Annual review grade descriptors

High level description of the grades use to assess progress at the end of first year or subsequent annual reviews

First Year Reviews

Very Good

Top grade, excellent progress, rarely awarded at first year:

• Ability to undertake research demonstrated: either publishable results already obtained or is working at a level such that publishable results are imminent.
• Full ownership of project: full understanding of the project and background is evident and has taken ownership of the project with clear research plans.
• Ability to write at research level demonstrated: first year report at publication quality and / or publications either completed or at advanced stage.
• Recommend immediate progression to second year.

Good

The expected grade for successful progression:

• Ability to undertake research evident: is working at a level where publishable results will be obtained within the next year.
• Developing ownership of project: has shown good understanding of the project and is starting to take ownership and responsibility for the direction of the project; small gaps in knowledge / background will be filled by normal reading and experience. There are viable research plans in place.
• Good written ability: style and level of report appropriate to a thesis, but may need guidance and practice available from IAD courses.
• Recommend immediate progression to second year.

Satisfactory

Progression to PhD likely, but requires improvement:

• Ability to undertake research in question: is not currently working at a level likely to obtain publishable results with the next year, but has shown the potential to do so.
• Ownership of project: has shown acceptable understanding of the project and background but with evident gaps. Has not yet taken ownership and is being directed by supervisors.
• Written ability: style and level of report appropriate but development will be required to reach the required standard required for a PhD thesis.
• Recommendations: typically to review progress in 3 months with the expectation, subject to improvement, of progression to second year.  Here is it essential to try and identify if the identified issues result from lack of motivation / work level / project miss-match or background.

Disappointing

Progression to PhD unlikely, but has shown ability to undertake work at postgraduate level:

• Ability to undertake research not shown: is not working at level that is likely to obtain publishable results and has shown little potential to do so.
• Ownership of project: has shown basic understanding of the project but with significant gaps and has taken little, or no, ownership of the research and is reliant on the supervisors (or other Research Assistants/PhD students) for day to day direction.
• Witten ability: content and level of written report below PhD thesis level but shown acceptable ability to communicate in appropriate scientific language.
• Recommendations: will typically be transferred to MSc by Research. If review in 3 months is recommended it is essential that the source of the identified issues are established. Case will be sent to College Research and Training Committee.

Unsatisfactory

Poorest grade, no progression to PhD and has shown little or no ability to work at postgraduate level (this is very rare):

• No ability to undertake research demonstrated: work either not completed or completed in an inconsistent and random manner with little demonstrated ability or motivation.
• No ownership of project: either lack of understanding / background or lack of motivation / work ethic.
• Written ability: serious concerns about ability to write at requirded thesis level or failure to submit adequate reports to the specified deadline.
• Recommendation: will typically be to exclude as postgraduate student, this is finally College decision and case will be sent to College Research and Training Committee.which will typically come with the requirement for an additional 3 months final review. 

Second Year Review

Very Good

Top grade, excellent progress:

• Publishable research obtained: at least one published output with, normally, others at advanced stage. Clear evidence that within one years there will be easily sufficient novel material for a high quality thesis.
• Full ownership of project: full ownership of the project, clear understanding of significance of work and clear research plans to complete a sufficient body of work for a high quality thesis.
• Ability to write at research level demonstrated: normally lead author on publication.
• Recommend immediate progression to third year.

Good

The expected grade for successful progression:

• Ability to undertake research demonstrated: either publishable results already obtained or is working at a level that publishable results are imminent. Evidence that within a year there will be sufficient novel material to complete a thesis.
• Ownership of project: full understand the project and background evident and has taken ownership of the project with clear research plans to complete sufficient novel material for a thesis.
• Ability to write at research level demonstrated: normally has either authored published material or currently preparing publishable material. If no published material yet and there was doubt from first years, must show evidence of progression and has attended suitable courses.
• Recommend immediate progression to third year.

Satisfactory

Progression to PhD likely but requires improvement,

• Ability to undertake research demonstrated, but sufficient novel material for thesis in doubt: is working at suitable research level with some research level material completed, but there are currently doubts that there will be sufficient material for a thesis within the expected submission time.
• Ownership of project: understand the project and background evident and has mostly taken ownership of the project with clear research plans to complete thesis, but still required significant input from supervisors.
• Written ability demonstrated: ability to write a thesis evident, but may need additional support from IAD / supervisors.
• Recommendation typically to review progress in 3 months with the expectation, subject to improvement, of progression to third year.  Here is it essential to try and identify if the identified issues result from lack of motivation / work level / or fundamental project problems.

