Reporting and midterm evaluation

Annual report

All PhD candidates must submit a progress report to the department head by September 1 each year, using the designated form in the box above. Supervisors also submit their reports using a separate form. The department head reviews the forms and forwards them to the PhD program by September 15. The reports from candidates and supervisors are treated confidentially by the head of department and the leader of the Committee for Research Education (KFU), who also coordinate with the department head regarding follow-up. The KFU discusses the overall results of the progress reports at an aggregate level.

Midterm evaluation

• A midterm evaluation must be conducted for all candidates enrolled in the PhD program at the Norwegian School of Sport Sciences. The midterm evaluation should take place midway through the program (preferably in the 3rd semester for candidates with a three-year contract and the 4th semester for candidates with a four-year contract) and no later than one year before the planned submission of the dissertation.
• The midterm evaluation should serve as an opportunity for the candidate to present their work to professionals outside their supervisory group and to receive constructive feedback and recommendations for further progress. The departments are responsible for conducting midterm evaluations for their candidates. This arrangement also includes candidates with external employers.
• The midterm evaluation, including preparations, is a mandatory part of the educational component of the PhD program and carries a weight of 5 ECTS credits. See the course description for further details: PHD644 Midterm evaluation

Purpose

• The evaluation aims to enhance the quality of the research work and ensure completion within the stipulated timeframe.
• It should provide the candidate with feedback on the project's quality and progress and offer input and recommendations for further progression.
• The midterm evaluation should be a central and mandatory part of NIH and the institute's follow-up of the candidate, in addition to regular supervision, annual progress reporting, and performance evaluations.

Committee

• The committee for the midterm evaluation shall consist of two members. Whenever possible, both genders should be represented. Efforts should be made to ensure that one of the members has no affiliation with the Norwegian School of Sport Sciences (NIH), and the members must be impartial.
• The main supervisor serves as the administrator of the committee.
• Proposals for the committee and the date of the midterm evaluation should be submitted via email to the Committee for Research Education (KFU).

Preparation

The candidate must submit written materials in the form of a midterm report and relevant attachments no later than six weeks before the evaluation.

Structure and Content of the Midterm Report

1. Facts about the doctoral period  

   • Overview of employment start date, doctoral period, and planned end date. 
   • Overview of completed courses and modules.
   • Provide the names and institutions of the supervisors. 

2.  Status of the research work

   • Briefly describe any changes made to the project plan (projects, main research questions, articles, or changes based on feedback from the expert evaluation during admission). 
   • Identify any challenges that have arisen or may arise.
   • Overview of completed work to date, including data collection, analyses, and published works. 
   • Attach the original project plan.

3. Progress Plan

   • Detailed progress plan covering the period up to the submission of the dissertation. 
   • Description of milestones, timeline, and measures to ensure completion.

4. Description of planned articles/chapters

   • For each planned work, provide a brief description of: title, objective, method, data basis, status, and plan for completion. 
   • Describe the status of the work on the thesis summary (kappa), and attach a table of contents if available.
   • Attach relevant drafts, if available. 

5. Attachments

   • Original project description. 
   • Drafts of articles/chapters. 
   • Table of contents for the dissertation (if available). 
   • Other relevant documentation.

Implementation  

• The evaluation begins with the candidate presenting their project based on the submitted written materials (20 minutes). The committee members act as opponents and then lead a discussion with the candidate.
• To ensure a beneficial learning experience, it is important that the committee emphasizes a critical, constructive, and supportive dialogue with the candidate. The supervisor is responsible for guiding the committee to ensure the questioning is conducted at an appropriate level.
• The midterm evaluation is conducted as a mini-defence (disputas) lasting up to 2 hours. The evaluation is open to the relevant academic community.

Evaluation and Follow-Up

• The midterm evaluation shall result in a written assessment from the committee (see designated form in the box on top), focusing on constructive feedback and recommendations for further progress. It should also include an evaluation of the candidate's planned progress toward submission.
• The committee's assessment (on the designated form) is delivered to the candidate, the supervisor, the department head, and the PhD administration (STA). The assessment is presented as an information item at the Committee for research education (KFU) meeting.
• The supervisory team is responsible for ensuring that the committee's recommendations are followed up.
• The external member of the committee is compensated for 20 hours of work.

The Committee for research education (KFU) is responsible for identifying a lack of progress in the dissertation work, deficiencies in supervision, and implementing measures to address these issues. KFU must ensure that the quality assurance system is functioning and, in the case of unsatisfactory reports, may decide to interrupt/terminate the PhD program.