Adopted by the Oslo School of Architecture and Design Board on 21 June 2006 and pursuant to Sections 3-3 and 3.9 of Act no. 15 of 1 April 2005 relating to Universities and University Colleges.
PART 1 INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS
§ 1 Applicability of the Regulations
These Regulations apply to PhD studies which lead to the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) at the Oslo School of Architecture and Design (AHO). The Regulations generally pertain to admission to, undertaking and completing a PhD at the AHO.
§ 2 Scope, content and objectives of PhD studies
The School's PhD studies are organised into 3 years of full-time studies and comprises the following:
- one compulsory tuition component (at the Research School) which accounts for 45 credits (ESTC),
- undertaking independent research work in active cooperation with supervisor(s) and other researchers,
- participation in active national and international research environments, and
- specialist assistance which is closely related to the PhD work being undertaken.
PhD studies at the AHO are designed to ensure that they can be completed within a fixed time frame. The AHO shall provide all PhD candidates with offers of education at a high scientific level, involving carrying out scientific work and a tuition component (the Research School).
The overall aim of the School's PhD studies is to qualify students for research activities at a high professional level in respect of architecture, urbanism, industrial design and other closely related subjects.
§ 3 Responsibility for PhD studies
The AHO Board has the overall responsibility for the School's PhD studies. The Board is responsible for adopting and amending these Regulations. The Research Committee (FU) determines the guidelines and procedures that apply to the School's PhD programme.
§ 4 Quality assurance
The AHO's Quality Assurance System is designed to include the School's PhD studies and contains details about how activities and procedures relating to guidance, research, tuition and administration should be conducted.
PART II ADMISSIONS
§ 5 Admissions
The AHO distinguishes between two different categories of PhD candidates: 1) PhD candidates for whom the AHO is responsible as an employer (research fellows) and 2) PhD candidates for whom the AHO is not responsible as an employer.
Research fellowship positions are normally announced every other calendar year. Other applicants, as shown below, may be admitted on an ongoing basis:
- applicants for posts that have been advertised on externally funded projects at the AHO
- applicants funded by independent institutions
- applicants funded by other external sources
- applicants funded by the Industrial PhD Scheme
- self-funded applicants
§ 5.1 Admission requirements
In order to be admitted to the PhD programme applicants must usually hold a master's degree in architecture, industrial design, landscape architecture or have undergone 5 years of equivalent studies that have been approved by the AHO as a basis for being included in the School's PhD studies.
Admission will not normally be permitted if:
- funding of the PhD work has not been clarified,
- copyright agreements with external third parties present an impediment to the public defence and publication of the thesis,
- the intellectual property rights agreements that have been entered into are so unreasonable that the AHO should not be involved in the project in question,
- if less than one year of full-time work remains in respect of the PhD project concerned. Exemptions will be made for PhD candidates who apply to submit completed - or almost completed - thesis after the expiry of the admission period, cf. the final subsection of §5.3.
Applicants who have already been deemed as being qualified for admission to PhD studies in respect of other relevant specialist PhD programmes will normally be regarded as being qualified for admission to the AHO's PhD programme.
In those cases where a project description has already been deemed to be worthy of funding by the Norwegian Research Council (NFR), the AHO is not obliged to undertake any additional expert assessment.
Considerations relating to equal status shall be adhered to when admitting/employing PhD candidates, cf. §6-2 of the Norwegian University Act.
Applications shall be submitted on the designated form. The AHO may stipulate requirements for applicants to attend special courses and/or to pass special tests prior to admission.
If an applicant is planning to write his/her thesis in a different language to those that have been approved in accordance with §10 of these Regulations, then an application for approval of such shall be submitted with his/her application.
Applicants from countries outside the Nordic countries must be able to provide documentary proof of their English skills as follows:
- TOEFL – Test of English as a Foreign Language, with at least 550 points in a paper-based test, 213 points in a computer-based test (TOEFL CBT) or 80 points in an Internet-based test (TOEFL IBT).
- IELTS – International English Language Testing Service, British Council, with at least 6.0 points (overall score).
- Certificate in Advanced English or Certificate of Proficiency in English from the University of Cambridge.
Applicants with the following documentation are exempt from the School's English requirements:
- Citizens from Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the USA.
- One year of university studies in one of the above mentioned countries where tuition was provided in English.
