Helpful Links

MASTER'S THESIS EXAMINATIONS: PRE-EXAMINATION PROCESS (Section 1)

1.1  Thesis Submission 

  1. After appropriate reviews, the candidate and the supervisor inform the department of the date they intend to submit the thesis. This notice shall be given at least two weeks before the submission date, so an examination can be scheduled.
  2. The candidate is required to upload the examination copy of their thesis through Carleton Central at least three weeks before the examination date.
  3. The candidate must accept the Academic Integrity thesis statement on Carleton Central indicating comprehension of and adherence to the Carleton University Academic Integrity Policy.

1.2  Constitution of the Examination Board

  1. The thesis supervisor schedules the examination and recommends membership of the thesis examination board to the chair of the department.
  2. The chair of the unit appoints the examination board to comprise, as a minimum:
    Thesis supervisor (or co-supervisors);
    One additional member from the student’s home unit or program. This includes cross-appointed and adjunct professors;
    One member who is from outside the student’s home unit or program;
    Chair of the unit (or delegate who serves as chair of the examination board);
    Dean of the Faculty concerned (ex officio);
    Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) (ex officio).
  3. In the case of joint programs, the examination board should normally include at least one additional faculty member from the appropriate unit or program at the other university. At the discretion of the academic unit, the presence of the additional faculty member from the other university releases the unit or program from the obligation of placing on the committee one member who is from a Carleton University unit or program outside that of the candidate and who has been at arm’s length from the thesis research.
  4. It is the responsibility of the chair of the department to ensure that specific appointments to the examination board are in accordance with this list. Alternate examination committee membership, for example, government or industry employees must be preapproved by the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies). The examination notice that is sent to Graduate Studies should identify the role of each board member.
  5. If any member of the examination board is to participate by telephone, videoconference or any other medium, the department must inform Graduate Studies at least a week before the examination which technical arrangements will be made to allow remote access. Graduate Studies provides technician-supported facilities for videoconferencing. If an unsupported voice-over internet protocol (such as Skype) is used, there must be proper audio-conferencing equipment available as backup (such as a “polycom conference phone” available through ITS) and an analogue telephone line in the room.
  6. If a member of the examination board, other than the Carleton examiner outside the department (see 1. 5 c), has agreed to participate in the examination and consequently is unable to participate, he or she must submit a brief written report on the thesis to the chair of the department one week in advance. This report will include both an evaluation of the thesis and a set of questions to be asked at the examination. The chair of the examination board will present the report to the examination board at the examination by 1) posing the questions contained in the report on behalf of the absent member during the examination question period and 2) providing the absent member’s judgments on the thesis in the in camera discussion following the examination question period.

1.3  Examination Preparation

  1. The committee members must receive a copy of the thesis either through Carleton Central or from the student or the department three weeks in advance of the defence. The thesis and accompanying documentation must be submitted by the student through Carleton Central two weeks before the defence.
  2. The department posts the examination notice announcing the date, time and location of the thesis examination. Any special arrangements for participation of the examiners (telephone, video- conferencing etc.) will be included on the examination notice. The date of the announcement must be two weeks prior to the date of the examination.
  3. The department, based on their own procedure, makes sure that all examiners authorize the defence no later than one week before the oral examination. If any examiner has serious reservations regarding the thesis, these must be noted on the form at this time and submitted to the Chair of the Department and copied to the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies).
  4. Where possible, the external examiner’s report will be submitted at least one week before the defence. It will be automatically shared with the entire committee, but not with the student.
  5. In the event of serious reservations, the Chair of the Department will consult with the thesis supervisor and the candidate to determine whether the examination will be deferred. The candidate has the right to proceed to examination. If the examination is deferred, the Chair of the Department will inform the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies).

1.4  Observers

  1.  Any faculty member from within the University (or from the joint institutes) may attend the examination as an observer. Other observers may also attend the examination provided they have obtained the permission of the candidate and the chair of the examination board. Observers are not permitted to ask questions during the examination or participate in any other way and may not leave the examination without permission of the chair.
  2. Faculty members other than those on the examination board may be granted the privilege of asking questions during the examination if they have provided a written submission containing the examination questions at least two working days before the examination to the chair of the examination board.

