➦ Norsk versjon

Regulations for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (Ph.D.) at Western Norway University of Applied Sciences

DateFOR-2024-06-24-1859
MinistryMinistry of Education and Research
Entry into force01.08.2024
Last consolidatedFOR-2025-10-22-2352
Abbreviated titleDegree of Philosophiae Doctor (Ph.D.) at Western Norway University of Applied Sciences
Original titleForskrift om graden philosophiae doctor (ph.d.) ved Høgskulen på Vestlandet

Legal basis: Adopted by the University College Board on 24 June 2024 pursuant to the Act of 8 March 2024 No. 9 relating to Universities and University Colleges section 9-1, section 11-9, section 11-10, section 13-2, section 12-4 section 14-1, and section 14-2.

Amendment Regulations incorporated into this text: Regulation 22 October 2025 nr. 2352.

This is an unofficial translation of the Norwegian version of the Regulation and is provided for information purposes only. Legal authenticity remains with the Norwegian version as published in Norsk Lovtidend. In the event of any discrepancy, the Norwegian version shall prevail.

The translation is provided by Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.

Chapter 1. Preliminary provisions

Section 1-1.Applicability

The regulations apply to all education leading to the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (Ph.D.). The regulations provide rules on admission to, completion of, and conclusion of the Ph.D. programme, including joint degrees and cotutelle agreements (joint supervision).

Section 1-2.Objective

The Ph.D. programme shall qualify candidates for research activities of international standards and for other work in society where high demands are placed on scientific insight and analytical thinking, in accordance with good scientific practice and recognised research ethics standards. The Ph.D. programme shall provide the candidate with knowledge, skills, and competence in line with the Norwegian Qualifications Framework.

Section 1-3.Scope and Content

(1) The Ph.D. programme consists of three (3) years of full-time study and includes a training component comprising a minimum of 30 ECTS credits.
(2) The main component of the Ph.D. programme is an independent research project carried out under active supervision.

Section 1-4. The Ph.D. Degree

The Ph.D. degree is awarded on the basis of:

a.an approved doctoral thesis,
b.approved completion of the training component,
c.an approved trial lecture on an assigned topic, and
d.the approved public defence of the doctoral thesis.

Section 1-5.Responsibility for Doctoral Education

(1) The Board of Western Norway University of Applied Sciences has the overall responsibility for the Ph.D. programme.
(2) The Board determines the host faculty for each Ph.D. programme.
(3) The Dean of the host faculty has the academic and administrative responsibility for implementation of the Ph.D. programme.
(4) In cross-faculty Ph.D. programmes, the Deans of the participating faculties share academic responsibility. The specific academic and administrative responsibilities are determined by written agreement between the relevant faculties.

Section 1-6.Central Ph.D. Committee

The Board appoints a Central Ph.D. Committee at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences. The Board determines the mandate for and composition of the Central Ph.D. Committee.

Section 1-7.Programme Committee

Each Ph.D. programme requires a Ph.D. Programme Committee. The Board determines the mandate for and composition of the Programme Committees. The Dean appoints members to the Programme Committee.

Section 1-8.Quality Assurance

The Ph.D. programme is covered by the quality system at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.

Chapter 2. Admission

Section 2-1.Conditions of Admission

(1) To be eligible for admission to the Ph.D. programme, applicants must have completed a master’s degree of 120 ECTS credits building on a bachelor’s degree of 180 ECTS credits, or an integrated master’s degree of 300 ECTS credits, in accordance with the requirements set by the Norwegian Qualifications Framework for second cycle education (master’s education).
(2) After special consideration, the Programme Committee may approve other comparable qualifications, including equally weighted master’s degrees of a different scope, as the basis for admission. The Dean can set requirements for the candidate’s residency at the institution. The master’s degree that forms the basis for admission must contain an independent work of at least 30 ECTS credits.
(3) The Ph.D. Programme Committee approves the master’s degrees that qualify for admission to the Ph.D. programme in question.
(4) The Programme Committee can set further requirements for qualifications for a Ph.D. programme, in accordance with criteria that are publicly available and in keeping with the University College’s recruitment policy and academic profile.
(5) The Dean may establish requirements for residency.