- The completion of university studies where English comprised the major component of the studies concerned.
- A Bachelor's Degree where the language of tuition was English throughout the entire course of study.
- An A-level in English with a minimum pass of C or above.
§ 5.1.1. Admission procedures for scholarship posts
Priority subject areas for research will be specified when advertising scholarship positions in respect of admission to the AHO's PhD programme. The text of such advertisements will provide information about institutional affiliation.
Applications for scholarship positions shall contain the following:
- CV and documentary proof of expertise in respect of the applicant.
- Documentation relating to the educational qualifications supporting the candidate's application.
- A provisional project description and a tentative progress schedule. These shall provide information about the topic of research, the problems to be addressed in the research work and the empiricism to be employed. Also required is an outline of the approach to be used and references relating to the status of knowledge possessed about the field of research concerned.
- Information about special supervision requirements and any established supervisory contacts.
- Any plans relating to spending time at other research institutions or enterprises, including foreign ones.
- If relevant: information about intellectual property rights (IPR) restrictions that are linked to the project concerned.
In order to assess applicants the FU (Research Committee) appoints an expert committee. The institute to which the doctoral candidate is to belong is encouraged to propose members. The Committee shall consist of three members, two of whom should preferably be external members. Both genders should be represented whenever possible. All members must have a doctorate (PhD or equivalent expertise. Special justification shall be provided in the event of non-conformance with these criteria.
Decisions relating to admission shall be based on an overall assessment of the application concerned. The most important criteria for prioritising applicants shall be as follows:
- an assessment of the applicant's general expertise and his/her expertise in respect of the relevant project,
- the relevance of the project concerned in relation to AHO's priority specialist areas,
- the professional quality of the project application and its feasibility, and
- the AHO's supervisory capacity.
It is the duty of the expert committee to assess the qualifications for admission to the AHO's PhD studies. It shall distinguish between qualified and non-qualified applicants, and then draw up its assessments on the basis of the material submitted. The Committee shall present its assessments of each individual qualified applicant. Applicants shall not be ranked if such has not been specifically requested.
The relevant institute will assess applicants who are deemed to be qualified in consultation with the project manager and, if necessary, conduct interviews. The institute will make recommendations about employment. The Committee's assessments and the institute's recommendations will be dealt with by the FU which will report to the Rector about appointments. The Board will decide about any appointments to the AHO.
§ 5.1.2. Admission procedures for applicants for whom the AHO is not responsible as an employer
External applicants funded by their own institutions, other external sources or their own funds must submit documentation about their funding.
Admission offers for the AHO's PhD programme will only be made subject to reservations about funding. Admission offers are thus conditional on applicants being able to provide documentary evidence of the fact that funding can be provided within a maximum framework of three months.
In order to assess applicants the FU (Research Committee) appoints a committee that normally consists of three expert members. Both genders should be represented whenever possible. All members must have a doctorate or equivalent expertise. Special justification shall be provided in the event of non-conformance with these criteria.
Decisions relating to admission shall be based on an overall assessment of the application concerned. The most important criteria that apply in respect of assessing admissions to the School's PhD studies are as follows:
- the applicant's professional qualifications,
- the professional quality of the project concerned,
- the professional relevance of the project for the AHO,
- the AHO's supervisory capacity.
It is the duty of the expert committee to assess the qualifications for admission to the School's PhD programme. The Committee will make recommendations on the basis of the material submitted. Such recommendations will be sent to the FU who, on the basis of such recommendations and the application concerned, will submit a report about admission. AHO’s Rector will make decisions about admissions.
§ 5.2 Admission period
The School's PhD studies are organised into 3 years of full-time studies. In the event of study breaks that comply with statutory legislation the admission period will be extended accordingly. It is not normally permissible to pursue PhD studies that have a progression lasting for more than 6 years of studying.
Generally speaking applications for admission to the programme should be submitted within three months following the commencement of the research project that is designed to lead up to the PhD degree. If less than one year of full-time work remains in respect of the PhD project concerned, the applicant shall be rejected. cf. § 5.2.
The maximum time for the completion of a PhD programme is eight years from the original starting date.
After the expiry of the admission period, the parties' rights and obligations under the PhD agreement shall be discontinued such that the PhD candidate loses his/her rights to supervision, course participation and access to the AHO's infrastructure. However, PhD candidates may apply to submit their thesis for adjudication for their PhD degree after the expiry of the admission period, cf. the final subsection of §5.3.