1.5 The Examination

  1.  The examination can be done in-person (when university permits) or fully virtual.
  2. The chair of the department (or designate) chairs the examination board.
  3. It is the responsibility of the chair of the examination board to enforce the rules of procedure governing the conduct of examinations, to ensure that academic standards are maintained, and to protect the candidate from unfair or unreasonable forms of questioning. The chair of the examination board ensures that the examination is conducted according to the highest standards of academic integrity, collegiality and professionalism. In exceptional circumstances, if the chair of the examination board is not satisfied that the spirit of the guidelines for the evaluation of the thesis has been met, he/she will adjourn the examination and consult with the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies).
  4. If a member of the committee cannot attend, arrangements must be made in advance for this examiner to participate by telephone, video- conferencing or similar media, or by submitting a report with their questions in advance to the chair of the examination board.
  5. If a member of the committee cannot attend and has not submitted a report on the thesis, the chair of the examination board, in consultation with the board, determines whether the examination will proceed. The chair of the examination board will inform the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) of these events following the examination.
  6. The procedures to be followed in defences are as follows:
    The chair of the examination board conducts a brief in-camera meeting with the examination board at the outset to review the examination procedures and potential outcomes. The definitions of minor and major revisions will be addressed by all members of the examination board along with the criteria for medal eligibility (see Medals Policy). The chair of the examination board inquires whether any member of the board can foresee any significant difficulty with respect to the final acceptability of the thesis. If significant difficulties are foreseen, concerning either content or scholarly presentation, the chair of the examination board determines whether there is reason to adjourn the examination. If the examination proceeds, the chair of the examination board informs the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) following the examination. The chair will also take this opportunity to remind the committee of the need to conduct the defence in a respectful manner.
    It is important that the defence be conducted in a respectful manner. The relationship of a candidate’s research with their personal identity is an issue that occasionally comes up during graduate defences. Studies on positionality have shown that individuals from disadvantaged groups, especially racialized minorities, tend to be questioned more frequently on this matter than those of other backgrounds. If an examiner believes it pertinent to ask a candidate about their positionality, chairs should ensure that questions are posed in a respectful way. Given that candidates may not always be able to articulate their level of comfort / discomfort in such situations, the chair should ensure that the candidate is not pressured to provide more personal information than what they (the candidate) reasonably consider meets the defence’s scholarly requirements.
  • The chair of the examination board admits the candidate to the room and reviews the examination procedures;
  • The candidate may make a brief introductory statement and may use audio/visual aids or other appropriate methods supporting this statement;
  • In the first round of questions, the examiners normally proceed in the order set out in the examination notice. Questioning in this round is one-on-one without interventions from other board members;
  • This will be followed by a second round of questions without a set order. In this round, questions may come from any of the examiners, and comments and general discussion may take place. The duration of this round is at the discretion of the chair of the examination board;
  • The candidate may make a closing statement but is not required to do so;
  • The candidate is asked to withdraw while the examination board deliberates.

1.6 Examination Outcome

  1. The chair of the examination board polls the members of the examination board to determine if the candidate passes or fails. The supervisor records in writing all required revisions, major or minor, agreed to by the board. In addition, the chair of the examination board records in writing the process for approving required revisions, including who will review and approve the revisions as decided by the examination board. Any subset of the examination board can be chosen for approval but for minor revisions, it is usually only the supervisor.
  2. The thesis grade can be Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory. It is Satisfactory if/when the document is accepted and the oral defence is considered Satisfactory. If consensus cannot be reached among the members of the examination committee as to the categorization of the thesis (Accepted, Acceptable after minor revisions, Acceptable after major modifications, Rejected) or for the oral defence (Satisfactory, Unsatisfactory), a vote will be taken to determine the outcome. The Internal Examiner must form part of the majority vote. If the Internal Examiner does not form part of the majority vote, the chair of the examination board will adjourn the examination and inform the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies). In exceptional circumstances, if the chair of the examination board is not satisfied that the spirit of the guidelines for the evaluation of the thesis has been met, he/she should adjourn the examination and consult with the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies).
  3. In cases where the oral defence is deemed unsatisfactory but the thesis is deemed satisfactory (accepted with or without revisions), the candidate will normally be required to defend again within one month of the original defence, with the same examining committee. The committee will produce a report itemizing the reasons for the failure of the oral defence. Should the defence be deemed unsatisfactory a second time, the candidate will be permanently withdrawn from the program, without the option of re-applying to the program.
  4. In cases where the thesis is deemed unsatisfactory, the candidate will normally be withdrawn from the program. The examining committee will produce a report itemizing the reasons for the failure of the thesis. The examining committee may recommend to the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) that the candidate be allowed to register for an additional term to revise and resubmit the thesis. In such cases, a second defence will be scheduled within 6 months of the original defence, with the same examining committee. Should the thesis be deemed unsatisfactory a second time, the candidate will be permanently withdrawn from the program, without the option of re-applying to the program.
  5. The chair of the examination board polls the internal and departmental members of the examination board regarding recommendation of the candidate for a medal if the thesis is judged to be outstanding. The thesis supervisor does not participate in the discussion regarding medals. If the board members agree to recommend the candidate, the chair of the examination board submits a written report to the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies).
  6. The chair of the examination board ensures that the examination report is prepared and signed by all members before the adjournment of the examination board. The chair of the examination board signs for absent members of the examination board. For virtual examinations, an email report is sent to the unit after the exam, CC’ing all the examination board members as a sign of their agreement.
  7. The chair of the examination board invites the candidate back into the examination room to discuss the examination outcome.
  8. The total duration of the examination should not normally exceed two hours.
  9. The chair of the examination board completes the Examination Report Outcome Form in Carleton Central.

