degree (PhD) at Diakonhjemmet College.
Regulations 25 April 2014 No.. 953 philosophiae doctor degree (PhD) at MHS.