§ 5.3 Premature termination
The PhD candidate and the AHO may agree to terminate the PhD studies before the appointed time. In the event of such termination of the PhD studies, the arrangements for matters relating to any employment circumstances, funding, rights to results, etc. shall be determined in writing.
The AHO may decide to forcibly terminate the PhD studies prior to the appointed time. Such a decision may be made if one or more of the following circumstances apply:
- A significant delay in implementation due to circumstances over which the PhD candidate has control and the nature of which is such that it creates justified doubt about whether or not the PhD candidate will be able to complete the project within the appointed time.
- Repeated or significant failure on the part of the PhD candidate to comply with his/her duty to provide information, undertake follow-up or submit reports, including failure to submit progress reports and failure to attend progress seminars.
- Breaches of the ethical research guidelines that apply to the subject concerned.
- Conduct displayed by a PhD candidate that undermines the trust that needs to exist between the institution and the PhD candidate during implementation, including any criminal activities associated with implementation of the PhD studies.
- Any significant changes in the research project.
PhD students funded by AHO may be dismissed from their posts when there is just cause for doing so on the basis of circumstances affecting the institution or the employee, cf. Sections 9 and 10 of the Norwegian Civil Servants Act, or they shall be dismissed pursuant to Section 15 of the Act.
All commitments on the part of the AHO towards PhD candidates shall cease to apply after 8 years, cf. § 5.2. However, PhD candidates can apply, at their own initiative, to submit their thesis for adjudication after the expiry of a maximum admission period of 8 years. If such an application is granted, the FU will appoint a reader (cf. § 2) in order to assist with completion leading up to final submission.
§ 6 The PhD contract
Admission will be formalised in written contracts that shall specify the subject, supervision and the parties' mutual rights and obligations. Any significant changes in the circumstances outlined in these contracts shall be presented to the Research Committee for approval.
The contract consists of three parts. Part A of the contract is entered into between the AHO and individual research fellow and will be signed by the Rector, the fellow and the manager of the institution. Part B applies to supervision and will be signed by the PhD candidate, supervisors and the head of the PhD programme.
Part C of the contract is entered into between the AHO, the PhD candidate and external parties in those cases where the PhD candidate is employed by an external party and/or has a job with an external party. Part C governs the working conditions, including the time to be spent on the PhD work, operating assets, the requirements for scientific equipment and intellectual property rights.
Research fellows normally have a duty to be present at the AHO. Other places of work may be agreed for shorter or longer periods.
Other PhD candidates must normally spend a minimum of one year at the AHO.
PART III IMPLEMENTATION
§ 7 The Research School
In conjunction with work on the thesis, the Research School shall provide PhD tuition at a high specialist level. Courses at the Research School shall normally correspond to 45 credits.
The Research School must be attended on a full-time basis, even by part-time PhD candidates. All PhD candidates are normally obliged to attend the Research School. The AHO may grant exemptions from some aspects of the Research School if documentary proof can be provided of other tuition or research experience which provides equivalent expertise.
Attendance at the Research School shall be completed and approved by no later than 1 (one) year after the completion of the compulsory studies.
Some provisions relating to examinations contained in the Norwegian Act relating to Universities and University Colleges, as well as relevant provisions contained in the Regulations relating to Masters Studies at the Oslo School of Architecture and Design, govern certain aspects of the examination held at the Research School.
The curriculum of the Research School shall be specified in a separate study plan. In addition to providing details about types of courses and seminars and the allocation of credits, the study plan shall also specify allocations between the Research School and the PhD studies governed by the institutes.
§ 8 Affiliation with research environments
The main supervisor, in consultation with the AHO's institutes, is primarily responsible for ensuring that PhD candidates participate on a regular basis in an active research environment with senior researches and other PhD candidates.
As regards PhD candidates who are more closely associated with other institutions, an agreement shall be entered into between the degree-allocating and cooperating institutions which regulates the working conditions and this shall also ensure that the PhD candidate participates in an active research environment, cf.. § 6.
§ 9 Reporting
Procedures relating to progress reporting shall reveal any failures to make progress in respect of thesis work and any supervisory defects.
During the admission period, PhD candidates and their appointed supervisors shall submit separate written reports each semester about PhD study progress on a designated form. These reports shall be submitted to and approved by the Research Committee or the Research Committee's authorised representative.
