(1) This Policy defines and sets out the procedures for the admission, examination, and award of the higher doctorate degrees offered by La Trobe University. (2) This Policy and Procedure applies to: (3) 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). (4) The higher doctorate degree awarded to successful candidates will depend on the discipline of the research. (5) To be eligible for admission to this degree nominees must normally: (6) 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. (7) While nominees are formally admitted to and enrolled in the degree, there is no formal supervision, and there are no course or candidature requirements other than the submission of the work for examination. (8) The Higher Doctorates Committee (HDC) is a sub-committee of the Research and Graduate Studies Committee (RGSC). (9) 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. (10) The HDC is responsible for: (11) 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: (12) Where the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Industry Engagement) is also Chair, RGSC and submits a nomination for the degree, the recommendation from the HDC will be submitted to the Vice-Chancellor for approval. (13) 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 Chair, HDC. (14) On receipt of a nomination for admission to the degree, the Chair, HDC will invite the Nominee to submit the following to the HDC: (15) 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. (16) 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: (17) 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. (18) 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 normally be withdrawn from the degree. (19) Admitted candidates will only be given an extension to their candidature beyond twelve months in exceptional circumstances. Candidates requesting an extension to their candidature should apply in writing to the Chair, HDC. The Graduate Research School (GRS) will action an extension to candidature beyond twelve months following approval from the Chair, HDC. (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 from the HDC. (24) The HDC will appoint three examiners for the examination of a higher doctorate. (25) Any examiners shall: (26) The identity of examiners will normally be withheld from the candidate until a decision has been approved by Academic Board, or an unsuccessful examination outcome is reached, in relation to the examination. (27) An examiner may specifically request their name be withheld, however, all potential examiners will be informed that under Victorian legislation a candidate may request full details of their examination, including examiner’s names. (28) A submission for a higher doctorate will normally consist of: (29) 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. (30) Where any book(s) form part of the work to be submitted the applicant should provide digital copies of each for examination. If examiners request a hard copy of the book(s) the candidate will be asked to provide hard copies. (31) 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, HDC. (32) During the examination process, there should not be any direct contact between an examiner and the candidate. (33) 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. (34) Examiners will be asked to recommend either that: (35) The HDC may set aside an examination report when: (36) When the HDC has concluded its consideration of the examiners’ reports it shall either recommend to the Chair, RGSC that: (37) 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. (38) After approval by Academic Board, or an unsuccessful examination outcome is reached, the Graduate Research School (GRS) will advise the candidate of the outcome and provide each report with the examiner’s name (unless the examiner has specifically requested his or her name be withheld). (39) Candidates who have been advised of an unsuccessful examination outcome will be advised formally in writing by the Graduate Research School (GRS) that they may reapply after two years of the date of the letter of outcome, if they have additional published outputs. (40) Candidates who have received an unsuccessful outcome will be advised of their right for a review. (41) 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. (42) If the review is upheld the Chair, HDC will arrange for a re-examination of the work and will appoint new examiners where appropriate. (43) 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. (44) 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. (45) The candidate will be asked to: (46) For the purpose of this Policy and Procedure: (47) This Policy is made under the La Trobe University Act 2009 .Higher Doctorate Policy
Section 1 - Key Information
Top of Page
Policy Type and Approval Body
Academic – Academic Board
Accountable Executive – Policy
Graduate Research School
Responsible Manager – Policy
Pro Vice-Chancellor (Graduate and Global Research)
Review Date
21 June 2026
Section 2 - Purpose
Section 3 - Scope
Top of Page
Section 4 - Key Decisions
Top of Page
Key decisions
Role
Approval for admission into higher doctorate
Chair, Research and Graduate Studies Committee
Appointment of examiners
Higher Doctorates Committee
Approval for award of higher doctorate
Academic Board
Section 5 - Policy Statement
Section 6 - 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
Top of PageSection 7 - Definitions
Top of PageSection 8 - Authority and Associated Information
View Document
This is the current version of this document. To view historic versions, click the link in the document's navigation bar.