• Section 1 - Background and Purpose
• Section 2 - Scope
• Section 3 - Policy Statement
• Section 4 - Procedures
• Part A - Degrees Awarded
• Part B - Eligibility for Admission
• Part C - Criteria for the Award
• Part D - Overseeing Committee
• Part E - Nominations for Higher Doctorates
• Part F - Admission to the Degree
• Part G - Confirmation of Submission
• Part H - Appointment of Examiners
• Part I - Submission for Examination
• Part J - Examination
• Part K - Outcome of Examination
• Part L - Request for Review
• Part M - Graduation and Submission of Archival Version
• Section 5 - Definitions

Section 1 - Background and Purpose

(1) This Policy defines and sets out the procedures for the award of higher doctorate degrees.

Section 2 - Scope

(2) This document applies to:

1. all higher doctorate programs offered by La Trobe University;
2. all prospective and currently enrolled candidates for a higher doctorate program; and
3. staff of the University and external persons involved in relevant decision-making processes; such as external examiners.

(3) This document describes the procedures for the admission, examination and award of the higher doctorate degrees offered by La Trobe University. They are:

1. Doctor of Science (DSc)
2. Doctor of Letters (DLitt)
3. Doctor of Laws (LLD)

Section 3 - Policy Statement

(4) A higher doctorate is the highest qualification of the University and may be awarded by the Academic Board to a candidate for published work assessed by external examiners as representing an internationally recognised, significant and sustained original contribution to knowledge in one or more branches of learning, above the requirements of a doctoral degree. This award is made in compliance with the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 (the TEQSA Act) and the Higher Doctorates Rule 2015.

Section 4 - Procedures

Part A - Degrees Awarded

(5) The higher doctorate degree awarded to successful candidates will depend on the discipline of the research.

Part B - Eligibility for Admission

(6) To be eligible for admission to this degree applicants must normally:

1. be a graduate of La Trobe University, or
2. have been a salaried member of the academic staff of the University for at least five years.

Part C - Criteria for the Award

(7) A higher doctorate will be awarded for work that is an internationally recognised, significant and sustained original contribution to knowledge in one or more branches of learning.

(8) While applicants are formally admitted to and enrolled in the degree, there are no course or candidature requirements other than the submission of the work for examination.

Part D - Overseeing Committee

(9) The Higher Doctorates Committee (HDC) is a sub-committee of the Research and Graduate Studies Committee (RGSC).

(10) The HDC will be chaired by the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Graduate and Global Research). The membership and operations of the HDC will be as outlined in the Terms of Reference and in this procedure.

(11) The HDC is responsible for:

1. the review of applications and recommendations to the Chair RGSC for admission to the degree
2. the appointment of examiners
3. recommendations to the Chair of the RGSC in relation to the outcome of a higher doctorate examination.

Part E - Nominations for Higher Doctorates

(12) The following officers of the University may recommend in writing to the Chair HDC admission to the degree of an eligible person who has completed work considered by the nominators to be an original distinguished contribution or contributions to knowledge in one or more branches of learning:

1. University Council members
2. the Vice-Chancellor
3. Deputy Vice-Chancellors, Provosts and Pro Vice-Chancellors
4. Deans of Schools

(13) Where the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Industry Engagement) is also Chair of the RGSC and submits a nomination for the degree, the recommendation from the HDC will be submitted to the Vice-Chancellor for approval.

(14) Where the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Graduate and Global Research) submits a nomination for the degree, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Industry Engagement) will appoint an alternative HDC Chair.

(15) On receipt of a nomination for admission to the degree, the Chair HDC will invite the Nominee to submit the following to the HDC:

1. a completed La Trobe Higher Doctorate Nomination Acceptance Form
2. a detailed curriculum vitae and evidence of their eligibility for admission to the degree (see clause 6-7) including copies of relevant testamurs
3. a summary of their broad field of research
4. a description of their achievements, including the applicant’s view of the extent to which the work contributes to the advancement of knowledge
5. an overview of the material to be submitted for the degree.

Part F - Admission to the Degree

(16) Upon receipt of a nomination for a higher doctorate, the HDC will determine whether in its opinion the work appears worthy of examination for the degree and if so shall formally recommend admission to the Chair RGSC.

(17) Nominees who have been approved for admission by the Chair RGSC or Vice-Chancellor will receive a letter of offer of admission to the degree from the Graduate Research School (GRS). The letter of offer will include:

1. the date for submission of the work for examination, which will normally be no later than six months from the letter of offer
2. the requirements for submission, as outlined in clause 26

(18) Nominees who have not been approved for admission will be advised formally in writing that they may reapply after two years of the date of the letter if they have additional published outputs.

(19) Admitted candidates who do not submit work for examination within twelve months of receiving a letter of offer without approval from the Chair HDC will be withdrawn from the degree.