Subsequent to such submission, all PhD candidates shall be invited to attend a progress seminar or a final seminar. The latter shall be organised for PhD candidates during the final phase of their studies.
Failure to submit or inadequately submitted progress reports by a PhD candidate may result in the forcible termination of the candidate's studies prior to the end of the admission period, cf. § 5.4.
Supervisors who fail to comply with their reporting duties may be relieved of their supervisory responsibilities.
§ 10 The thesis
§ 10.1 Thesis requirements
The thesis shall be an independent, scientific work that complies with international standards relating to the specialist field with regard to ethical requirements, academic standards and methodology. The thesis shall contribute to the development of new specialist knowledge and must be of sufficiently high quality to merit publication as part of the scientific literature available on architecture and design, cf. § 2.
Some joint work is acceptable for a thesis when the PhD candidate's independent contribution can be identified and documented.
Compilations of several shorter papers may be approved as a thesis when the PhD candidate's independent contribution can be identified and documented, when there is a connection between the papers concerned and when such a connection has been accounted for.
If a paper has been written in collaboration with other authors, the PhD candidate shall adhere to those norms relating to co-authorship that are generally accepted in the specialist field concerned. Thesis that include the work of several authors shall be accompanied by a signed statement outlining the contributions made to each individual paper by the PhD candidate and each individual co-author. They shall also be accompanied by a signed statement from the individual co-authors confirming that they are aware of, and are responsible for, the completed work.
§ 10.2 Work that cannot be accepted
Work that has been accepted as a basis for previous examinations cannot be accepted for adjudication unless such work is included as a minor part of a thesis which consists of several, connected works.
A work or part of a work that has previously been approved for PhD degrees at a Norwegian or foreign institution cannot be accepted for adjudication, even if the work is submitted in a revised format.
§ 10.3 Rights re. the use of results
A PhD candidate's rights in respect of making use of his/her own results, the exploitation of patentable inventions, and copyright, etc. are governed by the AHO's general rules on this subject, as well as the rules that apply in the Norwegian Act pertaining to inventions produced by employees.
§ 10.4 Language
Thesis shall be written in Norwegian, Swedish, Danish or English. If a PhD candidate wishes to use a different language, special permission to do so shall be sought upon admission, cf.. § 5.1.
§ 11 Supervision
Work on PhD Thesis shall be carried out under individual supervision. A senior supervisor shall be appointed with primary responsibility for academic follow-up of the PhD candidate concerned. The PhD candidate and his/her supervisor shall have regular contact with each other. The frequency of contact shall be shown in the progress report, cf. § 9. Supervisors shall undertake to keep themselves informed about the progress of the PhD candidate's work and they shall assess the candidate in relation to the progress schedule contained in the project description. The senior supervisor shall be an employee of the AHO if such expertise is available at the institution. If the PhD candidate does not have a senior supervisor at the AHO, a co-supervisor from the AHO shall be appointed.
PhD candidates are entitled to be supervised by one or more assistant supervisors in addition to the senior supervisor. It is recommended that all PhD candidates should have at least one assistant supervisor in addition to a senior supervisor. All supervisors shall have a PhD or equivalent research expertise.
Both the senior supervisor and the PhD candidate shall undertake to submit reports in accordance with the rules laid down by the AHO, cf. § 9.
§ 12 Readers
A reader shall be appointed as soon as the draft thesis is ready. Readers shall have a PhD degree of equivalent research expertise. Readers shall normally be external readers and they shall be appointed by the Research Committee in response to proposals submitted by the main supervisor. Readers shall submit a report containing concrete feedback, as well as an assessment of whether or not the thesis is ready for submission. Such reports shall be submitted to the main supervisor and the PhD candidate, with a copy to the Research Committee.
PART IV COMPLETION
§ 13 Adjudication
PhD degrees are awarded on the basis of the following:
- Approved completion of studies at the Research School, or other approved specialist studies or expertise
- Approved scientific thesis
- Approved trial lecture on the subject specified
- Satisfactory defence in a public disputation
§ 14 Submission
Three copies and an electronic version of the thesis shall be submitted to the research administration. The thesis shall be submitted on the School's template for PhD thesis.
