Completion

Planning final presentation

Planning for the presentation and evaluation of the artistic doctoral outcome should begin early, at the latest while preparing for the mid-term evaluation. If part or all the public presentation of the artistic doctoral outcome is to take place in the form of a screening performance, installation, or other time- and place-specific cultural event, it is essential to plan this well in advance. You may need to reach agreements with external venues and organizers regarding when and where the public presentation will take place. Furthermore, it is crucial to consider the logistics of the event and ensure sufficient funding within your research budget.

To ensure that all necessary practicalities are in place, application for assessment of the artistic doctoral outcome must be submitted at least five months before the planned public presentation of the doctoral outcome. This also helps the institution ensure that an evaluation committee can be present if part or all the presentation of the doctoral outcome takes place as a public event.

If the artistic doctoral outcome involves a public event, it is necessary to plan for its documentation. The documentation must be included as part of the archiving of the doctoral outcome.

Application for final assessment

For the necessary preparations to be made, the main supervisor in due time, should inform the responsible unit at the faculty that an application for assessment is imminent.

The candidate applies for assessment of the artistic doctoral outcome at the latest five (5) months before the planned date of presentation of the artistic outcome. The main supervisor should normally recommend the application.

The application uses a designated form and should contain the following:

An account of what should form the basis for the assessment, including a plan for where, when, and how the artistic doctoral outcome is to be publicly presented. It should also be specified whether any parts of the doctoral outcome will be made available to the committee before the public presentation.
An account of the required coursework, and any other academic training or competencies.
Documentation of necessary permits.
A plan for approved documentation and archiving in a permanent format of the entire doctoral outcome in a durable format.
Declarations from co-authors when this is required.
A confirmation that where language is used in the artistic doctoral outcome, this material will be made available in English.
A statement regarding whether the artistic doctoral outcome is being submitted for evaluation for the first or second time.
Declaration that the artistic doctoral outcome has not been submitted for evaluation at another institution.

The application for final assessment is processed by the PhD Committee. Applications that do not meet the requirements may be rejected.

The training component must be completed and approved before the final assessment of the artistic doctoral outcome commences.

Required coursework must be approved as completed before the assessment committee begins its work. If required coursework is not completed and approved by the time the assessment committee is to begin its work, assessment will be cancelled or postponed.

If the training component has previously been approved as completed, you do not need to apply again. Instead, attach the confirmation of approval when applying for final assessment.

Appointment of an assessment committee

Once the PhD committee has approved an application for assessment of the artistic doctoral outcome, the dean, following a recommendation from the PhD committee, appoints an expert committee comprised of at least three members who will assess the doctoral outcome and the public defence. Appointment of the assessment committee is to be done well in advance.

The composition of the committee

The research group prepares a reasoned proposal for the assessment group and presents it to the PhD committee. The proposal must show how the individual members represent relevant expertise, how the committee collectively covers the subject area of the artistic doctoral outcome, and how the assessment committee meet the formal criteria. In preparation for the proposal, potential members must be asked and declared willing and able.

The assessment committee will normally be comprised so that:

both sexes are represented
most of the members are external
at least one of the members does not have their main position at a Norwegian institution
if possible, one of the members is from a relevant overseas institution
all the members hold a doctoral degree or equivalent expertise in the subject area
at least two members have relevant artistic competence at associate professor level

If these criteria are not met, an explanation must be provided.

The following templates are to be used:

The doctoral candidate must be informed of the proposed committee's composition. The doctoral candidate may comment on the proposal, no later than one week after the proposal for the composition has been made known – so that the faculty in its processing of the case is best informed about possible conflict of interest or other influential factors, through information from the candidate, as well.

The dean appoints one of the members as chairperson of the committee, normally an internal member from the institution. When special reasons so dictate, the dean – utilizing its own academic staff – may instead appoint a managing director who does not participate in the academic assessment of the artistic doctoral outcome.

The committee chairperson is responsible for organizing the committee's work, including ensuring that the work is commenced quickly and that the timeframe for committee work is kept. The chairperson shall contribute to coordinating the committee's recommendation on the artistic doctoral outcome and clarify the division of work between the committee members during the public defence.

If a candidate’s artistic doctoral outcome has been rejected and she/he applies for a new assessment, the PhD committee may appoint a committee consisting of the same, or partly the same, members as at the previous assessment, or it may appoint a completely new committee. The committee must then be informed that this is the second time the artistic doctoral project is submitted for evaluation.

