Languages

Research

Doctoral education PhD

Admission

Employer responsibility

AHO is the employer:

PhD positions funded by AHO are normally advertised once a year, in January/February. The persons admitted start the Research School in the following autumn semester.
PhD positions connected to externally funded projects can be advertised throughout the year.

Another party than AHO is the employer:

PhD candidates funded by another institution can be admitted to AHO’s PhD programme if the project is relevant to AHO and there are available supervisors.  

Industrial PhD candidates work in a company and their project is partly funded by the Research Council of Norway.  More information about the industrial Ph.d scheme

Guidelines for admission to the PhD programme

Admission procedure for PhD positions (positions where AHO has the employer responsibility)

Prioritised research subject areas will be announced when the PhD positions are advertised in connection with admissions to the PhD programme at AHO. Institute affiliation and potential supervisors will be announced in the advertisement text. Applications for PhD positions must contain: 

  • The applicant’s CV and documentation of qualifications.
  • Documentation of the education that will form the basis for the admission.
  • A preliminary project outline and tentative progress schedule. This should give an account of the topics being researched, the issues the applicant wishes to explore through their research and the empirical data to be collected. An outline for the methodical approach and references to the knowledge status in the field must also be enclosed.
  • Information must also be provided of special supervision requirements and, if relevant, already established supervision contacts.
  • Any plans for stays at other, including foreign, research institutions or establishments.
  • If relevant: provide information about any immaterial property rights (IPR) restrictions connected to the project.

The Research Committee will appoint an expert committee to assess the applicants. The institute which the PhD candidate will be affiliated to shall propose members to the committee. The committee shall comprise three persons, two of whom should preferably be external. If possible, the committee should comprise both men and women. All members of the committee shall hold a doctoral degree or equivalent qualifications. Special reasons must be provided if these criteria are not met.

The most important criteria for prioritising between applicants shall be:

  • An assessment of the applicant’s general competence and the applicant's competence in relation to the project in question
  • The project’s relevance in relation to AHO’s prioritised subject areas
  • The academic quality of the project application and the project’s implementation potential
  • AHO’s supervision capacity

The expert committee's task is to consider qualifications for admission to AHO’s PhD programme. The committee shall differentiate between qualified and non-qualified applicants and make their assessments on the basis of submitted material. The committee shall present their assessment of each individual qualified applicant. The applicants shall not be ranked unless this has been explicitly requested.

The institute in question assesses the applicants who are found to qualify in consultation with the project manager and can invite the candidate for an interview if they so wish. The institute gives its advice on appointment and writes a recommendation. The Research Committee will consider the expert committee’s assessments and the institute's recommendation. The Research Committee is AHO's appointment body for PhD positions.

If possible, appointments and admissions to the PhD programme shall be handled at the same time, so that a decision to appoint someone means that they are also admitted to AHO’s PhD programme.

Admission procedures for applicants for whom AHO does not have employer responsibility

AHO only accepts students who can document funding for the entire admission period.
External applicants with funding from their own institution or external sources or who plan to fund themselves, must submit documentation of such funding when they apply.

Approval of admission to the PhD programme at AHO is conditional upon funding. Approval of admission is thus granted on the condition that the applicant can document that funding can be secured before they start the PhD programme.

The Research Committee considers all applications for admission to the PhD programme.

Admission can be refused if:

  • funding of the PhD work has not been clarified (Section 5-1 Conditions for admissions)
  • there are agreements in place with external third parties that are an obstacle to publication and public defence of the thesis
  • the immaterial property right agreements entered into are so unreasonable that AHO should not participate in the project
  • the applicant will be unable to meet the requirement for at least one year of the project to be carried out after they have been admitted to the PhD programme, cf. Section 5-1.

If the Research Committee approves the applications, it will appoint an expert committee, which will normally consist of three members, to assess whether the applicants are qualified. If possible, the committee should comprise both men and women. All members of the committee shall hold a doctoral degree or equivalent qualifications. Special reasons must be provided if these criteria are not met.

Admission decisions shall be based on an overall assessment of the application. The most important criteria for assessment of admission to the PhD programme are:

  • the applicant’s academic qualifications
  • the project’s academic quality
  • the project’s relevance to AHO
  • AHO’s supervision capacity

The expert committee's task is to consider qualifications for admission to AHO’s PhD programme. The committee will provide its recommendation based on the submitted material. The recommendation shall be sent to the Research Committee, which, based on this and the application, decides what candidate(s) to admit.

