Policy and Procedures for the Examination of Research Degrees

The following policy relates to the examination of Research Degrees at Liverpool John Moores University and applies to full-time and part-time Postgraduate Research Students of the following degrees: 

• Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
• Master of Philosophy (MPhil)
• PhD by Published Work 

It is University policy that every research thesis will be assessed by examiners who have appropriate academic qualifications, relevant expertise in the area of research being examined, and a suitable level of experience in examining research degree submissions.

Any deviation from this policy will only be considered in the most exceptional circumstances, and must be agreed by the Chair of Research Degrees Board before the examination takes place.

It is a requirement of the University that candidates for all Research Degrees produce a thesis or other appropriate form of submitted material which embodies their research for examination at the end of the degree. The term ‘thesis’ is used hereafter to describe all submitted material. 

The examination of a Research Degree thesis involves two stages: first, the submission and preliminary assessment of the thesis, normally by one internal and one external examiner; and second, the defence of the thesis by the candidate at a viva voce examination with the same examiners.

To be awarded a doctoral qualification, research students must – through their thesis and their defence of this in the viva voce examination – meet the requirements of Section 4 of The Framework for Higher Education Qualifications of UK Degree-Awarding Bodies (2024): They must demonstrate that they have: 

• a broad knowledge and understanding of their discipline and associated research techniques – i.e. show that they understand the broader research context within which their work sits and can frame their work and their research question(s) with reference to that research context; 
• applied in their work their knowledge of their discipline and associated research techniques – i.e., that they have chosen a research methodology that is sound, and which is relevant for their research question(s), applied this correctly, and analysed their results/findings appropriately and accurately 
• made a distinct and original contribution to knowledge – this does not mean something that completely changes their field; it is likely to be something that adds to knowledge in their field; 
• produced work which is considered to be worthy of publication – i.e., work which satisfies the scholarly and professional requirements associated with publication in a peer-reviewed academic format such as a journal.

Examiners must be satisfied that the degree criteria have been met before recommending an award. 

The standard of the Master of Philosophy (MPhil) is that expected of a graduate who has satisfactorily completed a programme of study which includes the critical investigation and evaluation of an approved topic and who has demonstrated an understanding of research methods appropriate to the chosen field and has presented and defended a thesis, by oral examination, to the satisfaction of the examiners.

The Lead Supervisor is required to submit their Nomination of Examiners in eDoc within ten working days of the submission of the Notification of Intent to Submit by the Postgraduate Research Student. 

Supervisors are required to contact the examiners to ensure that they are willing and available to examine the degree, before nominating them. 

In consultation with the candidate, supervisors should verify that the proposed examiners have not had a significant personal, financial or professional relationship with the candidate. 

The supervisor must discuss their nominations with the candidate, prior to completing their Nomination of Examiners. Candidates have the right to contest the nomination of an examiner or Independent Chair for reasons that can be justified, and should approach the Doctoral Academy within one working week of receiving the nomination with their concerns in the first instance. If after discussions with relevant staff the disagreement remains unresolved, the candidate must submit a written statement giving reasons for their objections to be considered by the Research Degrees Committee. Research Degrees Board can agree one of the following outcomes: 

• If the Board agrees that there are reasonable concerns about the appointment of the examiner/Independent Chair as stated in the written statement from the candidate, a new examiner/Independent Chair will be nominated by the Lead Supervisor. Only the role contested by the candidate will be re-nominated. 
• If the Board does not agree with the concerns outlined in the written statement from the candidate the nominated examining panel will remain and a date will be set for the viva examination. The candidate can appeal this decision once by submitting their concerns to Student Governance. The Assistant Academic Registrar (or their nominee) will reconsider the submitted written statement, and a formal decision will be communicated to the candidate. 

Nominations for examiners need to be endorsed by Faculty Research Degrees Committee and approved by University Research Degrees Board. Approval will only be given when the nominations comply with the criteria set out in this policy.  

External examiners are approved subject to the successful verification of their Right to Work in the UK in line with university expectations. This verification must take place before commencement of duties as an external examiner i.e., prior to the thesis being circulated.

The nomination and approval process and notification to examiners will be via eDoc and managed by the Doctoral Academy.

Supervisors must refer to the criteria detailed in this policy when nominating examiners. There may be occasions when the proposed examiner does not meet all the criteria outlined in the policy, for example, in a specialist subject area where there is only a small pool of experts. In such cases, approval to exceptionally appoint the examiner must be sought by the Lead Supervisor from Research Degrees Board.

