School of Dentistry 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.

How to organise a Progress Review

The following guidelines outline the management and conduct of HDR Progress Reviews in the School of Dentistry. 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

Progress review requirements
	Confirmation of Candidature (R1)	Review 2 (R2)	Review 3 (R3)
Candidature Documents	Candidate statement Individual Development Plan (IDP) Portfolio/summary of development activities/Academic CV.	Candidate statement Individual Development Plan (IDP) Portfolio/summary of development activities/Academic CV.	Candidate statement Individual Development Plan (IDP) Portfolio/summary of development activities/Academic CV.
Project Documents	Literature Review and Research Outline Ethics application progression report/Approval iThenticate report.	Summary of completed work/draft chapter/paper, plan for completion iThenticate report.	Thesis preliminary pages with expanded outline of thesis, thesis draft (at least 2 completed chapters) iThenticate report.
Interview	60 minutes	60 minutes	60 minutes
Oral Presentation	Open 30 minutes presentation 10-15 minutes question time	None	Open 30-45 minutes presentation 10-15 minutes question time

Note: Documents should be submitted before the census date of the research quarter in which your review is due.

Panel Composition

Your Progress Review Panel (PRP) in the School of Dentistry will consist of

a chair, and
a reviewer.

Confirmation of Candidature Review (R1)

Your confirmation of candidature review will include the submission of your candidature and project documents, and an open 30-minute oral presentation, and a 60-minute interview with the review panel.

The review documents will be as follows:

A critical review of recent and relevant published work in the field of their research project;
Research hypothesis and aims;
Research plan and timetable for completion of a thesis suitable for submission and examination;
Research progress - Progress towards completing the research aims, typically in the form of methods, results, discussion and conclusions, although other formats may be acceptable depending on the research area;
Skills and resources required to complete the project (written in dot point or tabular format);
Relevant skills and techniques already gained;
Skills, techniques, equipment, facilities (including satisfactory workspace), and finances required to complete the project.

Document requirements
Contents	Details
Contents	Details	PhD page numbers	MPhil page numbers
Title page	Name of candidate, title of project, names of advisors	1 page	1 page
Brief summary/introduction		1 page	1 page
Critical Review (length)	Critical up-to-date review, which should demonstrate a good knowledge of the field and identify knowledge gaps.	20 – 30 pages	15 – 20 pages
Hypothesis development and Aims of the project	This should be related to issues identified in the literature review.	1 page	1 page
Research methodology	A clear statement of the methods to be used, resource requirements (are all pieces of equipment and funds to complete the study available to you, or do you need to look for collaborators who can provide these?), data analysis methodology to be use. ethics requirements etc.	4 – 8 pages	3 – 6 pages
Research progress (length)		max. 20 pages	max. 15 pages
Timeline		1 page max	1 page max
Page size		A4
Line spacing		1.5
Font size		12
Margins		2.5 cm on each side

Oral presentation

The oral presentation gives the Candidate the opportunity to present their thesis proposal to an appropriate group of disciplinary peers for the purpose of receiving expert and constructive advice about:

the proposed project;
the project scope and feasibility including timeline for completion of the project;
the appropriateness of the theoretical approach, methodology, and/or experimental design;
the Candidate’s progress towards completing the research aims.

Written feedback will be provided by your reviewer(s) after the review meeting, and you will be required to prepare a written response to this feedback. Your chair will also prepare a written report detailing the recommendations of the Progress Review Panel to the Dean, UQ Graduate School.

Progress Review 2 (R2)

Your second progress review will include the submission of your candidature and project documents, and a closed 60-minute interview with the review panel.

The document (maximum of 25 pages, excluding draft chapter/journal article, using 1.5 line spacing) should include:

Timetable - an updated timetable for completion of a thesis suitable for submission and assessment
Thesis structure - a document outlining individual thesis chapter headings
iThenticate report(s)
At least one of the following documents:

A draft thesis chapter – this should not be the introduction chapter, as this was used as evidence for the R1 unless significant changes/additions have been made and these can be outlined as part of the submission.
Manuscript – this may be in draft/submitted/in press/published form but must be a complete document that has received feedback from the Advisory Team.
Conference abstract – an abstract submitted for a conference poster or oral presentation for which the Candidate has written a draft and received feedback from their Advisory Team.
An ethics proposal – this must be substantially the Candidate’s work rather than written by the Advisory Team for the Candidate’s work.
Research poster – for presentation at a School/University or Professional conference. This poster must have been substantially written by the Candidate and received Advisory Team feedback.
Other - depending on research area.

The feedback may include a recommendation for an oral presentation for R2. This may apply if the candidate has not shown he/she is developing an ability to communicate their research to a wider audience than the Advisory Team. Ways in which the Candidate may show development include the following (at least one is required):

An informal oral presentation given to a research group (greater than only the Advisory Team);
A poster or oral presentation at a conference;
The UQ Three Minute Thesis Competition;
Other - depending on research area.

Progress Review 3 (R3)

Your third progress review will include the submission of your review documents, an open 45-minute oral presentation, and a 60-minute interview with the review panel.

The review documents should include:

Summary information about the thesis by completing a Thesis Preliminary Pages document, which includes the thesis title and a complete abstract.
Expanded contents/outline of the thesis.
A draft of at least one complete chapter for the thesis. The Candidate must check this document with iThenticate, which is professional text matching software that assesses the originality of written work. The Candidate must share the iThenticate report with the Principal Advisor and Chair of the Review Committee within one day of distributing the written components.
Outline of any publications that will arise from the HDR research.
A detailed plan and timeline for completing the thesis.