In the admission decision, at least one supervisor shall be appointed and the responsibility for other needs outlined in the application shall be assigned. The contract period shall be determined with a start-up date and end date. The start-up date shall be the same as the start-up date for the funding. Any extension of the contract period must be related to the candidate's rights as an employee or be specially clarified in relation to the candidate’s funding basis. The admission decision is only valid if a PhD contract has been entered into and signed by all parties.

The PhD contract

Upon admission, a written contract shall be filled in and signed by the candidate, supervisor and AHO.
 

The admission agreement is based on the Recommended Guidelines for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree (PhD) approved by the Norwegian Association of Higher Education Institutions (UHR) on 29 April 2011 (updated and amended on 29 January 2015) and replaces the corresponding agreement from 2004. The purpose of the agreement is to supplement and specify in writing the decision on admission to a PhD programme taken by a faculty. The admission agreement is used throughout Norway. The binding agreement between the parties aims to ensure that candidates admitted to a PhD programme have working conditions that enable them to complete the programme within the specified period of time.
 
The agreement is intended to address and regulate the most crucial aspects of doctoral education. The agreement consists of three parts:
 
Part A. General terms and conditions
This part is to be filled out by all candidates admitted to a PhD programme. The parties to the agreement in Part A are the doctoral candidate and AHO, specifically the institute with which the candidate is affiliated.
 
Part B. Agreement on academic supervision in PhD programmes
This part of the agreement is to be filled out by all candidates admitted to a PhD programme. The parties to the agreement in Part B are the doctoral candidate, his or her supervisor and the relevant institute. Part B of this agreement is required for all candidate-supervisor relationships.
 
Part C. Agreement between an external party and AHO on completion of the PhD programme
Part C of this agreement must be filled out for candidates with external funding and/or an external workplace. Candidates participating in the Industrial PhD scheme must also sign a separate cooperation agreement; cf. the guidelines from the Research Council of Norway. If the candidate is affiliated with two or more institution, an agreement must be signed with each of the external parties.

 

During

Absence and extension of periods

In cases of approved absence, an extension of the research fellowship period may be granted.

See

  • Personnel regulations AHO 
  • Personnel regulations for research fellows

for information about what constitutes approved absence.

Annual amount

The research fellow will have an annual amount stipulated by the Board at their disposal (currently NOK 20,000 per year) for materials, books, travel etc. in connection with the research work and publication of the work. The annual amount rules are described in more detail in the personnel regulations for research fellows. 

Midway seminar

The candidate presents their thesis work in an open seminar. The annual PhD symposium will normally be part of the midway seminar. Ideally, the presentation should be given in the third semester and include:

  • A description of the research project, research questions and choice of method.
  • A description of the project's results so far.
  • An updated progress plan for the research project with dated sub-goals, as well as an assessment of which points in the plan have the potential to be the most time-critical.

Substantiation that the work will be completed as planned (as of now) and on schedule.
The candidate begins by presenting their work (approx. 20 minutes). The work will then be discussed by one/two opponents (internal/external opponents). They will have approximately 20 minutes for comments. Finally, the other participants at the seminar will have the opportunity to ask the candidate questions. 
The head of the PhD programme chairs the seminar. The candidates, opponents and supervisor(s) must also participate. The seminar is otherwise open to anyone who is interested.
The candidate shall send out a written supporting document for the presentation two weeks before the seminar. The supporting document shall contain an overview of the whole of the thesis work so far, including the key research questions, theoretical framework and methodology. The supporting document shall also contain a plan for the remaining work.

Progress reporting

All students admitted to the PhD programme at AHO must fill in an ISP (Individual Study Plan) each semester. An exception applies to candidates whose public defence has been confirmed or who are on long-term sick leaves/leaves of absence. The Research Administration and head of the PhD programme will send out a reminder prior to each scheduled report. The report must be submitted by 30 September in the autumn semester and 30 March in the spring semester.
 
The ISP is divided into three parts. Parts 1 and 2 are public and used to keep the school updated on the project’s content, activity plan and publications, as well as completed courses. Part 3 is confidential and will not be made public. This part will be filled in by the supervisor in cooperation with the candidate.
 
The updated ISP shall be submitted to the Research Administration by the deadline each semester. It will be possible to ask for a special progress seminar if the candidate and/or supervisor finds it necessary. In such case, the school must be informed about who should be present at the seminar and what topics the candidate/supervisor wishes to discuss.