Section 2-2.Application

(1) The application must contain:
a.Documentation of the education that forms the basis for admission.
b.Project description that includes:
i.Academic description of the project
ii.Progress plan
iii.Documentation of full funding
iv.Documentation of specific needs for academic and material resources
v.Any plans for stays at other institutions
vi.Plans for research dissemination
vii.Information about any restrictions on intellectual property rights that are intended to protect the rights of others
c.Plan for the training component.
d.List of relevant publications.
e.Proposal for the main supervisor, as well as indication of affiliation with an active research environment.
f.Letter of recommendation from the proposed main supervisor,
g.Application to use languages other than English or Norwegian in the thesis, trial lecture and public defence, if applicable.
h.Explanation of any legal and ethical issues raised by the project and how these can be resolved. The application must indicate whether the project requires approval from research ethics committees or other authorities, or from private individuals (informants, patients, parents, etc.). Such approvals should, if possible, be obtained and included with the application.
(2) The Programme Committee may set requirements for additional documentation.

Section 2-3.Project Description

(1) A project description shall be developed in cooperation with the suggested main supervisor.
(2) The project description explains the thematic area, research questions and choice of theory and methodology. As soon as possible and no later than three (3) months after admission, the candidate and main supervisor must review the project description and assess the need for any adjustments.

Section 2-4.Admission Deadline

Applications for admission to the Ph.D. programme should normally be submitted within three (3) months after the start of the research project that will lead to the Ph.D. degree. If less than one (1) year of full-time work on the research project remains at the time of application, the applicant shall be rejected, cf. section 2-6 (3) letter c.

Section 2-5.Infrastructure

(1) The candidate shall have access to the necessary infrastructure for carrying out the research project. The Dean decides which infrastructure is considered necessary.
(2) For candidates with external funding or an external workplace, the Dean and the external party shall form an agreement on the research project. As a rule, the agreement must be signed prior to a decision being reached on the concerned candidate’s admission, or immediately thereafter.

Section 2-6.Decisions on Admission

(1) Decisions on admission are made by the Programme Committee and based on an overall assessment of the application.
(2) The decision shall appoint the main supervisor, assign responsibility for other needs outlined in the application and establish the start and end dates of the agreement period. The start date shall be the same as the start date for the candidate’s funding.
(3) Admission will be denied if:
a.Agreements with external third parties prevent the publication and public defence of the thesis.
b.The terms of intellectual property rights agreements on the project are unacceptable to the University College.
c.The applicant is unable to meet the requirement of implementing at least one year of the project after they are granted admission to the Ph.D. programme, cf. section 2-4.

Section 2-7.The Ph.D. Agreement

(1) Admission to the University College’s Ph.D. programme is formalised when the Ph.D. candidate, supervisor(s) and Dean sign the written agreement. The agreement regulates the rights and obligations of the parties during the admission period and ensures that the candidate regularly participates in an active research environment and facilitates the completion of the Ph.D. programme within the agreed time. The Central Ph.D. Committee determines the agreement form.
(2) For Ph.D. candidates with funding from, employment by, or other contributions from an external party, a separate agreement shall be made between the candidate, the faculty, and the external party. The Central Ph.D. Committee determines the agreement form.
(3) In cases where the Ph.D. candidate must have connections to foreign institutions, the University College’s guidelines for such collaboration must be followed and separate, established agreements are entered into. These agreements must normally be included with the admission agreement.
(4) Any significant changes to the agreement that will affect the implementation of the research project, or the training component must be approved by the Programme Committee.

Section 2-8.Agreement Period

(1) The Ph.D. programme is equivalent to three (3) years of full-time studies.
(2) The maximum length of time for implementing the project, excluding statutory leaves and compulsory work, is six (6) years from the start date to the public defence.
(3) In the case of legally mandated interruptions, the agreement period is extended accordingly.
(4) The program committee makes decisions on other extensions of the agreement period based on a justified application. If an extension is granted, the program committee may impose additional conditions.
(5) Any extension of the agreement period must be related to employee rights or specified in relation to the candidate’s funding basis.
(6) Following the expiry of the admission period, the parties’ rights and obligations under the Ph.D. agreement cease, which means the Ph.D. candidate may lose their right to supervision, course participation and access to the University College’s infrastructure. The candidate may still apply to submit the thesis for assessment for their Ph.D. degree.

