Work with quality at course level for the Ph.D.-candidates
Every time a compulsory course is taught, the course coordinator must do a summarising evaluation after the course is completed. For some elective courses and individual courses there will be no course report, these will be reported as a part of the annual progress report. Completed course work is evaluated through digital progress reporting in its own module.
a) Course evaluation and course report
| Responsibility | Course coordinator |
| Participants | Course coordinator, teachers in the course, Ph.D.-candidates |
| Purpose | Summarising evaluation of the course for continuous improvement |
| Data | Supervision and dialogue with Ph.D.-candidates,Results from Ph.D.-candidate evaluation when completed,Selected results data,Dialogue between course coordinator and teachers, course coordinator and Ph.D.-candidates. |
| Content | Short summarising report from the completion of the course, with description of status and action points. |
| Documentation | Course report from course coordinator |
b) Evaluation of progress and research quality in the Ph.D.-project
Progress and research quality is evaluated both through annual progress reporting and through the mid-way evaluation, in addition to the candidate surveys at institutional level. Candidate and supervisor are both individually responsible for the progress reports. A midway evaluation of the doctorate work should normally happen approximately after the candidate is halfway finished with the Ph.D.-programme, mesaured based off of the financing period. Vice-dean of research, or whomever they authorise, is responsible for any potential actions for follow-up is started.
c) Evaluation of the doctorate supervision
Evaluation of the doctorate supervision happens partly through annual candidate surveys at institutional level, partly through progress reporting, and partly through annual development dialogues with the leader of the unit. The dean is responsible for making sure Ph.D.-candidates not employed by UiS receive adequate follow-up.