The Research Committee will be informed about the progress reporting at least once a year and must initiate measures if there are major discrepancies.

Supervision

A supervisor will be appointed by the start of the study period. It is possible to apply for one or several co-supervisors

Appointment of supervisor(s)

The Research Committee (FU) will appoint a main supervisor for all PhD candidates. The main supervisor must confirm that he or she is willing to take on the assignment in advance. The main supervisor has the primary responsibility for the professional follow-up of the candidate, and should normally be employyed in a permanent academic position at AHO.

In special cases, an external supervisor may be appointed. AHO then covers fees within a given hour determined by FU. AHO does not cover travel expenses in connection with supervision. PhD candidates are entitled to the supervision of one or more co-supervisors. The hour is determined by FU. Co-supervisors are appointed by FU on the basis of proposals from the PhD candidate in consultation with the main supervisor. An application with CV must be submitted. AHO recommends that all PhD candidates have at least two supervisors. If possible, there should be a joint meeting between the PhD candidate and both / all supervisors  at least once a year. All supervisors must have a doctorate or equivalent research qualifications. In special cases, special emphasis on specialized, subject-specific competence can be permitted with co-supervisors. 

Rights and obligations with respect to supervision

The doctoral candidate and the main supervisor have a duty to keep each other informed about all factors of significance for supervision. The parties must actively deal with any circumstances that could prevent the performance of supervision as agreed in Section 5 below. The candidate and the main supervisor must submit progress reports as described in Part A of this agreement.

The academic supervisor is to:
  • give advice on formulating and delimiting topics and research questions;
  • discuss and assess hypotheses and methods;
  • help the candidate to become acquainted with the literature and relevant data (library, archives, etc);
  • discuss various aspects of the written presentation (structure, language, referencing, documentation, etc);
  • stay informed as regards the candidate’s progress and evaluate that progress relative to the plan for completion;
  • help to introduce the candidate into relevant research environments;
  • discuss results and their interpretation;
  • give advice on scientific dissemination;
  • provide the candidate with guidance in ethical matters related to the thesis. 
The candidate is to:
  • provide a draft of parts of the doctoral thesis to the supervisor as agreed and in accordance with the project description. Parts of the thesis may be presented in relevant seminars;
  • complete the required coursework in accordance with the progress plan;
  • uphold the ethical principles that pertain to his or her area of research.

The PhD Regulations

The PhD Regulations have been adopted by the Board of AHO and constitute the underlying document for the PhD programme.

The PhD programme

The PhD programme at AHO is a three-year full-time programme leading to the degree philosophiae doctor (PhD). When a candidate is awarded the philosophiae doctor degree, it demonstrates that they have acquired research competence in their field. Read more about the PhD programme.

The PhD thesis: template

All PhD candidates at AHO are obliged to use AHO’s template for PhD theses. If you are writing an article-based thesis, you are obliged to use the template for the introduction (‘kappa’). Published articles shall be printed in the same way as in the journal in question.

You are responsible for ensuring that the thesis complies with the template. AHO will not cover any expenses for this. PhD candidates entitled to an annual amount, i.e. candidates appointed as research fellows at AHO, may use this amount for text editing and work with the template. 

AHO's template for theses are available in two variants:

Contact The Research Administration if  you have any questions about the template

The Research School

The PhD programme's training component covers two semesters and includes lectures and student activities.
The Research School has its own website

Completion

Agreement on online archiving of doctoral thesis

Publication & dissemination

Copies and distribution of PhD theses

Copies:

AHO pays for the printing of 70 copies. The candidate may pay for more copies. The printer will invoice the candidate directly.

Distribution: 

The printed copies of the thesis are distributed as follows:

  • Ten free copies to the candidate
  • Seven copies to the National Library
  • Seven copies to the library (for lending)
  • Four copies to the committee and defence chair
  • Two to four copies to the supervisors
  • One copy to the chair of the PhD programme
  • One to five copies to the Research Committee
  • Four copies to the Research Administration
  • Around 20–25 copies are made available to the audience during the public defence of the thesis. 

The thesis is not for sale, but will be made electronically available in ADORA.

Crediting academic publications

Background

Author’s addresses have an important function in relation to crediting the research institutions to which the authors are affiliated. It is very important that AHO’s researchers credit their affiliation to AHO in their publications in order for the publication to confer publication points in connection with DBH (Database for Statistics on Higher Education) reporting. If a publication has several co-authors, the publication points are divided between the authors. The Norwegian Association of Higher Education Institutions (UHR) recommends that, as a rule, the address of the institution must be given in a publication if it has made an essential and substantial contribution to, or provided a basis for an author’s contribution to, the published work.