The following shall also be submitted with the thesis:
- Confirmation of approved attendance at the Research School
- Documentation relating to acquisition of the required permits when such is necessary
- Co-authorship statements when such are required in accordance with § 10.1.
- A statement confirming whether or not the thesis is being submitted for adjudication for the first or second time
- A statement confirming that the PhD work has not been submitted for adjudication at another institution
Failure to comply with the requirements contained in § 14 herewith will result in rejection of the thesis.
§ 15 Appointment of the Adjudication Committee
An Adjudication Committee shall be appointed with at least three members. The main supervisor shall submit a proposal for the Adjudication Committee to the Research Committee. Such proposals shall be substantiated and should show how the Committee as a whole would be able to cover the specialist field dealt with in the thesis.
The composition of the Committee shall be such that:
- both genders are represented whenever possible,
- at least one of the members has no association with the AHO,
- at least one of the members has no association with Norwegian institutions whenever possible,
- all members have a PhD or equivalent research expertise.
The appointed supervisors, and anyone else who has contributed to the thesis, may not be members of the Adjudication Committee, or chair it.
Special substantiation shall be provided in the event of any non-conformance with these criteria.
The rules relating to vested interests contained in the Norwegian Public Administration Act shall apply to Committee members.
Two of the Committee's members shall be opponents. The Research Committee shall appoint an administrator as one of the Committee members, or in addition to the Committee's members.
The Rector shall approve the composition of the Adjudication Committee in response to the recommendations of the Research Committee.
The Committee shall adjudicate the thesis, trial lecture and disputation.
§ 16 Work of the Adjudication Committee
§16.1 Obtaining supplementary information
The main supervisor may be invited to meetings of the Adjudication Committee in order to provide an account of his/her supervision and thesis work. The Committee may call for submission of the PhD source material and supplementary or clarifying information.
§ 16.2 Correction of formal errors in the thesis
A submitted thesis may not be withdrawn before a final decision has been reached as to whether it merits a public defense.
The PhD candidate may correct formal errors in his/her thesis. In such cases, a list of such corrections (an errata list) must be submitted prior to the disputation. The list of errors (Errata-list) must accompany the printed thesis.
§ 16.3 Revising submitted thesis
The Adjudication Committee may, on the basis of a submitted thesis and any additional material, cf. § 16.1, recommend granting permission for a thesis to be revised. The Research Committee at AHO shall decide if permission can be granted for revision of the thesis in question after recommendation from the adjudication committee. If the Research Committee permits revision, a deadline shall be stipulated which does not normally exceed three months. A new deadline for the Adjudication Committee’s report must also be decided.
A decision by The Research Committee about a new deadline cannot be appealed by the PhD candidate.
A revised thesis must, provided that this is possible, be evaluated by the initial Adjudication Committee.
§ 16.4 Recommendations of the Adjudication Committee
The Adjudication Committee delivers its recommendations about whether or not a thesis is worthy of being defended for the PhD degree concerned. Such recommendations and any dissenting opinions must be substantiated.
The Committee's recommendations shall be delivered within three months after the Committee has received the thesis concerned, unless the AHO has decided otherwise. If the Committee previously has permitted revision of the thesis, the new deadline decided by the Research Committee will apply cf. §16.3.
The recommendations of the Adjudication Committee shall be passed on to AHO. The recommendation is presented to the PhD candidate with a deadline of 14 days to present his/her written comments on the recommendations.
Subsequently the recommendation will be presented for processing at AHO.
The thesis must be approved before the trial lecture and public defense may take place.
§ 16.5 Rejection of thesis
If a unanimous Adjudication Committee finds that fundamental changes to theory, hypothesis, material, method or structure is necessary for the work to be recommended for defense, the Committee shall reject the thesis.
The same applies to serious breaches of AHO’s ethical guidelines, or of generally accepted scientific methods and research ethics guidelines.
§ 17 Procedures relating to the Committee's recommendations
Procedures relating to unanimous recommendations
The Adjudication Committee's recommendations and any comments shall be processed by the Research Committee. The Chairman of the Research Committee may recommend unanimous Committee recommendations. If - despite unanimous Committee recommendations - there exist justified doubt about whether or not a thesis should be approved, a majority in the Research Committee may seek further clarification from the Adjudication Committee, or appoint two new experts to submit individual statements about the thesis. Such individual statements shall be presented to the PhD candidate, who will be provided with the opportunity to comment. The Research Committee shall make a final decision relating to the case in response on the basis of the Committee's recommendations, the statements obtained and any comments submitted by the PhD candidate.