Alternate member

If one of the members of the evaluation committee is prevented from participating in the public defence, the dean, in accordance with the regulations for the PhD in artistic development sec. 14, may appoint an alternate to sit on the assessment committee. In such cases, the following applies:

The appointment of an alternate member is made in consultation with the committee administrator.
The PhD candidate is informed as soon as an alternate member has been appointed.
The requirements as to impartiality applies to alternate members and the faculty.
If an external member of the committee is unable to attend, the internal member of INN University will serve as a replacement and assume the role of the opponent.
If the internal member of INN University is unable to participate or needs to act as an alternate for the opponent, the faculty will appoint a substitute member.

Requirements for impartiality of committee members

The committee members are subject to the provisions in section 6 of the Public Administration Act regarding impartiality. Appointed supervisors and others that have made significant contributions to the artistic PhD project are not eligible to serve on the evaluation committee or to administer it. In the absence of clear violations of the impartiality requirements, such as family relationships or financial interests, it is the responsibility of each committee member to assess their own eligibility. The assessment must be made in accordance with the relevant provisions outlined in the Public Administration Act.

He is similarly disqualified if there are any other special circumstances which are apt to impair confidence in his impartiality; due regard shall inter alia be paid to whether the decision in the case may entail any special advantage, loss or inconvenience for him personally or for anyone with whom he has a close personal association. Due regard shall also be paid to whether any objection to the official's impartiality has been raised by one of the parties.

To ensure the integrity of INN University's PhD programmes, it is crucial to avoid any potential for impartiality objections during the evaluation process. Hence, INN University requests that all prospective committee members disclose any relationships that may compromise their ability to provide an unbiased assessment. To assist in this assessment, the following questions serve as guidelines for the committee members:

Are you related to the Ph.D. candidate or have any other close personal connection to the candidate or supervisor beyond what is explicitly stated in sec. 6 of the Public Administrative Act?
Do you have any joint publications, artistic development work, or other artistic collaborations with the Ph.D. candidate?
Have you had any joint publications, artistic development work, or other artistic collaborations with any of the Ph.D. candidate's supervisors in the last four years?
Have you had an advisory function without being formally appointed?
Do you have ongoing close professional collaboration with the candidate or supervisors?
Are there any other factors that may be of significance to your impartiality in evaluating the artistic doctoral outcome?

If any of these questions are answered in the affirmative, the committee member is asked to assess their own impartiality to the faculty. It is important to note that one may still consider themselves impartial even if they have shared publications or professional and artistic collaborations with the candidate or their supervisor, as this typically does not provide any personal benefit in the approval or rejection of the doctoral outcome. Only in cases where specific circumstances may significantly weaken the trust in impartial treatment, or if another party requests it, the university may override the committee member's assessment and conclude that the individual should not participate in the evaluation committee.

The public presentation of the artistic doctoral outcome

The entire doctoral outcome must be available by the time of the public presentation. If you want parts of the doctoral outcome to be made available to the committee before the public presentation, this must be submitted to the committee no later than four weeks before the public presentation of the doctoral outcome. In that case, it is the faculty that sends this material to the committee. Depending on the format, the faculty must receive the material from you earlier so that it can be processed and forwarded in time. The PhD Committee sets an internal submission deadline when the application for final assessment is approved.

If the public presentation implies a cultural event open to the public, you must in due time deliver the necessary material for use in the institution's information work.

Crediting of INN University

In all contexts where work related to the artistic doctoral project is published or presented publicly, Inland University of Applied Sciences must be credited. This applies to publications, public screenings, artistic works, and other presentations based on the artistic doctoral research. Other institutions and collaborating partners must also be duly acknowledged and credited according to their contributions.

Errata list

A submitted artistic doctoral outcome cannot be withdrawn until a final decision is made on whether it is worthy of defence for the PhD degree. However, you have the possibility to apply for permission to correct formal errors in the artistic doctoral outcome after it has been submitted. Correction of formal errors means, in practice, making text within the doctoral outcome syntactically meaningful or linguistically correct, not clarifying or changing the meaning of the text.

The application must be enclosed with a complete overview of the errors (errata) that you want to correct, and it should not be long. If you have listed changes that the PhD Committee or the evaluation committee believe are substantive, you will not be granted permission to implement the changes. The application for permission to correct formal errors in the artistic doctoral outcome must be sent by e-mail to the PhD Committee with the errata list as an attachment, no later than 4 weeks before the committee's deadline for submission of the decision and can only be done once. After the errata list has been approved by the PhD Committee, it will be forwarded to the assessment committee.