Main rule:

When an AHO employee is the author or co-author of a publication, the address ‘The Oslo School of Architecture and Design’ or ‘Arkitektur- og designhøgskolen i Oslo’ should be used, provided that the publication is a product of work performed in his or her position at AHO. In addition, the name of the institute or research unit should appear.

The rule may also include works and design products (results of artistic research), provided that they are the results of work performed in the position at AHO. 

Secondary positions

AHO employees employed in secondary positions at other institutions should normally credit both AHO and the other institution for work carried out as part of the secondary position, and AHO alone for work carried out as part of their primary position. The same applies to persons employed in secondary positions at AHO.

Please note that if several institutions are credited as an author's address, the publication points shall be distributed equally among the institutions. This concerns both researchers in secondary positions at AHO and AHO employees who have secondary positions elsewhere.

 

Externally paid researchers affiliated to AHO

The author's address of externally paid researchers should be clarified when a contract is entered into with the individual researcher. Responsible party: the project manager

PhD candidates

PhD candidates at AHO shall comply with the main rule and state AHO as their author’s address. Unless otherwise agreed, externally financed PhD candidates shall give both AHO’s and the primary employer’s address as their author's address, provided that both parties have actually made an essential and substantial contribution (cf. UHR's Recommended guidelines for crediting academic publications to institutions). 

Open access to scientific publications

See the national guidelines for open access to scientific publications.

Publications by AHO

Design and quality assurance of bibliographic data

The Research Administration is responsible for the template for theses (Con-text thesis).
The library can help with quality assuring bibliographic data for publications that do not follow a fixed template.

ISBN and ISSN

ISBN (books) and ISSN (series and journals) are numerical codes for unique identification of publications and are particularly useful for sales and bibliographic registration. The number in itself does not convey any form of legal or copyright protection.

Publications by AHO can be assigned an ISBN if expedient for identification and sales/dissemination purposes. ISBNs are normally not assigned to student work.

The library administers ISBNs and ISSNs. ISBNs for theses are assigned to the Research Administration, not to the individual candidates.

Active ISSN series:

  • Con-text thesis (1502-217x)
  • AHO works (2387-5771)

Discontinued ISSN series:

  • Research magazine (0804-0729)
  • Con-text thesis (1503-217x)
  • Yearbook (0802-748x) 
  • AHO works (1890-8799)

Sales

The reception desk is responsible for selling AHO’s publications, by order or in person.

Legal deposit

For the library:
The library shall be given seven copies of all publications for their own collection and archive.
For the National Library of Norway:
The duty to legally deposit material is set out in the Act relating to the legal deposit of generally available documents. Seven copies of all AHO publications are sent to the National Library of Norway, the Mo i Rana branch.

Reporting research results

General

Cristin is a national research documentation system that encompasses the higher education sector in Norway, as well as the institute sector and the regional health authorities. Data reported in Cristin is the basis for reporting publication points to the DBH database (Database for Statistics on Higher Education), reporting publication data for projects under the auspices of the Research Council of Norway, and for internal allocation of budget funds.

Furthermore, academic staff can use Cristin to keep an overview of their own publications, activities and results, and to link to and publish data on websites, for application purposes etc.

Who must report research?

Everyone who conducts research and/or produces scientific/artistic material as part of their employment relationship with AHO:

  • Academic staff in permanent positions
  • ​PhD candidates
  • Academic staff in project-based positions/temporary positions
  • Adjunct professor positions submit reports for their academic production as part of their employment relationships with AHO
  • Emeriti/emerita

Employees without research obligations (e.g. part-time teachers) are not obliged to report research.

Results and activities to be reported in Cristin

  • Research projects, including external PhD projects
  • Research results in the form of scientific publications (the Norwegian Scientific Index (NVI) categories in Cristin)
  • The results of scientific and artistic research in the form of design products, works etc.
  • Research dissemination to peers or the general public
  • Research stays abroad

Teaching and supervision should not be reported.
Project applications should not be registered in Cristin, but must be reported to the Research Administration.

How to report in Cristin.

Cristin is a self-explanatory system, and researchers enter their data themselves. Data are registered on a running basis throughout the year.

