PHMEDHV

PhD Programme in Medicine and Health Sciences

– Midway evaluation

Mid-term evaluation

The midterm evaluation is an assesment of doctoral candidates' individual progress, and should preferably be carried out in the third semester. It provides doctoral candidates with an opportunity to receive constructive feedback and to define further work. Simultaneously, the evaluation will give the department an opportunity for structured follow-up of the candidates and to identify potential problems that should be addressed.

The candidate's presentation

In a mid-term evaluation, the candidate should make a an oral presentation of the doctoral work so far. The presentation should be open to the public and announced on 'Innsida', NTNU's restricted web portal.

The oral presentation from the candidate should include the following:

  • a presentation of the project (project description)
  • some information about publications and their status (published; submitted; work in progress)
  • information about progress in relation to the admission period
  • information about development of the project in relation to the original project plan
  • reasons for prospective changes to the academic training / project plan
  • reasons for prospective changes in progress compared to the original schedule
  • an updated progress plan (data collection, analysis / treatment, writing, publishing, summary, submission of thesis)
  • the status of academic training and, if relevant, a plan for the completion of remaining courses
  • information about research visits/research collaboration abroad

The presentation should normally take about 30 minutes

The presentation is led by group leader

The supervisor(s) should be present during the candidate's presentation

The Department's evaluation and follow-up

The candidate's department is responsible for conducting mid-term review, evaluate it and implement follow-up measures as needed. The department may delegate this task to their research groups where appropriate.

  • The department put together an evaluation team to assess the candidate's midterm presentation. As a minimum, these consist of two people
  • Evaluation Group shall contain a minimum of Panel Chair and one member of the research  group / department
    Panel Chair opens / manages the  presentation
  • Evaluation Group assesses the candidate's midterm presentation according to established mid-term evaluation
    Immediately after the presentation, the evaluation group make an oral summary together with the candidate and supervisor
  • In the summary meeting the student is made aware that he can subsequently request a conversation with the group leader or department without supervisors present
  • Results of the candidate's presentation and the written summary is to be recorded in the mid-term evaluation summary
  • The evaluation team will decide whether the project's academic status (research methods, themes, ethical and economic aspects, supervision conditions, etc.) are satisfactory or not
  • The evaluation team will decide whether the project's progress / schedule is satisfactory
  • If all conditions are satisfactory, the department  will inform the candidate and supervisor
  • If the evaluation team does not find all the above conditions satisfactory, the department takes the measures it considers appropriate, such as
  • Note to the candidate and the supervisor specifying that matters which are not satisfactory require correction
  •  Candidates must submit a written response to the department
  • Implement the conversation with the candidate and the supervisor, either together or separately
  • Request the new progress status by, for example six months or one year
  • Consider measures such as increasing the number of supervisors or adjust the project