Dissemination of the doctoral outcome

You must submit a form with a summary of your artistic doctoral outcome three weeks prior to your public defence. It should be concise, accurate, and understandable to people outside your field. It should also detail your contribution to the field and society. The summary must be submitted in Norwegian and English as your artistic research will be disseminated in both languages on the INN website. It is advisable to start writing the summary early, as it takes time to craft effective research communication.

For guidance on writing the popular science summary, please refer to the tips provided here.

Assessment of the artistic doctoral outcome

How long does the assessment take?

The evaluation committee begins its review either at the time of the public presentation or in case material is made available to the committee beforehand, at the latest four weeks prior to the presentation. Before the committee begins its review, the faculty holds a meeting with the committee in order to review the objectives and profile of the artistic PhD programme, and the responsibilities and duties ascribed to the assessment committee.

The assessment committee's report shall normally be delivered within three months after the committee has received all the parts of the artistic doctoral outcome for assessment. In case of vacation, the assessment may take longer. The committee cannot be contacted directly.

When the committee's recommendation is available, it will be forwarded to you. You can comment on the evaluation committee’s recommendation before it is submitted for approval to the PhD Committee. The deadline for submitting comments is 10 working days from when the recommendation is made available. If the PhD candidate does not wish to submit any comments, the PhD Committee shall be informed in writing as soon as possible. Any comments made by the PhD candidate shall be sent to the PhD committee that is to decide the matter.

What are the possible outcomes of the assessment?

The evaluation committee may either recommend that the artistic doctoral outcome be approved for public defence or that it should not be approved. There is no option to request reworking of the doctoral outcome.

1. Unanimous positive recommendation

If the committee finds that the artistic doctoral outcome is worthy of public defence, it will return a positive recommendation. The PhD Committee shall approve the recommendation before it is finally decided that a public defence will be held. As soon as you have received a confirmation that a public defence is to be held, you must start preparing for the defence. This includes ensuring that the artistic doctoral outcome is publicly documented and archived.

2. Split recommendation

If the committee delivers a split recommendation, the PhD committee may base its decision on the majority recommendation or consider the recommendation of the minority as the basis for its decision. In the latter case, the PhD Committee may seek further clarification from the evaluation committee and/or appoint two new experts to submit individual statements on the artistic doctoral outcome. Such additional, or individual statements must be submitted to the PhD candidate who is then given the opportunity to comment on them. If both new experts agree with the majority's recommendation in the original committee recommendation, this recommendation must then be followed.

3. Unanimous negative recommendation

If the PhD committee concurs with the assessment committee’s recommendation that the artistic doctoral outcome is not suitable for public defence (rejected), you will receive a letter regarding the decision. An artistic doctoral outcome that has not been found worthy of defence may be assessed in a revised version no sooner than six (6) months after the PhD committee has made its decision. In this case, a new application for final assessment must be filed no later than five months before the planned date for a new public presentation of the artistic doctoral outcome.

A new evaluation can only take place once. The final deadline for applying for a new assessment is two years after the PhD committee reached a negative decision concluding the first assessment. When applying for a new assessment, the candidate shall explicitly note that the artistic doctoral project has previously been assessed and was not found worthy of defence.

Archiving of the artistic doctoral outcome

The artistic doctoral outcome must be documented and archived in a permanent format in such a way that others may study it in the future.

The artistic doctoral outcome must be made available to the public no later than two (2) weeks prior to the date of the public defence. The material must be made available in the form in which it was submitted for assessment. If part or all the public presentation of the artistic doctoral outcome has taken place in the form of an exhibition, screening, performance, installation, or other time- and place-specific event, this must be documented and included in the archiving of the doctoral degree work.

Research Catalogue serves as an institutional archive for artistic research, and artistic doctoral outcomes are typically archived as expositions within the INN University portal on Research Catalogue.

During the assessment process, the Research Catalogue exposition will be submitted to the institutional portal for review. The exposition is archived when it is published on the institutional portal. The exhibition will then be frozen permanently, preventing further changes, and automatically assigned a DOI. The final publication will be made by the institution. The library at INN University and the research administration at the faculty will assist in this process.

Learn more about the Research Catalogue peer review and publication process.

Public defence and doctoral conferment

After the assessment committee and INN University have found the artistic doctoral outcome worthy of defence, the PhD candidate will be presented for the public defence (disputas). There is no requirement for a trial lecture within the PhD in artistic research.

Upon the PhD committee approval of the public defence based on the assessment committee's recommendation, the doctoral candidate will be awarded the degree of Philosophiae doctor in artistic research.

