The evaluation committee, comprising a minimum of three members, will be composed in such a way that:
- Both sexes are represented
- At least one of the members is not affiliated with the UiS
- At least one of the members should be from a foreign institution
- All the members hold a doctoral degree or equivalent expertise
The composition of the committee must be well justified in the proposal and it must also illustrate how the committee, as a whole, covers the field(s) addressed in the doctoral thesis.
All parties to the matter are obliged to clarify the relations (if any) to the proposed committee members, since this may affect the assessment of conflict of interest. This applies to both professional and familial relationships. This obligation is incumbent, not only upon the candidate and potential committee members, but also upon supervisors, co-supervisors and heads of departments/centre directors.
Before the evaluation committee is appointed, the candidate can comment its composition, so that the doctoral committee can be informed of a possible conflict of interest or other decisive factors before treating the proposal.
The faculty must either appoint one of the committee members to serve as the committee’s chairperson or nominate another person from outside the committee. The committee Chair is responsible for managing the committee's work and ensuring that the committee work progresses at a decent pace in compliance with the given timeframe. The Chair will assist in coordinating the committee's recommendation of the thesis and assign duties to the committee members during the public defence. The Chair shall also ensure that the committee's work is in accordance with both the Regulations for the degree Philosophiae Doctor at the University of Stavanger and Guidelines for the Evaluation of Norwegian Doctoral Degrees.
The proposal for the evaluation committee should be ready either before, or at the time of submission of the thesis. The academic community must clarify with the proposed members whether they wish to and have the opportunity to participate in the evaluation committee. Once this is done, the proposal is sent to the doctoral committee (acting on behalf of the Rector) for consideration and a final decision. The doctoral committee is responsible for ensuring that the proposed committee members do not have close relationships or a conflict of interest with any of the parties in the PhD thesis.
Once the faculty has approved the application for the thesis, the evaluation committee is appointed. Once the doctoral committee recommends the evaluation committee, the doctoral candidate may submit written comments regarding the committee composition, no later than a week after the proposal has been made known (Regulations § 15). If there are no comments, the thesis is sent to the evaluation committee, with the name(s) of the supervisor(s), information about the candidate's coursework and declaration of co-authorship, if any. Regulations for the degree Philosophiae Doctor at the University of Stavanger and Guidelines for the Evaluation of Norwegian Doctoral Degrees should also be attached to the thesis.
It is often the case in practice that supervisors, the members of the evaluation committee and the moderator of the public defence set a date for the defence in connection with the appointment of the evaluation committee. The public defence date should be set no later than five months after the thesis has been submitted.