Doctorate degrees

PARTICIPATION IN THE COLLOQUIUM FOR PHD-CANDIDATES

excerpt from the Promotion-Regulations:

“The exoneration from the participation can be declared by the board upon well-founded application. Reasons for exoneration are, for example, temporary stays outside of Germany or irrefutable family obligations“.

For the board to decide on a (probably in all cases only temporary) exoneration it has to receive a corresponding application by the candidate. A working place outside of Ruhr-Universität is not an adequate reason since the colloquium takes place only a few times per year. Considerate planning will allow to combine attending the colloquium with the undoubtedly necessary, regular exchange between candidate and advisor. Participation simply belongs to the commitments PhD-candidates enter when accepted –upon their application- to the faculty’s list of PhD-students. Advisors are asked to explicitly and unmistakably point out this regulation. Notably, the colloquium is not a class for which a mandatory presence may be legally challenged but it constitutes an element of good scientific practice.
 

TALKS GIVEN AT THE COLLOQUIUM FOR PHD-CANDIDATES

From reports and personal experience it has to be noted that presenter and auditorium do not really meet the notion of the regulations. The expectations for a presentation are such that every listener can in principle understand the objective and motivation of the thesis and gains an idea of the chosen tools for reaching the goals. This expectation results not least from the hope that an intellectual exchange between presenter and listener follows the presentation. Registration in the list of PhD-candidates offers the privilege becoming part of the faculty’s ”young intelligence“. Curiosity regarding questions with which other members of this circle are concerned should be an expression of the scientific curiosity indispensable for a PhD-project. The presentation of one’s ideas to intelligent non-experts and evaluating proposals of scientists from not necessarily close fields become sooner than later chords of a scientist, e.g., when trying to raise funding. To practice these chords among peers should be seen as a welcome chance (rather than a cumbersome chord).
 

EXONERATION OF PHD-CANDIDATES FROM THE SCIENTIFIC COLLOQUIA

excerpt from the Promotion-Regulations:

“The exoneration from the participation in scientific colloquia of the institutes can be temporarily or permanently declared by the board. Besides stays outside of Germany, family obligations etc. also compulsory services associated with the employment relationship at RUB can be stated as justification. The primary advisor will decide on the exoneration“.

Participation in the scientific colloquia of the institutes is without exception mandatory for PHD-candidates. Here as above it should be considered a privilege to be able to regularly listen to national and international experts. It is to learn diverse strategies for problem solving and to gain breadth in background. The latter not only raises the attractivity of a candidate for the transition to a professional career outside of academia but constitutes a basic requirement for an academic career. “External“ PhD-candidates can be exonerated from participation in case a large geographic distance turns the travel time-consuming AND given a participation in a comparable scientific program at the site of work. The comparability has to be evaluated by the advisor who indicates the exoneration to the board explicitly naming the alternative events visited by the candidate.
 

TOPIC FOR THE DISPUTATION

excerpt from the Promotion-Regulations:

„The disputation covers the dissertation as well as questions that are related to the dissertation subject with respect to objective or employed methods “

Even though the formulation in the regulations remains rather unspecific it indicates the code of praxis that has been followed in the past and should be followed in the future according to the board. The presentation shall not have the character of a thesis defense. Advisor and candidate should rather ensure that the topic allows for a treatment of an overarching geoscientific question into which the results of the thesis integrate as an example. The first minutes of the presentation have to introduce an interested non-expert to the general context and the diversity of approaches and methods available to answer the raised questions. The use of acronyms in the title is explicitly discouraged. The advisors should actively consult during topic selection since they have to present and ”defend“ on a board meeting.
 

PUBLICATION BEFORE GRADUATION

The old regulation states the following regarding indication of publications of parts of a thesis before graduation:
”Publication of the dissertation or parts of it before submission requires the written consent of the advisor; the board has to be notified about the consent (§ 11, Abs. 3).“

The new regulations do not explicitly call for such a procedure, but the board found it had to be followed in the following way. The candidate prepares a list documenting which parts of the submitted thesis were published or have been submitted for publication and to what extent a peer-review has taken place. This list has to be complemented by a statement regarding the candidate’s contribution to the publications (in as much as the publications are of the multi-author type) in general covering explicitly the following aspects

- the role in data acquisition
- the genuine intellectual input
- the contribution to writing.

This complemented list has to be part of the submitted thesis –as is the declaration regarding authorship and the candidate’s signed CV.