Disappointing

Progression to PhD unlikely, but has shown ability to undertake work at postgraduate level:

• Ability to undertake research has not been shown: is not currently producing research level material and there are doubts that this is obtainable within the time scale required.
• Ownership of project: has shown understanding of the project but with significant gaps and has taken little ownership of the research and is reliant on the supervisors for day to day direction.
• Witten ability: but shown acceptable ability to communicate in appropriate scientific language at level, but perhaps not at research level.
• Recommendations: will typically be transfer to MPhil if there is sufficient material, or MSc by Research is below this. Possibility of review in 3 months but it is essential that the source of the identified issues are established. 
• Refer to College

Unsatisfactory

Poorest grade, no progression towards a PhD and has shown little or no ability to work at postgraduate level (this is very rare):

• No ability to undertake research demonstrated: work either not completed or completed in an inconsistent and random manner with little demonstrated ability or motivation.
• No ownership of project: either lack of understanding / background or lack of motivation / work ethic.
• Written ability: serious concerns about ability to write at thesis level or failure to submit adequate reports to the specified deadline.
• Recommendation: If there is sufficient work from previous year, then possibility of transfer to MSc by Research, else exclusion as a research student.
• Refer to College

Third / Fourth Year Review

Very Good

Top grade, excellent progress,

• Ability to undertake research demonstrated: at least one first author paper accepted for a refereed journal with other publications at an advanced stage. The majority of the novel work completed for a high quality thesis and clear plans and timetable complete outstanding work. No doubt that there is sufficient novel material for a high quality thesis which will be completed within funding period.
• Full ownership of project: full ownership of the project, clear understanding of significance of work and clear research plans to complete a sufficient body of work for a high quality thesis to be submitted within the funding period.
• Ability to write at research level demonstrated: normally lead author on publication and typically corresponding author during publication.
• Recommend immediate progression to final year.

Good

The expected grade for successful progression:

• Ability to undertake research demonstrated: publishable results obtained with first author paper in preparation or has made significant input to multi-author paper which has either been accepted for publication or at advanced stage. Clear plans and timescale in place to complete sufficient novel work for thesis within the maximum period of study.
• Ownership of project: full understand of the project and background with clear evident of having taken ownership of the project with clear research plans to complete sufficient novel material for a thesis within the maximum period of study.
• Ability to write at research level demonstrated: normally has either authored published material or currently preparing publishable material. If no published material yet and there was doubt from second year, must show evidence of progression and has attended suitable courses.
• Recommend immediate progression to final year.

Satisfactory

Completion of PhD likely, but risk factors identified:

• Ability to undertake research demonstrated: publishable results obtained and the ability to produce novel research materials shown, but doubt if there will be sufficient novel material to complete within the required timescales, and there is a risk of requiring an extension.
• Ownership of project: full understand the project and background evident and has mostly taken ownership of the project with clear research plans to complete thesis, but timescales in doubt and there is a risk of requiring an extension.
• Written ability demonstrated: ability to write a thesis evident, but may need additional support from IAD / supervisors.
• Recommendation typically progression to final year provided there are viable plans in place to complete the work for a thesis. If there is doubt from either the supervisor or assessors that an addition review in 3 months may be required.
• NOTE: If there is doubt that the thesis will be completed within the maximum period of study this is the best grade that can be awarded.

Disappointing

Completion of PhD unlikely, with significant shortcoming and risk factors identified:

• Ability to to produce sufficient novel research not shown: there is insufficient novel research either completed or planed for a PhD thesis and there is doubt that this can be rectified within a reasonable timescale even with an extension of the maximum study period.
• Ownership of project: has shown basic understanding of the significance of the project work, but here are still evident gaps. Ownership of the project still in doubt and there has been little progress to identify this.
• Witten ability: content and level of written report below PhD thesis level, but shown acceptable ability to communicate in appropriate scientific language.
• Recommendations: will typically be transfer to MPhil; progression to PhD would requires significant progress. If review in 3 months is recommended it is essential that the source of the identified issues are established. 
• Refer to College

Unsatisfactory

Poorest grade, no progression towards a PhD and has shown little or no ability to work at postgraduate level (this is very rare, especially at this stage):

• No ability to undertake research demonstrated: work either not completed or completed in an inconsistent and random manner with little demonstrated of ability or motivation.
• No ownership of project: either lack of understanding / background or lack of motivation / work ethic.
• Written ability: serious concerns about ability to write at thesis level or failure to submit adequate reports to the specified deadline.
• Recommendation: If there is sufficient work from previous year, then possibility of transfer to MPhil, but more likely to MSc by Research, else exclusion as a research student.
• Refer to College