Procedures relating to split recommendations
The Research Committee shall process a split decision, with possible remarks, from the Adjudication Committee
The Research Committee may adopt a decision to seek further clarification from the Adjudication Committee, or appoint two new experts to submit individual statements about the thesis in question. Such individual statements shall be presented to the PhD candidate, who will be provided with the opportunity to comment.
The Board shall adopt a decision relating to the case in response to recommendations from the Research Committee, and on the basis of the Committee's recommendations, the statements obtained and any comments submitted by the PhD candidate.
Procedures relating to rejection of thesis
The work of the PhD candidate must be rejected ff a majority in the adjudication committee decide that the thesis is not worthy of a public defense cf. §16.5. The rejection, with possible remarks, from the adjudication committee must be processed by The Research Committee.
If there are reasons to believe that the thesis nevertheless should be approved the Research Committee may adopt a decision to seek further clarification from the Adjudication Committee, or appoint two new experts to submit individual statements about the thesis in question. Such individual statements shall be presented to the PhD candidate, who will be provided with the opportunity to comment.
The Board shall adopt a decision relating to the case in response to recommendations from the Research Committee, and on the basis of the Committee's recommendations, the statements obtained and any comments submitted by the PhD candidate.
§ 18 Re-submission
A PhD thesis that has not been deemed worthy of defense (cf. §16.5) may be adjudicated in its revised form, but not before six months after the Board has adopted a decision to reject the thesis in question. Re-adjudication may only take place once.
When re-submitting his/her thesis, the PhD candidate shall state that his/her work has previously been adjudicated by the AHO or another institution and that they had deemed that it was not worthy of being defended.
A new Adjudication Committee must be appointed to evaluate the re-submission according to the rules in § 15. At least one of the members in the first Adjudication Committee should be appointed as a member in the new committee.
§ 19 Publication of a thesis
§ 19.1 Printing a thesis
100 copies of a thesis shall be printed once it has been approved for disputation. The AHO will pay the printing expenses. If the printing expenses exceed the amount that has been earmarked at any one time for such expenses in the Research Committee's budget, the PhD candidate shall be responsible for covering the difference.
The PhD candidate shall submit his/her thesis in electronic pdf format and on the AHO's template for PhD thesis. The PhD candidate shall also submit the following in electronic format:
- a summary of the thesis not exceeding 150 words
- a brief presentation of himself/herself not exceeding 150 words
- an illustration for use on the cover
- a popular scientific summary not exceeding 200 words
The thesis shall be available for publication by no later than two weeks prior to the date on which the disputation is to be held.
§ 19.2 IPR
No restrictions may be placed on the publication of a PhD thesis, with the exception of a deferment of the publication date which has been agreed in advance. Such deferment may be granted when the PhD studies are either partially or fully funded by an external party in order to allow the external party to consider patenting/commercialisation. External parties are not entitled to stipulate conditions about the partial or full publication of a PhD thesis.
§ 19.3 Open access
The AHO would like PhD candidates to make their Thesis available in the AHO's ADORA Open Access archive and to sign the AHO's Avtale om elektronisk arkivering av doktoravhandling (Agreement relating to the Electronic Filing of PhD Thesis). PhD candidates are obliged to publish a summary of their Thesis in ADORA.
§ 19.4 Addresses
When publishing a PhD thesis or other written works relating to PhD studies, including scientific articles, anthology articles and monographs, the AHO shall usually be specified as the PhD candidate's institutional link/address. This also applies to work that has been undertaken either fully or mainly during the PhD studies, but which has been published at a later date. Unless otherwise agreed, externally employed PhD candidates shall specify the addresses of both the AHO and their main employer on their publications.
§ 20 PhD examination
§ 20.1 Trial lectures
Once the AHO has deemed a thesis to be worthy of defence, the PhD candidate shall deliver a trial lecture. The purpose of this is to test the candidate's ability to acquire knowledge of matters beyond the topic of the thesis and to impart such knowledge in a lecture setting.
The title of the trial lecture will be determined by the Adjudication Committee and announced to the PhD candidate 10 working days prior to the trial lecture.
The trial lecture shall be delivered in the language in which the thesis has been written, unless the AHO approves another language.