1.7  Final Thesis Submission

  1. Accepted:
  1. The candidate, after completing any editorial changes, will upload the final copy of the thesis in Carleton Central for approval by the thesis supervisor or designate. The candidate will also complete the required electronic forms;
  2. Having verified the changes, the thesis supervisor or designate will approve the upload and the final thesis will be electronically forwarded to Graduate Studies;
  3. Provided that all master’s program requirements have been satisfied, the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) recommends to Senate, through the Graduate Council, that the degree be awarded;
  4. Graduate Studies arranges for the electronic thesis to be transferred to the Library.

b. Revisions:

  1. The candidate, after completing major revisions as directed by the examination board, will submit copies of the final thesis to all those involved in the approval of the revisions or modifications (see 1.6 a);
  2. Having verified that the required revisions have been completed, those involved will approve the revisions through email;
  3. Once all necessary approvals have been obtained, the candidate will upload the final copy of the thesis in Carleton Central for approval by the thesis supervisor or designate. The candidate will also complete the required electronic forms;
  4. Having verified that the required revisions have been completed, the thesis supervisor or designate will approve the upload and the final thesis will be electronically forwarded to Graduate Studies;
  5. Provided that all master’s program requirements have been satisfied, the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) recommends to Senate, through the Graduate Council, that the degree be awarded;
  6. Graduate Studies arranges for the electronic thesis to be transferred to the Library.

 

DOCTORAL THESIS EXAMINATIONS: PRE-EXAMINATION PROCESS (Section 2)

2.1 Thesis Submission

  1. After the appropriate reviews, the candidate and the supervisor inform the department of the date they intend to submit the thesis. This notice shall be given at least two weeks before the submission date, so an examination can be scheduled;
  2. The candidate is required to upload the examination copy of the thesis through Carleton Central at least four weeks before the examination date;
  3. The candidate must accept the following documents on Carleton Central:
    • the Academic Integrity thesis statement
    • the FIPPA agreement
    • license to Carleton

2.2 Constitution of the Examination Board

  1. After consultation with the thesis supervisor, the chair of the department recommends membership of the thesis examination board to the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies). The chair of the department also provides information, including abbreviated CVs regarding the appropriateness of the nominated external examiner. This information will address issues of expertise and conflict of interest (below).
  2. The Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) appoints the examination board to comprise as a minimum:
  • One member from outside Carleton University who is a recognized authority in the subject of the thesis (External Examiner);
  • One member (full-time faculty or adjunct) from outside the student’s home unit and who has been at arm’s length from the thesis research (Internal Examiner). If the unit includes significantly distinguished areas or programs, the Internal Examiner can belong to a different one from the student. In the case of joint programs, the member from the other university may replace the Internal Examiner with Graduate Studies approval;
  • Thesis supervisor or co-supervisors;
  • At least two thesis advisory committee members. If no thesis advisory committee has been established, two unit or program members may be appointed. This includes cross-appointed and adjunct professors. In the case of joint programs, the member from the other university may replace one of the unit/program members;
  • Chair of the unit (ex officio);
  • Dean of the faculty concerned (ex officio);
  • Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) or deputy (chair of the examination board).

