Being a member of a higher degree’s committee or research committee responsible for approving research proposals: As a member and Chair of the HDC in my Faculty one has to ensure fairness and consistency in the consideration of each proposal that serves at each meeting. In my Faculty we have clear criteria for our proposals and we have generated a reader’s template requiring the reader to assess the proposal based on the stated criteria in as fair and objective manner as possible. The culture in our HDC is one of providing critical yet constructive feedback to the candidate and supervisor. The Chair has to manage any potential unforeseen dynamics carefully and run the meeting in an efficient and effective manner. To do so, an agenda together with all the proposals, a reader’s list and template is distributed to all Faculty members. In addition, the Chair reads all the proposals and has to systematically guide the meeting through the agenda following a set process with decisive decisions about the proposal. For example, the proposal is accepted.
Being an examiner of theses, in writing and orally in a viva: This role should be done in a fair and objective manner as possible, providing critical yet constructive feedback. I always include a note to the candidate and supervisor at the end of my report. One should have a clear understanding of the university’s assessment criteria for external examining and assess accordingly.