Part G - Confirmation of Submission

(20) One month prior to the anticipated submission the candidate will write to the GRS confirming the date of submission. At this time the candidate will advise of any change in the work to be submitted from the overview provided prior to admission of the degree.

(21) The candidate will be asked to supply the names of any examiners whom they do not wish to examine their submission.

(22) The GRS will provide instructions to the candidate concerning the uploading of digital material (including durable records of artefacts) and the provision of any hard copies for examination.

(23) The GRS will send an Appointment of Examiners Form to the Chair, HDC seeking the nomination of examiners.

Part H - Appointment of Examiners

(24) The HDC will appoint three examiners for the examination of a higher doctorate.

(25) Any examiners shall:

1. be professors of international standing, and shall be persons considered by the HDC to have special knowledge and competence in the branch of learning relevant to the degree;
2. be independent of La Trobe University;
3. have had no involvement with the candidate, either through co-publication, co-grant authorship, or be currently employed at the same institution as the candidate; and
4. will not have been identified by the candidate as unsuitable (see clause 21).

Part I - Submission for Examination

(26) A submission for a higher doctorate will normally consist of:

1. a summary of the published work being submitted, in chronological and/or thematic groupings where appropriate;
2. where the work includes any jointly-authored publications, an outline of the candidate’s contribution to the research and the published work;
3. a statement confirming that the submission contains no work for which a degree has been awarded by La Trobe or any other university;
4. the published work and any appropriate framing material.

(27) Following confirmation of the availability of the examiners and any special requirements they may have, the GRS will provide the examiners with access to the submission together with guidelines for examination for the degree.

(28) Where any book(s) form part of the work to be submitted the applicant should provide three hard copies of each for examination.

Part J - Examination

(29) Examiners are required to submit independent reports within three months of receipt of the material and should not consult other examiners other than in exceptional circumstances, either following the approval of or at the request of the Chair of the HDC.

(30) During the examination process, there should not be any direct contact between an examiner and the candidate.

(31) Examiners will be asked to judge whether the body of work submitted by the candidate has generated important debate, caused a change in theory or practice in the discipline, influenced scholars or practitioners in the field, or has made a substantial impact on society.

(32) Examiners will be asked to recommend either that:

1. the degree be awarded to the candidate
2. the degree should not be awarded to the candidate

(33) The HDC may set aside an examination report when:

1. there is sufficient evidence of inadequate or poor quality in that examination
2. there is a demonstrable bias that disadvantages the candidate and brings the examination into question
3. it has been found that the examiner does not meet the criteria for examiners as prescribed by this procedure
4. there is evidence of actions, such as collaboration between examiners or inappropriate communication with the candidate, that may bring the examination into disrepute.

Part K - Outcome of Examination

(34) When the HDC has concluded its consideration of the examiners’ reports it shall either recommend to the Chair RGSC that:

1. the degree should not be awarded to the candidate
2. the degree should be awarded to the candidate

(35) Where the HDC recommends that the degree should be awarded, and the recommendation is endorsed by the Chair RGSC, the Chair RGSC will submit the recommendation to the next meeting of the Academic Board for approval.

(36) After approval by Academic Board, or an unsuccessful examination outcome is reached, each report with the examiner’s name (unless the examiner has specifically requested his or her name be withheld) will be made available to the candidate.

(37) Candidates who have been advised of an unsuccessful examination outcome will be advised formally in writing that they may reapply after two years of the date of the letter of outcome, if they have additional published outputs.

Part L - Request for Review

(38) Candidates who have received an unsuccessful outcome will be advised of their right for a review.

(39) Reviews may only be sought on procedural grounds related to the conduct of the examination and must be submitted to the University Ombudsman within 30 days of the date of the written advice of the examination outcome.

(40) If the review is upheld the Chair HDC will arrange for a re-examination of the work and will appoint new examiners where appropriate.

Part M - Graduation and Submission of Archival Version

(41) Following Academic Board approval, the Graduations Office will invite the candidate to graduate. The University Events Office will make appropriate additional arrangements for a graduation ceremony in which a higher doctorate will be awarded.

(42) The work for which the degree was awarded will normally be made publicly available in the La Trobe University Institutional Repository where there are no restrictions on access to the work.

(43) The candidate will be asked to:

1. complete an Access to Thesis - Consent form, provide copies of any relevant copyright agreements or restrictions on public access to the work and indicate any need for embargo for all or part of the work;
2. where any books form part of the submission, supply an additional hard copy for inclusion in the University Library Collection and a publisher’s digital version, where these exist, for inclusion in the La Trobe University Institutional Repository;
3. supply a citation to be read at the graduation or public award of the degree.

Section 5 - Definitions

(44) For the purpose of this Policy and Procedure:

1. Higher doctorate: An additional kind of Doctoral Degree, of higher standing than a PhD or professional doctorate, which is awarded based on an internationally recognised original contribution to knowledge rather than through the process of supervised independent study.