c. In the case of joint programs, the examination board must include at least one faculty member from the appropriate unit or program at the other university.

d. It is the responsibility of the chair of the department to schedule the examination and to ensure that specific appointments to the examination board are in accordance with this list. Alternate examination committee membership, for example government or industry employees, must be preapproved by the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies). The examination notice that is sent to Graduate Studies should identify the role of each examination board member,

e. If any member of the examination committee is to participate by telephone, video conference or any other medium, this must be specified in the examination notice.

f. If a member of the examination board (other than the external examiner) is unable to participate, she/he must submit a written report on the thesis to the chair one week in advance. The chair of the examination board will present the report to the examination board at the examination by 1) posing the questions contained in the report on behalf of the absent member during the examination question period and 2) providing the absent member’s judgments on the thesis in the in-camera discussion following the examination question period.

2.2.1 Conflict of Interest

  1. External Examiner. The external examiner should be an impartial scholar with recognized expertise in the thesis research area. In addition, it is necessary that she/he be at arm’s length from the candidate, from the supervisor(s) and from the university. To guarantee the impartiality of the external examiner, the following conditions should be met:
  • The external examiner should have no family ties or close business ties or close professional ties to the candidate or the supervisor(s) in the preceding six years;
  • The external examiner should have neither held an appointment at Carleton University nor be a member of the joint institutes with the University of Ottawa in the preceding six years;
  • The external examiner should have no prior supervisory relationship with the candidate or with the supervisor(s) in the preceding six years;
  • The external examiner should not have been a principal co-author or close research collaborator with the candidate or with the supervisor(s) in the preceding six years.

While this list is not an exhaustive one, it provides an indication of the kinds of relationships that call into question the impartiality of the external examiner.

2.3 Examination Preparation

  1. The committee members must receive a copy of the thesis either through Carleton Central or from the student or the department four weeks before the defence. The examination copy of the thesis and accompanying documentation must be submitted through Carleton Central by the student three weeks before the defence.
  2. After approval, Graduate Studies announces the date, time and place of the thesis examination. Any special arrangements for participation of the examiners (telephone, video-conferencing etc.) will be included on the examination notice. The date of the announcement must be at least four weeks in advance of the date of the examination. If any member of the examination board is to participate by telephone, videoconference or any other medium, the department must inform Graduate Studies at least a week before the examination which technical arrangements will be made to allow remote access.
  3. The Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) writes to the external examiner to review procedures followed in the defence, to outline judgments to be made and to ask that any major concerns be communicated in the report to be submitted at least one week before the examination.
  4. The external examiner submits written comments on the thesis to the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) at least one week before the oral examination. Normally, the thesis defence will not proceed without receipt of the report of the external examiner one week in advance of the date of the defence.
  5. In cases where the external examiner’s report does not recommend that the thesis proceed to defence, the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) will consult with the Chair and/or Graduate Supervisor of the student’s department. After this consultation the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) may recommend to postpone the defence. In such instances, the external examiner will be asked for permission to release her/his report to the student and the thesis supervisor for review. The student has the option to accept the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies)’s recommendation for postponement or to proceed with the defence as planned. In either case, the examining committee shall remain the same.
  6. The department, based on their own procedure, makes sure that all examiners authorize the defence no later than one week before the oral examination. If any examiner has serious reservations regarding the thesis, these must be noted on the form at this time and the Chair will notify the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) immediately.

2.4  Observers

  1. Any faculty member from within the University may attend the examination as an observer. Other observers may also attend the examination provided they have obtained the permission of the candidate and the chair of the examination board. Observers are not permitted to ask questions during the examination or participate in any other way and may not leave the examination until the Chair has adjourned the proceedings.
  2. Faculty members other than those on the examination board may be granted the privilege of asking questions or making comments during the examination if they have provided a written submission describing their questions and comments at least two working days in advance of the examination to the chair of the examination board.