The public defence of the doctoral outcome

The public defence is concluded in the main language used within the artistic doctoral outcome, unless otherwise agreed. The Dean, or a party appointed by the Dean, leads the public defence. It is expected that the doctoral candidate and the committee are formally dressed.

During the defence, two of the committee members will act as opponents. Any other attendee who wishes to oppose ex auditorio must notify the chair of the public defence during the defence.

In preparing for the defence, you should carefully review the committee's recommendation and, if necessary, discuss with your advisor any potential topics that opponents may address during the defence. During the defence, you should be attentive and active, and demonstrate the ability to reflect on critical remarks. You should contribute to ensuring a positive atmosphere during the public defence and carry out your defence as clearly and accurately as possible.

Standard course of a public defence:

The chair of the public defence, the PhD candidate and the committee enter the defence room in procession.
The chair opens the ceremony and assigns the PhD candidate and the committee to their seats.
The doctoral candidate presents the artistic doctoral research and outcome.
Break
Procession into the room in the same order as above.
The first opponent relays her/his opposition and the candidate provides her/his defence.
Break
Procession into the room in the same order as above.
Break. Attendees who wish to comment ex auditorio must notify the chair of the defence during the break.
Procession into the room in the same order as above
The second opponent relays her/his opposition and the candidate provides her/his defence.
Opponents ex auditorio are given the opportunity to comment.
In a short closing speech, the doctoral candidate expresses her/his gratitude for having the opportunity to partake in the doctoral examination, and thanks the committee for the work it has done.
The chair concludes the public defence.
The PhD programme holds a reception in honour of the PhD candidate and the public defence.
The assessment committee arrives at the reception and announces their recommendation on whether the defence should be approved. The recommendation must be justified if the public defence is not approved.

After the public defence, the assessment committee submits a report to the PhD committee, explaining its consideration of the public defence of the artistic doctoral outcome. The report shall conclude with whether the artistic doctoral outcome is approved/rejected. INN University shall process the decision.

If the public defence is not approved, a new public defence may be scheduled within a reasonable time frame. As far as possible, a new public defence shall be assessed by the original committee.

Practical information

You should dress in formal attire for your public defence.
Normally, INN University arranges a lunch for the candidate, the evaluation committee, the chair of the public defence and the supervisors between the trial lecture and the public defence.
The public defence is a public event. You are encouraged to invite friends and family.
Your supervisors have no formal role during the public defence, but you are encouraged to invite them as listeners.
After the public defence you may choose to arrange a doctoral dinner.

Doctoral dinner

If you decide to end the day with a doctoral dinner, the following tips may be useful.

Who should be invited to the dinner, and what are their roles?

The doctoral dinner is your event. It is you who invites the chair of the public defence, committee members and supervisors for dinner. In addition, it is natural to invite colleagues and people who have helped you in the work towards your artistic doctoral outcome

There are no fixed rules for seating arrangements, but it is common for you and those accompanying you, members of the assessment committee, the chair of the public defence, and main supervisor to sit together.

It is common for the chair of the public defence, the third member of the assessment committee, and the supervisor to hold speeches. The toastmaster must be informed that the chair of the public defence is the first speaker during the doctoral dinner. Furthermore, it is traditional for you to give a speech where you thank the institution, the committee, the academic community, family, etc.

Can you get some of the costs of the dinner covered?

You are responsible for covering all expenses for the doctoral dinner. You may be able to claim a tax deduction for some of the costs, check the Norwegian Tax Administration's website for more information on tax deductions for doctoral degree-related expenses. The requirement for tax exemption is that the doctoral dinner is an official event with the required participation.

If you do not wish to arrange a formal doctoral dinner, you should inform the PhD administration so that the chair of the public defence, committee members, and supervisors are prepared for this.

Conferral of the degree

Once the faculty approves the committee's acceptance of the doctoral examinations, INN University confers the degree of Philosophiae Doctor in Artistic Research and awards a diploma to the PhD candidate. The diploma shall also provide information about the academic training programme the PhD candidate has participated in and the supervisor’s names. The university determines additional information to be included in the diploma. The university will send the diploma by mail shortly afterwards.

An annual ceremony is held at INN University where candidates who have had their artistic doctoral outcome and defence approved receive their diploma.

Completion grant

If you submit the artistic doctoral outcome on time, you can apply for a completion scholarship. This scholarship offers extended employment for 3 to 9 months after submission. During the scholarship period, which starts after the PhD period ends and you have submitted your artistic doctoral outcome, you will receive work assignments related to the Norwegian Film School.

Learn more about the completion scholarship

Content manager: Research department Last modified Apr. 13, 2023 3:08 PM