Composition of the examination team

The following are absolute requirements of the examining panel:

• As a minimum, two appropriately qualified examiners are appointed for the purpose, at least one of whom is internal and one external to the university.
• Examiners should understand the procedures which operate within LJMU and have a clear sense of the expectations and standards associated with a successful Doctoral award.
• The examination team as a whole must be able to demonstrate appropriate prior experience and training in the examination procedure and will normally have examined a research degree equivalent in level to the award being examined.
• The examining team must be able to reach an independent and authoritative judgement about the candidate’s work, free from bias and conflict of interest.
• In the case of candidates who are members of staff of the university, two external examiners must normally be appointed, in addition to one Internal. The proposed examiners must be considered and endorsed by the relevant School Director prior to FRDC consideration.

Examiner Restrictions

No one in the following circumstances or categories should be appointed as an examiner:

• Anyone who has been a member of the Postgraduate Research Student’s supervisory team or been directly involved in the research of the candidate.
• Anyone significantly involved in recent or current substantive research activities with the candidate.
• Anyone whose own work is the specific focus of the research project.
• Anyone with a contractual or personal relationship with either the Postgraduate Research Student or the Supervisor(s), or with a financial interest in the research of the candidate.

Frequency of Appointment

The examiner appointments will last for the duration of the examination process, including re-examination where this is the outcome of the first examination, unless exceptional circumstances arise. It is expected that:

• An external examiner should not normally be appointed more than three times in any three-year period, with a minimum of six months between tenures, except with the express permission of Research Degrees Board.
• Regular pairings of internal and external examiners should be avoided.

The role of the External Examiner

The external examiner must read the candidate's thesis, prepare a preliminary report, and should lead the viva voce examination. The external examiner must come to a view whether the candidate’s research work is of a standard comparable to that of students being examined at other institutions for the same degree. 

It is the responsibility of the external examiner to disclose any significant personal, financial or professional relationship with the candidate.

External examiners must have the right to work (RTW) in the UK. It is the Doctoral Academy’s responsibility to check that the university is provided with the relevant documentation from the external examiner regarding their RTW status. 

Consideration should always be given to the availability of external examiners within the UK. However, where it is necessary to appoint an examiner outside of the UK, any additional costs incurred by this arrangement will be met by the relevant school or faculty.

Criteria for nominating an External Examiner 

External examiners will normally be a specialist in the topic(s) to be examined. They should meet the following essential requirements:

• Have expertise in the area of work to be examined; 
• Be experienced in research, and have recently published, or have equivalent professional experience; 
• Preferably have been an examiner for a postgraduate research degree or have had experience of the postgraduate research degree examination process; 
• Hold a postgraduate research degree at the level being examined, or have equivalent professional experience; 
• Hold/have held an appointment within a university, or, if outside the university sector; e.g., a senior industrial scientist or professional practitioner, be aware of the standards required; 
• Retired academic members of staff fulfilling all other criteria may be selected as long as they are still active in research; 
• Visiting academic members of staff may act as External Examiners where they fulfil all of the other criteria for appointment.

External Examiner restrictions

External Examiners are not permitted to be: 

• A current employee of the university. 
• Former staff of the university, unless a period of five years has elapsed. 
• Involved in any collaboration with the candidate or have given any substantive advice to the candidate on their research (except in the case of a resubmitted thesis); 
• A former higher degree student of the university unless at least five years have elapsed since the degree was conferred.

Examiners who have been, or are currently acting as, the external examiner for a taught course will not normally be excluded from appointment as a research degree examiner.

Duties of an Internal Examiner

• To read the thesis and provide a preliminary report before discussing with the other examiners; 
• To manage all required tasks of the examination processes through eDoc within the required timeframes; 
• To attend any Research Degrees Board when required; 
• To manage the submission and approval of the Joint Examiners' Report within 5 working days of the viva voce examination.

The internal examiner is normally required to act as host during the external examiner’s visit to the university.

Criteria for nominating an Internal Examiner

The internal examiner must: 

• Be a member of the academic staff of LJMU; 
• Have expertise in the area of work to be examined; 
• Be experienced in research, and have recently published, or have equivalent professional experience; 
• Hold an academic award at the level being examined or have equivalent professional experience; 
• Be familiar with university processes and procedures and specifically have knowledge of university regulations for the degree under examination and of university examinations policy;
• Must have been through the examination process at least once, or have attended university training

In exceptional cases, retired academic members of staff fulfilling all other criteria may be selected as internal examiners as long as they are still active in research and have substantial involvement with the university. 