Personal data

The superuser (the library) creates profiles in Cristin on the basis of data from the payroll system SAP.
Researchers edit their own researcher profiles. Researchers and others who register in Cristin must enter all co-authors and the author's addresses for their publications.
Requirements for scientific publications
There are three categories of scientific publications:

  • articles in scientific journals
  • articles/chapters in scientific anthologies
  • scientific monographs

The publication must be published in an approved publication channel (see the Norwegian Centre for Research Data’s (NSD) Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers). The criteria are described more closely in the Norwegian Association of Higher Education's report A Bibliometric Model for Performance-based Budgeting of Research Institutions. In order to qualify for publication points, AHO must be referred to as the author’s address in the publication itself; see the Guidelines for crediting academic publications to AHO. The year of publication shall be the same as the year of reporting and be stated in the publication. Only first editions count. Researchers must submit a copy of the publication (in hardcopy or as a PDF) where the title, author's address (institutional affiliation), the year and the source of publication is stated. Copies shall be submitted to the AHO library (bibliotek@adm.aho.no) on a running basis.

Requirements for artistic research

Reported works, products, productions etc. must have been peer-reviewed and have been made available to the public/published. The heads of institutes are responsible for ensuring that everything reported as the results of artistic research meets these basic quality requirements. See also AHO’s guide for registering research in Cristin.

Training and user support

Cristin provides a general registration guide. If user support is required for reporting in Cristin, the Research Administration can help with the registration of projects, and the library can help with publications and other results.

Deadline for annual report

Data are registered on a running basis throughout the year. The annual deadline for registering data for the previous year in Cristin is 31 January. 

Quality assurance

The heads of institutes have special responsibility for ensuring that all academic employees report their research and for ensuring that the reported artistic research meets the quality requirements. The library is the institution’s superuser and quality assures all NVI (the Norwegian Scientific Index) items:

  • Compares the registered author’s address with that of the original publication
  • Compares the year of publication with that of the original publication
  • Keeps a regular overview of all NVI publications
  • Identifies any potential conflicts of interests in connection with co-publication with other institutions.

Approval and submission of NVI publications

The Cristin superuser (the library) reviews the NVI items and submits any questions and cases of doubt to the Research Committee for a professional assessment. It then presents the joint report to the Rector for final approval. The superuser approves via Cristin and submits the file. If AHO chooses to use the dissemination and works categories as a basis for internal performance-based budgeting, the Research Committee shall consider any questions of doubt. 

Self-archiving in ADORA via Cristin

Regulations for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) at AHO

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)[1],
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 

Voluntary 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.
Enforced termination:
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.
 
 
[1] The scope of credits (ESTC) may vary. 

Research ethics and data protection

The research at AHO shall comply with the relevant regulations for the handling of various data and research issues.

AHO has procedures in place in relation to guidance and internal control of student and research projects that fall within the scope of special legislation and/or process personal data.

Data protection official

The Norwegian Centre for Research Data (NSD) is the data protection official for AHO, and you must report any projects that involve personal data to NSD. NSD Data Protection Official provides information and advice and you can easily check whether you must report your project by visiting their website: www.nsd.uib.no/personvern

Responsibility for approval

The project manager is responsible for clarifying whether the project needs approval or must be reported to NSD and for ensuring that the necessary permits are obtained.

 

Guidelines for good research practice (AHO)

Under revision 

Researchers at AHO must:

  • Comply with the provisions in the Act relating to Universities and University Colleges that concern rights and obligations relating to academic freedom
  • Familiarise themselves and comply with AHO’s ethical guidelines and the guidelines that apply within their research field
  • Take into account that all research entails a responsibility for the knowledge the researcher gains access to, contribute to ensuring that this knowledge is not misused and that it benefits society
  • Must not keep any aspects of their research activities secret to other researchers at AHO, except in cases where there are good and publicly accepted grounds for confidentiality
  • Ensure that the scientific results for which the individual is responsible are sound enough to support the conclusions and that the raw data / sources used for the publications are available
  • Explain how funds made available to their research have been managed
  • Comply with the rules that apply to scientific publication in their field
  • Where possible, participate in collegial communities that analyse and communicate research methods and results
  • As an institution, AHO's handling of research ethics issues is subject to the same guidelines as its employees

The Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees

Here you will find both overriding ethical guidelines and the ethical guidelines that apply to the different subject and theory areas: www.etikkom.no

Apply for internal funds

Research leave

Application form for research leaves

Research leaves – guidelines for awarding leaves

1. General

The purpose of research leaves is to exempt permanent academic staff from teaching and administrative duties to allow them to concentrate on research activities (including artistic creative activities).
Academic employees can apply for and be awarded a research leave on the basis of specific guidelines. It is not a right that staff accrue automatically after a certain number of years. The staff member is required to have had normal teaching and administrative duties.
All permanent employees working in at least 50% of a full time academic position can apply for one year's research leave after minimum six years of service, or for a six months’ research leave after minimum three years of service. 