Chapter 3. Termination Prior to the End of the Agreement Period

Section 3-1.Voluntary Termination

(1) The candidate and the University College may agree to terminate the Ph.D. programme before the agreed time. In the event of such termination, a written agreement shall be made to address issues related to employment, funding, rights to results, etc.
(2) In cases of voluntary termination due to the candidate’s desire to change project or transfer to another programme, the candidate must reapply for admission based on the new project.

Section 3-2.Forced Termination

(1) The University College may decide to forcibly terminate the Ph.D. programme before the agreed time if one or more of the following circumstances occur:
a.Significant delays in completing the training component due to factors within the candidate’s control.
b.Repeated or significant breaches by the candidate of the duty to inform, follow up, or report, including failure to submit progress reports, cf. section 4-8.
c.Delays in the progress of the research project to an extent that raises reasonable doubt as to whether the candidate will be able to complete the project within the agreed timeframe. For forced termination, the delay must be caused by factors within the candidate’s control.
d.The candidate’s conduct violates the trust between the University College and the candidate during the Ph.D. programme, including illegal activities connected to the Ph.D. programme.
(2) Decisions on forced termination are made by the Dean following a recommendation from the Programme Committee. Appeals are handled by the Appeals Board for Student Affairs at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.

Section 3-3.Termination Due to Cheating or Misconduct

(1) In cases of cheating in exams or tests during the Ph.D. programme, the institution may decide to annul results and impose exclusion, cf. the Universities and University Colleges Act section 12-4.
(2) Decisions regarding cheating are made by the Appeals Board for Student Affairs at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, cf. the Universities and University Colleges Act section 14-1. Appeals are handled by the Joint Appeals Board for Student Affairs, cf. the Universities and University Colleges Act section 14-2.
(3) If the conduct is so serious that it qualifies as misconduct, cf. the Universities and University Colleges Act section 13-2 and the Research Ethics Act section 8, second paragraph, the institution may decide on forced termination.
(4) Decisions on forced termination due to misconduct are made by the Dean. Appeals against such decisions are handled by the Ministry or a special appeals committee appointed by the Ministry.

Section 3-4.Termination According to the Civil Service Act

Ph.D. candidates may be dismissed from their positions when there is just cause related to the operations of the institution or the employee's conduct, cf. the Civil Service Act section 19 and section 20, or may be terminated in accordance with section 26.

Chapter 4. Implementation

Section 4-1.Supervision

The thesis work must be carried out under individual supervision. The Dean and supervisors must together ensure that the Ph.D. candidate participates in an active research environment.

Section 4-2.Appointment of Supervisors

(1) The Ph.D. candidate must have at least two supervisors, one of whom is appointed as the main supervisor. The main supervisor is formally appointed by the Programme Committee at the time of admission.
(2) The main supervisor has the main responsibility for monitoring the candidate’s academic progress and ensuring the completion of the Ph.D. in accordance with the progress plan. The main supervisor should be from the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences. If the Programme Committee appoints an external main supervisor, a co-supervisor from the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences must be appointed.
(3) Co-supervisors are academics who provide guidance and share the academic responsibility for the candidate with the main supervisor. The division of responsibilities between the main supervisor and the co-supervisor(s) must be specified in an agreement upon the candidate’s admission to the Ph.D. programme at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.
(4) The impartiality rules in Chapter 2 of the Public Administration Act apply to the supervisors.
(5) All supervisors must hold a doctoral degree in their field and be active researchers. Exceptions to the requirement of a doctoral degree may be made for professors and associate professors.
(6) At least one of the appointed supervisors should have previous experience or training in supervising Ph.D. candidates.
(7) The Ph.D. candidate and he supervisor may request the University College to appoint a new supervisor for the candidate. Procedures for changing supervisors are outlined in the agreement on admission to the Ph.D. programme at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences. The current supervisor cannot step down until a new supervisor has been appointed.
(8) The parties may bring any disputes regarding the academic rights and obligations of the supervisor and the candidate to the Programme Committee for review and a final decision.