Honorary members of academic staff at LJMU may be appointed as internal examiners where they fulfil all of the other criteria for appointment.

Internal Examiner restrictions

The internal examiner must not: 

• Be the candidate’s Lead Supervisor or Co-Supervisor; 
• Be a candidate for the same degree; 
• Be a visiting member of staff; 
• Have had significant involvement in the project or with the candidate or their supervisor; 
• Have been appointed as the Independent Assessor in the Candidate’s Confirmation Assessment;

An examiner’s appointment may only be terminated prematurely in exceptional circumstances. Any request to terminate an appointment prematurely must be referred by the Faculty Research Degrees Committee to Research Degrees Board in writing, giving reasons for the request. The grounds for premature termination may include the following: 

• Failure to participate in the examination without due reason 
• Failure to submit a report without due reason 
• Failure to comply with all of the procedures of the examination process or the university’s regulations and policies more generally 

In case an examiner is no longer available to review and sign off amendments following referral, or in case an examiner fails to comply with the examination process (including unacceptable delays in the submission of reports), Research Degrees Board will approve alternative examination arrangements.

Appointment of an Independent Chair

An Independent Chair will be appointed under the following circumstances: 

• At the request of the internal and/or external examiner or supervisor if they anticipate difficulties with the examination or if they simply require the presence of a chair to assist them through the process. 
• At the request of the candidate if they require the presence of a Chair 
• When the school or faculty recognises there are issues relating to the conduct of the research and/or supervision or aspects of the thesis that require the presence of an experienced academic to oversee the process. 
• Where the internal examiner will be undertaking their first appointment as a research degree examiner. 
• Where there are a limited number of previous UK Postgraduate Research Student examinations across the team. 
• Where a second viva is required on a resubmission following re-examination. 
• Where exceptional or non-standard examination arrangements are agreed; 
• Any other circumstance in which Research Degrees Board considers it necessary.

The final decision to appoint an Independent Chair rests with the Chair of the Research Degrees Board. When an Independent Chair is appointed, the candidate, examiners and the Lead Supervisor should be informed who this will be and their role in the process.

Criteria for appointing an Independent Chair

The Independent Chair must normally: 

• Be an academic member of staff at the LJMU at the grade of senior lecturer or above; 
• Have attended appropriate training to be familiar with university processes and procedures and specifically have knowledge of university regulations for the degree under examination and of the university examinations policy for postgraduate research degrees; 
• Have substantial previous experience as an examiner of the postgraduate research degree viva voce examination; 
• Have experience in the supervision of Postgraduate Research Students studying for the degree being examined; 
• Preferably have previous experience of Chairing meetings. 

The Independent Chair must not be a member of the candidate’s supervisory team, or have played any significant part in the project or the assessment of the Candidate (e.g. in formal progress reviews/Confirmation).

The role of the Independent Chair

The primary role of the Chair is to ensure that the Postgraduate Research Student is examined fairly and in accordance with university regulations. They are not required to have any knowledge of the thesis or the discipline area and it is not expected that the Chair should receive or read a copy of the thesis in preparation for the examination. The Independent Chair should not be involved in or contribute to the assessment of the thesis. Specifically, their role is: 

• To attend the pre-viva voce meeting with the examiners and oversee the examiners’ plans for the viva voce examination; 
• To oversee the viva voce examination, to introduce the examiners and candidate, outline the procedure for the examination and its key purposes; 
• To ensure the candidate has the opportunity to defend the thesis and respond to all questions posed by the examiners; 
• To ensure that the supervisor, if present, does not contribute to the final decision; 
• At the end of the viva voce examination, ensure that actions required of the candidate and the examiners are clear and understood by all parties; 
• To advise examiners, the candidate and other parties involved in the examination on university policy and regulations; 
• To request that examiners complete and submit the relevant reports in eDoc within five working days of the viva voce examination; 
• In the case of disagreement between the examiners, the Chair's role is confined to advising the examiners on their options; the Chair does not have an additional casting vote but should help the examiners to reach an agreed position wherever possible

Conduct of the via voce examination

During the viva voce examination and the discussion held afterwards, the Chair should intervene only in the following circumstances: 

• To provide advice on regulations, procedures, policy and practice; 
• Where the Chair feels that there is activity that is not 'rigorous, fair, reliable or consistent'; 
• Where the Chair feels that there is activity which contravenes the university's Equality and Diversity Policy; 
• During the course of the examination, the Chair may feel it appropriate to call a temporary break in the examination in order to speak with the examiners in private; 
• When the examiners have finished their discussions with the candidate, the Chair should ensure that everyone, including the candidate, has had an opportunity to ask any questions; 
• The Chair should draw the proceedings to a close and explain the next steps in the procedure. Ordinarily, the Chair will ask the candidate to withdraw from the room while the examiners consider the outcome(s) of the examination and their recommendation to the Research Degrees Board.