2.5  The Examination

  1. The examination can be done in-person (when university permits) or fully virtual.
  2. The Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) (or designate) chairs the examination board.
  3. It is the responsibility of the chair of the examination board to enforce the rules of procedure governing the conduct of examinations, to ensure that academic standards are maintained, and to protect the candidate from unfair or unreasonable forms of questioning. The chair of the examination board ensures that the examination is conducted according to the highest standards of academic integrity, collegiality and professionalism. In exceptional circumstances, if the chair of the examination board is not satisfied that the spirit of the guidelines for the evaluation of the thesis has been met, he/she should adjourn the examination and consult with the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies).
  4. If a member of the committee cannot attend, arrangements must be made in advance for this examiner to participate by telephone, video- conferencing or similar media, or by submitting a report with their questions in advance to the chair of the examination board.
  5. If the external examiner is not present, specific arrangements must have been approved in advance for this examiner to participate by telephone, video-conferencing or similar media. The written report of the PhD external examiner must also be available. Th external examiner’s report must be submitted through Carleton Central at least one week prior to the date of the examination board.
  6. If a member of the examination board is unable to participate and has not submitted a report on the thesis, the chair of the examination board, in consultation with the board, will determine whether the examination will proceed. If the examination proceeds, he/she will inform the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) following the examination.
  7. The procedures to be followed in defences are as follows:
  • The chair of the examination board conducts a brief in-camera meeting with the examination board at the outset to review the examination procedures and potential outcomes. The definitions of minor and major revisions will be addressed by all members of the examination board along with the criteria for medal eligibility (see Medals Policy). The chair of the examination board inquires whether any member of the board can foresee any significant difficulty with respect to the final acceptability of the thesis. If significant difficulties are foreseen, concerning either content or scholarly presentation, the chair of the examination board determines whether there is reason to adjourn the examination. If the examination proceeds, the chair of the examination board informs the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) following the examination. The chair of the examination board makes sure that the external examiner’s report has been provided to the examination board members. The external examiner’s written comment regarding recommendation of the candidate for a medal is not conveyed at this point (see 2.6.e);
  • The chair of the examination board admits the candidate to the room and reviews the procedures;
  • The candidate may make an introductory statement and may use audio/visual aids or other appropriate methods of supporting this statement. It is usual to limit such statements to about twenty minutes;
  • In the first round of questions, the examiners normally proceed in the order set out in the examination notice. Questioning in this round is one-on-one, with no interventions from other members of the board;
  • This will be followed by a second round of questions without a set order. In this round, questions may come from any of the examiners, and comments and general discussion may take place. The duration of this round is at the discretion of the chair of the examination board;
  • The candidate may make a closing statement but is not required to do so;
  • The candidate is asked to withdraw while the examination board deliberates;
  • In case of technical difficulty in the course of an examination conducted through videoconferencing, the chair of the examination board may briefly suspend the proceedings to allow some time to fix the problem. Should the disconnection persist and the examiner(s) accessing the proceedings through videoconferencing fail to be reconnected in a timely fashion, the proceedings will continue through telephone connection using the analogue line affixed to the videoconferencing system (this analogue line is reserved for use as a backup for the videoconferencing system; any other telephone communication in the course of the examination must be conducted through the digital telephone line set up in the examination room);
  • Should both the videoconferencing and telephone systems become inoperative, the chair of the examination board in consultation with the board may carry on with the examination if it is deemed that the virtual presence of the distant examiner(s) is not absolutely required at the moment. Upon reconnection, the chair of the examination board will summarize the exchanges that the remote examiner(s) missed. Should technical difficulty make it impossible for the remote examiner(s) to satisfactorily complete their one-on-one questioning, the chair of the examination board may adjourn the examination and inform the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) of the situation;
  • Should persistent technical difficulties with both the telephone and videoconferencing systems interrupt the board’s examination outcome deliberations before a final decision has been reached, the chair of the examination board will adjourn the examination and inform the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) that deliberation will have to resume at a later time when all examiners are present in person or through telephone/videoconferencing;
  • In the case of an Integrated Thesis including co-authored articles, should the supervisor or any other member of the advisory committee be one of the principal authors of a co-authored article included in the thesis, this member will be allowed only limited participation in the defence. During his or her turn in the first round of questioning, the member may be allowed by the Chair to provide points of clarification on the thesis and reformulate questions for the candidate, but may not address critical and substantive issues. Furthermore, this member will not be allowed to participate actively in the deliberations after the defence.