Section 4-3.Nature of the Supervision

(1) The candidate and academic supervisors shall maintain regular contact. The frequency of contact shall be specified in the annual progress report, cf. section 4-8.
(2) The supervisors are obliged to stay informed of the progress of the candidate’s work and assess it in relation to the progress plan outlined in the project description, cf. section 2-2, letter b.
(3) The supervisors are obliged to monitor any academic issues that may lead to delays in the completion of the Ph.D. programme, to ensure that it can be completed within the agreed timeframe.
(4) The supervisors shall provide advice on the formulation and delimitation of the research topic and questions, discuss and evaluate hypotheses and methods, review results and their interpretation, discuss the structure and execution of the thesis, including its outline, language, documentation, etc., and assist with navigating relevant academic literature and data sources, such as libraries and archives. Furthermore, the supervisors shall guide the candidate on research ethics issues related to the thesis.

Section 4-4.Training Component

(1) The Ph.D. programme must be designed so that it can be completed within the agreed timeframe.
(2) The Dean is responsible for ensuring that the training component, together with the thesis work, provides an education at a high academic level and in accordance with international standards, incorporating the execution of scientific research, training in academic dissemination and an introduction to research ethics, scientific theories and scientific methods. The training component, together with the research project, shall contribute to the achievement of the expected learning outcomes in accordance with the Norwegian Qualifications Framework.
(3) If the University College does not organise the entire training component itself, arrangements shall be made to facilitate the candidate’s participation in equivalent training at other institutions.
(4) The training component shall consist of at least 30 ECTS credits, of which at least 20 ECTS credits must be completed after admission. The Programme Committee may allow exceptions to this requirement based on the applicant’s academic background. Elements included in the training component should generally not be more than two (2) years old at the time of admission.
(5) Courses and subjects at the doctoral level at another institution shall be credited in line with the rules set out in section 9-1 of the University and University Colleges Act.
(6) The Programme Committee approves the candidate’s training component, as well as applications for any changes to it.
(7) The institution hosting the individual Ph.D. programme should offer the Ph.D. candidate with guidance on future career opportunities both within and outside of academia, including awareness of the skills the candidate has acquired through their research work.

Section 4-5.Right to Parental Leave

Ph.D. candidates who are on parental leave from their Ph.D. programme may still attend courses and take exams that are to be included as part of their training component during the leave period, in accordance with Chapter 14 of the National Insurance Act.

Section 4-6.Accomodation

Ph.D. candidates with special needs have the right to accommodations in accordance with Chapter 7 of the Regulations Relating to Studies and Examinations at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.

Section 4-7.Regulation of Examinations in the Training Component

Provisions regarding examinations, including cheating, in the Regulations Relating to Studies and Examinations at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences apply to work that is part of the training component of the Ph.D. programme.

Section 4-8.Reporting

(1) The institution's quality assurance system for the Ph.D. programme shall include measures to identify any lack of progress in the thesis work and training component, as well as deficiencies in supervision, along with procedures for addressing any identified shortcomings.
(2) The system shall include annual and separate reporting from both the Ph.D. candidates and the supervisor, and be designed to avoid double reporting.
(3) The candidate and supervisor share equal responsibility for reporting to the Programme Committee. Failure to submit a complete or timely progress report by the candidate may result in forced termination of the doctoral education before the end of the enrolment period, cf. section 3-2. Supervisors who fail to meet their obligation to report may lose their supervisory responsibilities.
(4) The University College may require special reporting if needed.

Section 4-9.Midway Evaluation

(1) The midway evaluation of the doctoral work should take place in the third or fourth semester.
(2) The candidate shall present their work for evaluation by a group of at least two persons who have been appointed by the Programme Committee. The evaluation group shall assess academic status and progress of the doctoral work, and provide feedback to both the candidate, supervisor, and institution.
(3) If the evaluation group reports significant shortcomings in the research work, measures must be implemented to correct the situation.

Section 4-10.Thesis Requirements

(1) The thesis must be an independent research project that meets international standards for research ethics, academic level and methodology used in the relevant research field.
(2) The thesis shall contribute to the development of new academic knowledge and be of a standard that indicates it could be published as part of the scientific literature of the field.
(3) The thesis may consist of a monograph or a compilation of several smaller works. If the thesis comprises multiple smaller works, the relationship between them must be explained.
(4) If a written work has been produced in collaboration with other authors, the Ph.D. candidate must adhere to the norms for co-authorship that are generally accepted in the academic community and in accordance with international standards. If the thesis primarily consists of articles, the candidate should normally be listed as the first author on at least half of the articles.
(5) In theses that include works with multiple authors, a statement must accompany the submission, describing the candidate's contribution to each individual work, signed by the candidate and co-author(s).
(6) The Programme Committee decides which languages may be used in a thesis, cf. section 2-2.