Submission planning

Candidates must complete their Submission Planning, via eDoc, at least 3 months before they plan to submit their thesis in order to permit timely preparations for the examination. 

The candidate may decide when to submit and against the advice of their supervisor. Where a supervisor advises a candidate against submitting their thesis, it is recommended that the supervisor outlines their concerns, in writing to Research Degrees Board stating the reasons for advising against submission. 

The opinion of the supervisory team is advisory and does not guarantee the award of the degree. That decision rests with the examiners alone. Irrespective of the supervisor’s opinion, the decision to submit rests with the candidate. 

Failure or late notice of intention to submit will delay the examination of a thesis.

Thesis submission

The thesis must be submitted electronically in a single PDF document via eDoc. If requested by examiners, hard copies will be made available by the Doctoral Academy in consultation with the candidate. 

Under no circumstances should the candidate or supervisor supply the examiners with the copies of the thesis.

There should normally be a minimum of four weeks between the thesis circulation to the examiners and the viva voce examination.  A shorter time period must be agreed by the examination panel and with the Doctoral Academy.

The pre-viva voce examination report

Examiners must each complete an independent Pre-Viva Report before discussing the thesis with one another. The report allows examiners to: 

• clarify their preliminary judgement on the thesis for discussion with the other examiner(s) at the pre-viva voce examination meeting; 
• identify priorities and points for discussion at the viva voce examination; 
• identify revisions required, thereby saving time after the viva voce examination (even if revisions change as a result of the candidate’s performance or the views of the other examiner); 
• identify issues which may need to be discussed with the supervisor or matters that need to be reported to the Doctoral Academy/Research Degrees Board. 

The examiners must submit copies of their pre-viva voce reports at least 3 working days before the viva voce examination. 

Examiners who suspect the candidate of academic misconduct should contact the Doctoral Academy in the first instance to seek advice.

Setting up the viva voce examination

The viva voce examination must take place normally within eight working weeks from the date the thesis is sent to the examiners. 

The Lead Supervisor is responsible for making the practical arrangements for the viva voce examination and for confirming the date, time and location of the viva voce examination. The candidate and the examiners must be informed of the date, time and location of the viva voce examination not less than ten working days before the examination. 

The university has responsibilities under the Disability Discrimination Act to make reasonable adjustments to its examination arrangements to ensure that candidates with additional support needs are not disadvantaged for reasons relating to a long-term medical condition, sensory impairment, specific learning difficulty and/or disability.

Candidates are required to inform the Doctoral Academy if there are any particular arrangements or adjustments that need to be made to enable their full participation in the viva voce examination. This should be normally done no later than the intention to submit stage of the examination process. 

The candidate should inform the supervisor of any exceptional circumstance, which in their view might affect their performance adversely prior to the viva voce examination starting. The supervisor should ensure that the examiners are aware of any circumstances raised and inform the Doctoral Academy as soon as possible.

The pre-viva voce examination meeting

Sufficient time should be allocated for a meeting of the examiners prior to the viva voce examination. The examiners must confer with one another, in order to identify issues to be raised in the viva voce examination; and to agree who will ask which questions and in what order.

Attendance of the supervisor at the viva voce examination

Supervisors may be present at the viva voce examination with the consent of the candidate. They should under no circumstances participate in the examination. If required by the examiners, the supervisor may answer any questions put to them by the examiners, but at all other times the supervisor must act as a silent observer.

 It is recommended that the supervisor should be available at the time of the viva voce examination in case the examiners feel that their presence at the viva voce is required (for example, to give support to the student during feedback).

Viva voce examinations are mandatory for Research Degrees candidates presenting for the first time. The purpose of the viva is: 

After the viva voce examination, the examiners must agree a joint recommendation on the outcome of the examination and their comments on the thesis and candidate’s performance at the viva voce examination. This must be recorded on the Examination Outcome Report. 

The report provides important feedback to the candidate on their thesis and their performance at the viva voce examination and it is essential that responses are detailed, clear and legible.