2. The application

All applicants must fill in an application for research leaves. The applicant must describe their research project, stipulate the goals and set out a work plan for the research leave. Previous work efforts and research results must be described, as well as academic networks and, if relevant, any affiliation to a larger research project.

3. Rights and obligations during the research leave

The employee receives full pay during the research leave, and is exempt from their teaching obligations, attendance requirements, and administrative duties unless otherwise is agreed when the research leave is granted. The employee on research leave is obliged to concentrate their efforts on the research project that forms the basis for the research leave application. The employee cannot take on any work, offices or other duties that may interfere with the planned research tasks without AHO’s consent.
The institute is responsible for facilitating research leaves and finding substitutes for their employees on leave.

4. Reporting

Once the employee has completed their research leave, they must submit a brief report to the Research Committee within one month on their goal attainment etc. during the period of leave. The Research Committee will write a summary on the basis of the reports. The summary will be presented to the board.

5. Awarding criteria

When awarding research leaves, the following is emphasised:

  • The application's academic quality and feasibility.
  • The application's relevance in relation to AHO’s research strategy.
  • The application's importance in relation to competence-building at AHO, especially in relation to PhD qualifications.
  • Previous research leaves and their results.
  • The applicant’s accrual period.
  • The applicant’s total work for AHO in research, teaching and administrative duties.

For applications that are deemed to be of equal quality, the following factors will be taken into consideration:

  • Particularly extensive teaching and administrative duties over a long period of time.
  • Gender equality considerations in accordance with AHO’s practice of moderate gender quotas, including women’s possibilities of qualifying for senior positions.

6. Provisions on accrual periods

The basis for calculating the accrual period for research leaves is the number of semesters/years of ordinary service since the last leave. For permanent employees working reduced hours, the period is converted into whole accrual years.
When calculating the accrual period, periods of service in temporary academic positions with teaching obligations, followed by direct employment in a permanent position at the same place, shall count in the same way as periods of service as a permanent employee.
Leaves of absence without pay are not included in the accrual period, nor are employees who are freed up (full-time or part-time) to work for parties other than AHO. Sickness absence and pregnancy leaves, compassionate leaves etc. in accordance with the provisions of the pay scale for Norwegian state employees are included in the accrual period.
Research leaves with full pay are normally limited to one year.

7. Procedure for applications and case processing

Applications for research leaves are considered once a year, and the deadline for applying is 1 February.
The research leave can be granted from the autumn semester of the current year at the earliest.
Applications for research leaves are considered in four stages: At institute level, at management level in connection with the consideration of the financial situation, by the Research Committee and by the board of AHO.
The head of institute makes an academic and practical/financial assessment of each application and fills in a form. If there are several applicants from the same institute, the head of institute shall rank the applicants.
The head of institute makes a joint recommendation to the Research Committee by 15 February.
The Research Committee prepares a ranked recommendation to the Rector, who submits the case for the board's decision. 
AHO has stipulated a recommended upper limit for research leaves of three full-time equivalents per year. 

 
 
 
 

Strategic FU budget

Funds for research stimulation and cooperation 

Guidelines for applications
  • Priority will be given to research support between institutes and across AHO and other institutions
  • International and national collaboration, networks and dissemination are equally prioritized.
  • Activities should create value for AHO beyond the interests of individual researchers, centers and institutes
  • Applications should have realistic budgets.
  • Activities with external co-funding or forms of ‘peer reviewing’ will be prioritized.
  • Activities that result in identifiable ‘outcomes’ in terms of publications, applications for external funding etc. will be prioritized.
  • Activities that support overall strategies of AHO and institutes will be prioritized.
Application deadline and process
  • A total budget of 400 000 NOK is available for all applications per year.
  • A key issue concerning the budget is that it does not cover things that should be on the ordinary strategic budgets of the institutes/centres.
  • Application deadline are 1 February and 1 October each year.
  • FU processes and recommends applications to rector who has decision-making authority.
  • All granted projects must be reported to FU after the project period ends.

Project management and reporting