Section 4-11.Previous work

(1) The thesis may be submitted for assessment at only one institution.
(2) Works or parts of a work that have been accepted as the basis for previously awarded examinations or degrees before the Ph.D. education cannot be submitted for evaluation unless the work is included as a minor part of a thesis.
(3) Works or parts of a work that have been included in approved assignments and activities in the training component may be included in the thesis.
(4) Data, analyses, or methods from previous degrees may be used as the basis for work on the Ph.D. project.
(5) Published works cannot be accepted as part of the thesis if they are older than five (5) years from the publication date at the time of admission. The Programme Committee may grant exemptions from this requirement if extraordinary circumstances warrant it.
(6) All use of previous work(s) shall be referenced in accordance with the scientific citation standards of the relevant field.
(3) The thesis may be submitted for assessment at only one institution, cf. section 5-3 (2) letter f.

Section 4-12.Obligation to Report on Research Results with Commercial Potential

(1) The mutual rights of collaborating institutions must be regulated in an agreement.
(2) The applicable regulations at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences shall serve as the basis for the reporting obligations of Ph.D. candidates employed at the university regarding research results with commercial potential produced during their employment.
(3) For Ph.D. candidates with an external employer, the corresponding reporting obligation shall be specified in an agreement between the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, the Ph.D. candidate and the external employer.
(4) For Ph.D. candidates without an employer, the corresponding reporting obligation shall be specified in the admission agreement between the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences and the Ph.D. candidate.

Chapter 5. Completion

Section 5-1.Basis for Assessment

The Ph.D. degree is awarded on the basis of the following elements, cf. section 1-4:

a.Approved doctoral thesis,
b.Approved completion of the training component,
c.Approved trial lecture on an assigned topic, and
d.Approved public defence of the doctoral thesis.

Section 5-2.Time from Submission to Public Defence

(1) As a rule, no more than five (5) months should pass from submission to the defense.
(2) The main supervisor is responsible to notify the Dean and Programme Committee when the submission is imminent.

Section 5-3.Thesis Submission

(1) The application to have the thesis evaluated may only be submitted once the training component has been approved.
(2) The following documents must be attached to the application:
a.The thesis, in the approved format and in the form and number of copies specified in the Ph.D. programme syllabus.
b.Documentation that the training component has been completed and approved,
c.Documentation of necessary approvals, cf. section 2-2 letter h,
d.Co-author declarations where required in accordance with section 4-10 (4),
e.A statement indicating whether the doctoral work is being submitted for assessment for the first or second time.
f.A declaration that the doctoral work has not been submitted for assessment at another institution.
(3) The Programme Committee may reject an application for thesis assessment if it is evident that the thesis does not meet the required scientific quality and would be rejected by a committee.

(4) The thesis must be made publicly available no later than two weeks before the public defence, cf. section 5-15 (1).

Section 5-4.Processing of the Application

The Programme Committee processes applications for the thesis to be assessed. Applications that do not meet the requirements in section 5-3 shall be rejected.

Section 5-5.Appointment of the Assessment Committee

(1) Once the Programme Committee has approved the application for the thesis assessment, an Expert Committee of at least three members is appointed to assess the thesis and the public defence.
(2) The impartiality provisions of Chapter 2 of the Public Administration Act apply to the Committee members.
(3) The composition of the Committee should be determined by the time of submission.
(4) The Assessment Committee shall be composed as follows:
a.The majority of the members must be external.
b.Both genders must be represented.
c.At least one of the members must hold a primary position at a foreign institution.
d.At least one of the members must have no affiliation with the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.
e.One of the members must be a permanent employee at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.
f.All members must hold a doctorate degree.
(5) Any deviation from these criteria must be specifically justified.
(6) The Programme Committee nominates the Assessment Committee. The composition of the Committee must be reasoned and demonstrate how it collectively covers the subject area of the thesis.
(7) The Programme Committee proposes a chairperson from among the Committee members or in addition to the Committee members. The chairperson must be from the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences. The Dean appoints the Assessment Committee based on the nomination from the Programme Committee.
(8) Appointed supervisors and others who have contributed to the thesis cannot be members of the Assessment Committee or administrate it.
(9) If one of the Committee members withdraws, the Dean may appoint a substitute member.
(10) The candidate shall be informed of the proposed composition of the Committee and has the opportunity to submit written comments no later than one week after the proposed composition has been made known to the candidate.