The Examination Outcome Report must be completed on eDoc within five working days of the viva voce examination. The internal examiner will be required to complete the report on eDoc, and forward it on the other examiner for them to agree the report. This requirement must be made clear to both the internal and external examiners before the examination process begins. If examiners require more than five working days to complete their recommendation, they must inform the Doctoral Academy after the viva voce examination. 

Where a viva voce examination is not required (i.e. in the case of a resubmitted thesis), the completed Examination Outcome Report must be completed on eDoc via the internal examiner, normally within eight weeks of the thesis first being sent to the examiners. 

Candidates can request to see Pre-Viva Reports once the recommendation has been approved by Research Degrees Board. Examination Outcome Reports will be available to candidates on eDoc once approved by Research Degrees Board.

First examination

Following the completion of the first examination the examiners may recommend that: 

a The Candidate be awarded the degree. 

b The Candidate be awarded the degree subject to amendments being made to the thesis within a period of up to 3 months from the date of notification. 

Examiners must indicate to the candidate and Research Degrees Board in writing what amendments are required. Such amendments must not be so substantial as to require a full re-examination of the thesis. Such amendments might include, for example, moderate omissions of substance, moderate typographical errors, limited further analysis but such that it will not affect the originality of the central thesis; limited revision of material which is specified in detail by the examiners. Candidates would not be expected to carry out any further empirical research. 

c RE-EXAMINATION: The Candidate be permitted to revise the thesis and re-submit for the degree and be re-examined, with or without a viva voce examination within a period of up to 12 months from the date of notification. 

Examiners must provide Research Degree Board with a detailed written report on the deficiencies of the first submission which can be forwarded to the candidate after Research Degrees Board has approved the examiners’ recommendation. Such revisions might include, for example, more than 10% of the thesis to be amended, typographical/grammatical errors so numerous as to suggest carelessness; significant new empirical research required. 

d The Candidate be not awarded the degree and be not permitted to be re-examined. 

Where the examiners decide that the degree be not awarded and that no re-examination be permitted, the examiners shall prepare an agreed statement of the deficiencies of the thesis and/or its oral defence which includes the reason for their recommendation, which shall be forwarded to the Candidate by the Doctoral Academy. 

e In the case of a PhD examination, the candidate be awarded the degree of MPhil. This can be subject to the presentation of the thesis amended to the satisfaction of the examiners. 

The examiners must indicate the appropriate period of time, which the candidate shall have to amend the thesis to their satisfaction. 

Where a candidate is permitted to revise and resubmit their thesis for re-examination, Faculty Research Degrees Committee must review the candidate’s supervision arrangements to ensure that they are adequate during the period when the thesis is to be revised and resubmitted. 

Candidates can request to have copies of the pre-viva reports and approved Examination Outcome Reports via the Doctoral Academy once the recommendation has been approved by Research Degrees Board and the examination has been fully completed.

Approval of recommendations

Examiner recommendations remain provisional until they are formally approved by Research Degrees Board.

Timescales for amendments or revision to a thesis will commence on the day that the candidate receives formal notification from RDB of the outcome of the examination/re-examination. 

Candidates must submit required amendments or revision via eDoc to be considered by the examiner(s) identified in the Examination Outcome Report.  Examiners are expected to review these within a period of 4 weeks for amendments and 6 weeks for revisions following a re-examination outcome.

The examiner(s) identified in the Examination Outcome Report must confirm via eDoc that the requirements of the examiners have been satisfactorily complete by the candidate before the award can be considered and approved by Research Degrees Board.  

In the event of a disagreement on the appropriate outcome of a research degree examination between the internal and external examiner, the first recourse should be to reach a joint decision on the basis of detailed argument about the specific academic points arising from the examination. In resolving matters particular weight should be given to the views of the external examiner.

If, after their deliberations, examiners remain unable to reach an agreement on a recommendation following the viva voce examination, the procedure detailed below must be followed:

1. The candidate should be informed that the examiners have been unable to reach a decision and that separate reports will be completed and considered by the Research Degrees Board.
2. Each examiner must complete a separate Examination Outcome Report on eDoc giving justification for their recommendation within five working days of the viva voce examination.
3. The internal examiner or Independent Chair where appropriate, will be invited to the next, or specially convened, meeting of the Research Degrees Board to discuss the reports and to see if a recommendation can be agreed. Before the meeting, the external examiner should be contacted in order to obtain their views on the case.
4. Research Degrees Board may: a) accept a majority recommendation (provided that the majority recommendation includes at least one external examiner); b) accept the recommendation of the external examiner; c) require the appointment of an additional external examiner – especially if the internal examiner(s) disagree(s) strongly with the view of the external examiner or d) determine other action where appropriate
5. If agreement is not reached, the Research Degrees Board may, at its discretion, appoint one or more new external examiners or may. Additional examiners must not be told the identity of the original examiners nor their specific recommendations.
6. Where an additional external examiner is appointed, they shall prepare an independent preliminary report on the basis of the thesis and, if considered necessary may conduct a further viva voce examination independently of the previous examiners. Additional examiners must not be told the identity of the original examiners nor their specific recommendations. The identity of the new examiner(s) will not be disclosed to the other examiners or the candidate until the examination process has been completed.
7. Research Degrees Board will consider the additional examiner’s report and will have ultimate responsibility for confirming the recommendation.

