Guidelines for the internal PhD proposal evaluation process Swiss TPH Research commission (RC) – version 2021 PhD supervisor Immediately after registration of the new PhD project with the University of Basel/Swiss TPH, the PhD supervisor: 1. suggests and finds two Swiss TPH colleagues (project leaders who are not directly involved in the project) who agree on reviewing the PhD proposal, plus a statistical reviewer (contact Marek Kwiatkowski). The PhD supervisor conveys this information to Marco Waser / the research commission 2. decides (together with Marco Waser) at which forthcoming RC meeting the research proposal will be discussed (this has to occur within three to six months after registration of the PhD student) 3. determines the composition of the PhD committee
PhD candidate 1. writes his/her research proposal according to the guidelines (https://team.swisstph.ch/s/MapGAgp7QRusIh7icCAG0w) 2. submits the complete document to both reviewers four weeks before the scheduled RC meeting at the latest, and uploads all file to his/her designated Alfresco folder 3. schedules a meeting (no later than two weeks before the scheduled RC meeting) to discuss the proposal with both reviewers and the PhD supervisor 4. resubmits the revised proposal (in which all issues have been adequately addressed) to both reviewers (no later than one week before the scheduled RC meeting) 5. submits the final proposal including a concise abstract of their PhD project to the research commission. 6. prepares a short presentation to introduce his/her PhD project to the RC audience (see below ‘Proposed Structure of PhD Project presentation at the Research Commission meeting’)
Reviewers The evaluation process consists of three phases: Phase 1: Within two weeks after receiving the first version of the proposal, the reviewers: 1. evaluate the proposal and use the PhD proposal evaluation form as a tool to assess all relevant criteria 2. discuss the outcome of their evaluation with the PhD candidate and supervisor in a meeting organised by the PhD candidate (if meeting in person is impossible, this exchange has to take place by other means) 3. Statistical review: no need for an evaluation form, as each PhD work has its individual method challenges Phase 2: Within one week after meeting with the PhD candidate and supervisor, the reviewers receive the final, revised proposal from the PhD candidate 1. The reviewers fill out the evaluation form a second time. Criteria that are sound may simply be check-marked and commented by a single phrase if necessary. Only those issues that remain to be solved in the revised version need specific but concise comments. The reviewer also recommends the final proposal for approval, minor or major revision. However, the whole idea behind this streamlined evaluation process is that final proposals can be approved in principle by the research commission Appendix - 81