The trial lecture shall be delivered after the thesis has been submitted, but before the disputation is held, and it shall be evaluated by the Adjudication Committee.
The Adjudication Committee shall report to the AHO about whether or not the trial lecture has been approved.
Such recommendations shall be substantiated if the Committee has not recommended approval of the trial lecture. These recommendations shall be submitted to the AHO Board via the Research Committee. If the Board does not approve the trial lecture, a different trial lecture will need to be delivered on a different topic. Any new trial lecture shall be delivered within six months and whenever possible they shall be adjudicated by the same committee as the one which originally adjudicated the first lecture, unless the Board decides otherwise.
Trial lectures must be awarded a pass before a disputation can be held.
§ 20.2 Public defence of Thesis (disputations)
Once a trial lecture has been delivered the PhD candidate shall defend his/her thesis in a public disputation. The time and place of the disputation shall be announced well in advance.
The disputation shall be in the language in which the thesis has been written, or in Norwegian, unless the AHO approves another language.
The committee which adjudicated the thesis shall also adjudicate the public defence.
The disputation shall be chaired by whoever has been authorised to do so by the Chairman of the Research Committee.
There shall normally be two opponents. The two ordinary opponents shall be members of the Adjudication Committee.
The PhD candidate shall explain the purpose and results of the scientific investigation. The first opponent shall open the discussion and the second opponent shall conclude the disputation. However, the AHO may determine a different order and allocation of roles between the PhD candidate and the first opponent. Anyone else present who wishes to comment ex auditorio must notify the chairman of the disputation during the disputation within a time frame determined by the chairman.
If the disputation is not approved, such shall be substantiated. These recommendations shall be submitted to the AHO's Board via the Research Committee. If the Board does not approve the disputation, the PhD candidate may re-defend his/her thesis on one more occasion. A second disputation cannot be held until after six months at the earliest and whenever possible it shall be adjudicated by the same committee.
The disputation shall be approved by the Board before a diploma can be awarded.
§ 21 Approval of trial lectures and disputations
The AHO Board adopts decisions about the approval of trial lectures and disputations on the basis of the recommendations of the Adjudication Committee and the Research Committee. Such recommendations shall be substantiated if the defence is not approved.
§ 22 Conferral of diplomas
Once approval has been granted of the studies, thesis, trial lecture and disputation, the degree of Philosophiae Doctor shall be conferred on the PhD candidate by the AHO Board.
The PhD diploma shall be issued by the AHO who shall determine the information to be displayed on it.
PART V APPEALS, SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS, ENFORCEMENT AND TRANSITIONAL RULES
§ 23 Appeals
§ 23.1 Appeals relating to admission and procedural matters
Rejections of admission applications may be appealed against pursuant to the provisions contained in §§ 28 et seq. of the Norwegian Public Administration Act. Substantiated appeals shall be submitted to the Research Committee. If a rejection if upheld, appeals shall be sent to the Board for approval.
§ 23.2 Appeals relating to approval of the tuition programme
When appealing against the rejection of applications for the approval of courses or other components of the tuition programme, § 12 no. 1 of the Norwegian Public Administration Act shall apply accordingly. When appealing against the marking of special examinations or tests, the Norwegian Act relating to Universities and University Colleges shall apply. The Research Committee shall appoint an appeals examiner when appeals are submitted about marks that have been awarded (pass/not passed).
§ 23.3 Appeals relating to the rejection of applications for the adjudication or approval of a thesis, trial lecture or defence
The approval of a thesis, trial lecture or defence may be appealed against in accordance with the rules contained in § 28 et. seq. of the Norwegian Public Administration Act. Substantiated appeals shall be submitted to the Research Committee which can overturn or amend a decision if it decides that an appeal is justified. If it does not find an appeal to be justified, the appeal shall be sent to the Board for a decision. The Board may test all aspects of a decision that has been appealed against.
§ 24 Supplementary provisions
The AHO Board may authorise the Research Committee to issue guidelines, instructions and procedures related to these Regulations. Any supplementary guidelines and procedures drawn up by the Research Committee shall be submitted to the AHO's management for approval.
§ 25 Enforcement and transitional rules
These Regulations shall enter into force with immediate effect, and at the same time the Regulations of 21 June 2006 shall be abolished.
 The scope of credits (ESTC) may vary.