The re-examination period begins from the date that the notification of the examiners’ recommendation following the viva voce examination is sent to the candidate detailing the revisions required. Candidates have up to one year to conduct further research, revise and resubmit their thesis for a second further examination. 

The revised thesis must be submitted via eDoc by the candidate. 

The examination of a resubmitted thesis should normally be undertaken by the original examiners. In exceptional circumstances where this is not possible, replacement examiners must be selected and approved following the procedure detailed in this policy. If a change to the examination team is required, this must be agreed in consultation with the PGR. 

Examiners will be sent the resubmitted thesis and must provide separate re-examination preliminary reports within 6 weeks of receipt of the thesis. The preliminary reports should clearly indicate whether a second viva voce is required. The preliminary reports will be shared across the examination team.

Where a second viva voce is requested, this must be agreed by all examiners as all examiners will be expected to attend. The Doctoral Academy will make the arrangements for a second viva voce. 

Following the exchange of the Re-examination Preliminary Reports, or a second viva voce where one is requested, examiners must confer to agree a joint recommendation on the outcome of the re-examination, comments on the thesis and the candidate’s performance at the viva voce (if applicable). This must be recorded on the Re-submission Examination Outcome Report. The report must be completed on eDoc within 5 working days. The internal examiner will be required to complete the report on eDoc, and forward it on the other examiner for them to agree the report. 

In the event of a disagreement on the appropriate outcome following a re-examination, the process for examiner disagreement over a recommendation detailed in this policy must be followed.

Examiner recommendations (Re-examination)

Following a re-examination examination the examiners may recommend that: 

a The Candidate be awarded the degree. 

b The Candidate be awarded the degree subject to amendments being made to the thesis within a period of up to 3 months from the date of the viva notification.

Examiners must indicate to the candidate and Research Degrees Board in writing what amendments are required. Such amendments must not be so substantial as to require a full re-examination of the thesis. Such amendments might include, for example, moderate omissions of substance, moderate typographical errors, limited further analysis but such that it will not affect the originality of the central thesis; limited revision of material which is specified in detail by the examiners. Candidates would not be expected to carry out any further empirical research.

c The Candidate be not awarded the degree and be not permitted to be re-examined. 

Where the examiners decide that the degree be not awarded and that no re-examination be permitted, the examiners shall prepare an agreed statement of the deficiencies of the thesis and/or its oral defence which includes the reason for their recommendation, which shall be forwarded to the Candidate by the Doctoral Academy.

d In the case of a PhD examination, the candidate be awarded the degree of MPhil subject to the presentation of the thesis amended to the satisfaction of the examiners. 

The examiners must indicate the appropriate period of time, which the candidate shall have to amend the thesis to their satisfaction.

It is a requirement of the university that candidates for all Research Degrees upload their final and approved thesis to the LJMU E-Thesis Collection in line with the Policy and Procedures for Depositing e-Theses

Results will not be formally published until the candidate has submitted an electronic copy of their final thesis with the completed appropriate revisions. Any delay in the submission of the electronic copy of the final thesis will delay formal publication of the result and the release of the degree certificate.  

Degree certificates are issued by Registry Services either by post, at the Graduation ceremony or by alternative arrangement with the candidate.

Appeals may be made only on specific grounds as detailed in the Academic Regulations for Research Degrees.

A fee is paid by the university on receipt of the completed claim form, and following receipt of the Examination Outcome Report. Fee levels for external examiners are determined by the university annually. External examiners are also able to claim all reasonable expenses incurred whilst undertaking their duties in line with the Regulations Governing External Examiner Fees and Expenses for Research Degree Awards.

The university will not deduct tax from payments made. External examiners will need to make their own arrangements. 

In order to comply with UKVI regulations, the university will not be able to make any payments to external examiners who have not had their ‘right to work’ in the UK verified