Concerning the rules to be admitted to next Ph.D. year and to the Ph.D. final exam, the Ph.D. Teaching Board recalls that, among the Ph.D. objectives, and listed as first point, is the “number and quality of scientific publications” produced (and co-produced) by the Ph.D. Student. Consequently, it is very important to create a proper structure that can be of constant help and incitement for scientific production.

In more detail concerning the rules to be admitted to next Ph.D. year and, at the end of the third year, to the Ph.D. final exam:

  1. The Research Advisor will act together with the Ph.D. Tutor to solicit the Ph.D. Student about his/her scientific production and to give constant support both to evidence positive aspects and to advise about possible critical points. The Research Advisor, chosen by the Teaching Board, must be an expert in the scientific field, and possibly, but not mandatorily, a Member of the Ph.D. Teaching Board.
  2. Tutor and Research Advisor will jointly meet the Ph.D. student periodically (at least twice a year, to have an indication) to check learning and scientific activity, to highlight the obtained results, to suggest possible corrections, and to track future directions. In consequence of these periodic meetings, Tutor and Research Advisor will produce minutes to be submitted to the Ph.D. Coordinator and Teaching Board.
  3. Ph.D. Student will be requested to produce a report to send to Tutor, Research Advisor, Coordinator and Teaching Board in the final months of each year (e.g. it should be in September being the conclusion of each Ph.D. year on October, 31st.), structured as follows and covering all activities from the beginning of the PhD (i.e. the report at the 3rd year will cover the overall PhD):
    • Description of the Research Activity (maximum 4 pages)
    • Educational and Training Activity (including the official certificates of the exams)
      • Followed Courses, Seminars, Schools
      • Followed Schools
    • Your Publications (structured into Journals, magazines, book chapters, conferences,)
    • Followed Conferences and Workshops (both presenting and not presenting papers)
    • Experience developed outside the University of Genoa during your Ph.D. (either abroad or in Italy but not at the University of Genoa) specifying:
      • Activity developed (very short)
      • Period of time
      • Hosting institution/industry
    • Participation in Research Projects
      • Project Title and Description (very short)
      • Developed Activity in the Project
    • Awards and scientific recognitions
  4. After presenting the mentioned report, Ph.D. students will be requested to present their research activity to Coordinator, Tutor and Research Advisor (who must produce consequent minutes better specified in the following; in this view this presentation may be one of the two annual meeting required between Tutor/Supervisor and Student) and, possibly, to the Teaching Board.
  5. In consequence of the previous points, the decision about the admission to the next year and to the final exam will be taken by the Teaching Board on the basis of:
    • Report sent by the Ph.D. Student; performed presentation; and consequent Tutor/Research Advisor minutes, which must evidence (either by using more words or also synthetically, through evaluations such as: very good, good, fair, sufficient, insufficient,…): Ph.D. Student contribution to the research; autonomy level; original developed ideas; provided interest; interaction skills; and overall obtained level.
    • The scientific production of the PhD Student, which should have the following minimal features: I) one scientific paper proposed for the publication on international journal/magazine/book chapter/conference, agreed with Tutor and Research Advisor, possibly also considering the Italian VQR evaluation level of publications, at the end of the second Ph.D. year; II) one scientific paper published on international journal/magazine/book chapter/conference, agreed with Tutor and Research Advisor, possibly also considering the Italian VQR evaluation level of publications, at the end of the third Ph.D. year to be admitted to the final exam.
  6. Concerning the final exam, at the end of the third year, the deadline to deliver the final version of your thesis is fixed for October 31st (the deadline is very strict). Your thesis, the report of your overall activity (see previous point 3), and the Tutor/Research Advisor minutes (see previous point 5a) will be evaluated by two external reviewers, not belonging to the University of Genoa and not participating in your Ph.D., by the end of the following month. The reviewers will express an analytical written judgment on the thesis and will propose the admission to public discussion (to the final exam) or will propose to postpone the exam of a period or not more than six months if they believe the thesis requires significant additions or corrections. In case you should request the additional title of Doctor Europaeus you need to make a request to me by the end of September of the last year. The request can be processed only if you have spent at least 3 months of your Ph.D. in a research institution of the European Community outside Italy, obviously if it is not the main location of your Ph.D. In case you are admitted to the final exam (i.e. the opinion of the Ph.D. Teaching Board and of the two reviewers is positive) you have about one month time (from the end of November to the end of December) to implement modifications to the thesis as suggested by the reviewers. The final deadline to deliver the final amended version should be the end of December. Anyway, all reported dates will be confirmed year by year. Please look at the documents at provided by our administrative offices for further details (payments, needed copies of the thesis,…). The final version of the thesis must be sent also to the Coordinator and to the components of the final evaluation board that the CoordinatorI will communicate. The final exam should take place before the end of February.