2.6  Examination Outcome

  1. The chair of the examination board polls the members of the examination board to determine if the candidate passes or fails, and the extent of required revisions, if any. The thesis supervisor may participate in the deliberations, but shall not seek to influence the decision of the board regarding requested revisions. The supervisor records in writing all required revisions, major or minor, agreed to by the board. In addition, the chair of the examination board records in writing the process for approving required revisions, including who will review and approve the revisions as decided by the examination board. Any subset of the examination board can be chosen for approval but for minor revisions, it is usually only the supervisor. In the case of an Integrated Thesis, any member of the examination board who appears as one of the principal authors of a co-authored article included in the thesis is not allowed to participate actively in deliberations or vote on the outcome.
  2. The thesis grade can be Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory. It is Satisfactory if/when the document is accepted and the oral defence is considered Satisfactory. If consensus cannot be reached among the members of the examination committee as to the categorization of the thesis (Accepted, Acceptable after minor revisions, Acceptable after major modifications, Rejected) or the Oral Defence (Satisfactory, Unsatisfactory), a vote will be taken to determine the outcome. The thesis supervisor does not participate in the voting process. The chair of the examination board may approve the thesis as satisfactory if the majority of board members recommend it as satisfactory. The majority must include the external examiner. In exceptional circumstances, if the chair of the examination board is not satisfied that the spirit of the guidelines for the evaluation of the thesis has been met, he/she should adjourn the examination and consult with the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) (see 2.5.b).
  3. In cases where the oral defence is deemed unsatisfactory but the thesis is deemed satisfactory (accepted with or without revisions), the candidate will normally be required to defend again within one month of the original defence, with the same examining committee. The committee shall produce a report itemizing the reasons for the failure of the oral defence. Should the defence be deemed unsatisfactory a second time, the candidate will be permanently withdrawn from the program, without the option of re-applying to the program.
  4. In cases where the thesis is deemed unsatisfactory, the candidate will normally be withdrawn from the program. The committee shall produce a report itemizing the reasons for the failure of the thesis. The examining committee may recommend to the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) that the candidate be allowed to register for an additional term to revise and resubmit the thesis. In such cases, a second defence will be scheduled within 6 months of the original defence, with the same examining committee. Should the thesis be deemed unsatisfactory a second time, the candidate will be permanently withdrawn from the program, without the option of re-applying to the program.
  5. The chair of the examination board conveys to the board the external examiner’s written comment regarding recommendation of the candidate for a medal. If the external examiner does not recommend the candidate for a medal, discussion on the issue is brought to an end. If the external’s written recommendation is affirmative or undecided, the chair polls the internal and departmental members of the examination board regarding recommendation of the candidate for a medal. The thesis supervisor does not participate in the discussion regarding medals. If the board members agree to recommend the candidate, the chair of the examination board submits a written report to the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies).
  6. The chair of the examination board ensures that the examination report is prepared and signed by all members before the adjournment of the examination board. The chair of the examination board signs for absent members of the examination board. For virtual examinations, an email report is sent to the unit after the exam, CC’ing all the examination board members as a sign of their agreement.
  7. The chair of the examination board invites the candidate back into the room to discuss the examination outcome.
  8. The total duration of the examination should not normally exceed three hours. However, the external examiner should be encouraged to address all of his/her points.
  9. The chair of the examination board completes the Examination Report Outcome Form in Carleton Central.

2.7  Final Thesis Submission

  1. Accepted:
  1. The candidate, after completing any editorial changes, will upload the final copy of the thesis in Carleton Central for approval by the thesis supervisor or designate. The candidate will also complete the required electronic forms;
  2. Having verified the changes, the thesis supervisor or designate will approve the upload and the final thesis will be electronically forwarded to Graduate Studies;
  3. Provided that all doctoral program requirements have been satisfied, the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) recommends to Senate, through the Graduate Council, that the degree be awarded;
  4. Graduate Studies arranges for the electronic thesis to be transferred to the Library.

b. Revisions:

  1. The candidate, after completing major revisions as directed by the examination board, will submit copies of the final thesis to all those involved in the approval of the revisions or modifications (see 2.6.a);
  2. Having verified that the required revisions have been completed, those involved will sign the Thesis Revisions Approval Form;
  3. Once all necessary approvals have been obtained, the candidate will upload the final copy of the thesis in Carleton Central for approval by the thesis supervisor or designate. The candidate also completes the required electronic forms;
  4. Having verified that the required revisions have been completed, the thesis supervisor or designate will approve the upload and the final thesis will be electronically forwarded to Graduate Studies.
  5. Provided that all doctoral program requirements have been satisfied, the Vice-Provost (Graduate Studies) recommends to Senate, through the Graduate Council, that the degree be awarded;
  6. Graduate Studies arranges for the electronic thesis to be transferred to the Library.