Half-time review

• After approximately 20 months of full-time studies, the subject representative contacts you and your main supervisor to follow up on your progress and provide information about the halftime review. During the meeting, a decision shall be made regarding either a halftime review or a licentiate examination, as well as an approximate date for the review. The doctoral student may independently decide to complete a licentiate degree. Otherwise, the doctoral student and the supervisor attempt to reach agreement on whether a halftime review or a licentiate examination should be conducted. If agreement cannot be reached, the Director of Doctoral Studies and the subject representative are involved, after which the subject representative makes the decision.
• No later than approximately 8 weeks before the seminar, the subject representative appoints an advisory group consisting of two reviewers and either the subject representative or the Director of Doctoral Studies. The supervisor proposes two reviewers with relevant subject expertise. These may be recruited from outside the Department of Physics, but at least one should be local.
• The doctoral student coordinates the date and time with the advisory group and the supervisor and books a room for the seminar.
• Two weeks before the seminar, the report must be sent to the advisory group. The supervisor is responsible for ensuring that proofreading has been carried out and approving the content.
• The doctoral student contacts fysinfo@fysik.su.se to announce the seminar on the Department of Physics website.

Formal requirements for the report:

• The report must be no longer than 7 pages (excluding references and appendices).
• The length is calculated using A4 format, 11 pt Arial, single line spacing.
• Articles/manuscripts and other appendices shall be attached to the report.
• The current ISP (Individual Study Plan) shall be attached.

The report shall contain:

• A brief overview of the research project
• Progress achieved
• Plans for the remainder of the doctoral study period
• A description of the project in a broader context

The available space is therefore very limited. The intention is not for you to demonstrate in detail what you have done (as in an article or thesis), but rather to briefly describe what you have worked on and which milestones have been achieved. In terms of level of detail, the report may resemble a project application to, for example, the Swedish Research Council. The structure may, for example, be:

• Purpose and objectives (~1 page)
• State of the research field (~1 page)
• Project description (~1 page)
• Progress and results (~2 pages)
• Significance and scientific originality (~1 page)
• Plan for the remaining doctoral study period (~1 page)

• The seminar is public and the advisory group shall attend. The doctoral student’s presentation should be approximately 40 minutes long and similar in style to a conference presentation. It should contain a pedagogical introduction to the subject, an overview of the research field, presentation and discussion of methods and results, as well as conclusions and future prospects (for the remaining doctoral study period).
• After the presentation, the advisory group and other attendees ask questions. The discussion normally lasts 30–60 minutes.
• Immediately afterwards, the advisory group meets in private (the group decides whether the supervisor should attend parts of or the entire meeting).
• After the meeting, the advisory group provides oral feedback to the doctoral student and the supervisor (this part is not public). The goal is to provide clear advice and recommendations that will help the doctoral student identify areas that need strengthening.

• The feedback is also summarized in writing on a standardized form (link below). The form is discussed during the advisory group meeting and is then completed by the Director of Doctoral Studies/subject representative and, after approval by the rest of the group, sent to the doctoral student and the supervisor.
• If serious problems are identified, the advisory group shall establish a follow-up plan and schedule a follow-up meeting. Prior to this meeting, the doctoral student shall write a new report describing progress in relation to the follow-up plan and planning for the remaining doctoral study period. The subject representative is responsible for following up on the plan and ensuring that it is documented in the doctoral student’s individual study plan.

Form for the evaluation report pdf, 477.3 kB.

Subject responsible: Svante Jonsell, jonsell@fysik.su.se