School of Civil Engineering Progress Review Guidelines
Before reading the guidelines outlined on this page, ensure you have reviewed all the information about Progress Reviews, including the criteria for each review, and the Higher Degree by Research Candidature Progression Procedure.
The following guidelines outline the management and conduct of HDR Progress Reviews in the School of Civil Engineering. These guidelines should be used in combination with the Higher Degree by Research Candidature Policy and the Higher Degree by Research Candidature Procedure. Further instructions to help you to arrange your upcoming review are available here.
Progress Reviews Snapshot
| Confirmation of Candidature (R1) | Review 2 (R2) | Review 3 (R3) |
---|---|---|---|
Candidature Documents |
|
|
|
Project Documents |
|
|
|
Review Meeting | 60 minutes | 60 minutes | 60 minutes |
Oral Presentation | *Open 25 minutes with additional time as needed for Q&A and discussion | Upon request from the Progress Review Panel | Upon request from the Progress Review Panel |
Note: Documents should be submitted by the census date of the research quarter in which your review is due.
Panel Composition
Your Progress Review Panel (PRP) in the School of Civil Engineering will consist of at least three members and no more than four members, all external to the advisory team. Essential members are:
- The Chair: a School academic who has suitable seniority and discipline insight to be able to act with integrity in formulating the panel’s recommendations.
- At least two members of staff who have expertise in the general area of the thesis project.
- A discipline expert external to the School is optional and may replace one of the school staff members.
It is expected that the Progress Review Panel will remain the same throughout your candidature.