Section 5-6.Gathering of Supplementary Information

(1) The Assessment Committee may require that the Ph.D. candidate submit the underlying material and any clarifying additional information.
(2) The Assessment Committee may ask the supervisor to provide an account of the supervision and work on the thesis.

Section 5-7.Revision of a Submitted Thesis

(1) Based the submitted thesis and any additional material, cf. section 5- 6, the Assessment Committee may recommend that the Programme Committee grant permissions for minor revisions before a final recommendation is made. The Committee must provide a provide a detailed written account of what the candidate needs to revise.
(2) If the Programme Committee allows minor revisions of the thesis, a deadline for such revisions shall be set, which should normally not exceed three (3) months. A new deadline for the submission of the final report of the Committee must also be set. The institution’s decision under this section cannot be appealed by the Ph.D. candidate.
(3) If the Committee finds that major changes regarding theory, hypothesis, material, or method are necessary for the work to be recommended for the defence, the Committee shall not approve the thesis.

Section 5-8.The Assessment Committee Recommendation

(1) The Assessment Committee submits a recommendation on whether the work is approved for the defence. The recommendation and any dissenting opinions must be justified.
(2) The Assessment Committee’s recommendation must be submitted no later than three (3) months after the Committee has received the thesis. If the Committee allows revisions of the thesis, a new submission deadline runs from the date the revised thesis is resubmitted.
(3) The Assessment Committee’s recommendation is submitted to the Programme Committee, who then presents it to the Ph.D. candidate. The candidate is given a deadline of ten (10) working days to submit written comments to the recommendation. If the candidate does not wish to comment, the Programme Committee must be promptly notified of this in writing.
(4) Any comments from the Ph.D. candidate shall be submitted to the Dean, who makes the final decision on the matter in accordance with section 5-10.

Section 5-9.Correction of Formal Errors in the Thesis

(1) A submitted work cannot be withdrawn until a final decision has been made on whether it is approved for the defence.
(2) After submission, the Ph.D. candidate may apply for permission to correct formal errors in the thesis. A complete list of the errors (errata) that the candidate wishes to correct must be attached to the application. The application for correction must be submitted no later than two months after the candidate has submitted the thesis and may only be submitted once.

Section 5-10.Institutional procedures related to the Assessment Committee’s Recommendation

The Dean decides whether the thesis is approved for the defence, based on the Assessment Committee’s recommendation.

Section 5-11.Unanimous Committee recommendations

(1) If the Assessment Committee’s submits a unanimous recommendation and the Dean decides to base their decision on this unanimous recommendation, the Dean shall make a decision in accordance with the recommendation.
(2) If the Dean finds that there is reasonable doubt as to whether the Committee’s unanimous recommendation should be used as the basis for the decision, the Dean must request further clarification from the Assessment Committee and/or appoint two new experts to submit individual evaluations of the thesis. These additional or individual evaluations must be presented to the Ph.D. candidate, who will be given the opportunity to submit comments.
(3) The Dean makes the final decision based on the recommendation and the subsequent evaluations.

Section 5-12.Non-Unanimous Committee Recommendation

(1) If the Committee’s decision is not unanimous, and the Dean decides to base their decision on the majority opinion, the institution will issue a decision in accordance with the majority's recommendation.
(2) If the Committee’s decision is not unanimous, and the Dean considers basing their decision on the minority opinion, the Dean may seek further clarification from the evaluation committee and/or appoint two new experts to provide individual assessments of the dissertation. These additional or individual statements must be presented to the Ph.D. candidate, who will be given the opportunity to provide comments. If both of the new experts agree with the majority opinion in the Committee's original recommendation, this recommendation must be followed.
(3) The candidate shall be notified of the outcome following the consideration of the statements from the new experts.
(4) Any new experts appointed under this section shall not be part of the Assessment Committee nor act as opponents during the defence. However, if any members of the original Assessment Committee members withdraw, the new experts may be appointed as substitute members in accordance with section 5-5 (9).

Section 5-13.Resubmission

(1) A Ph.D. thesis that has not been approved for the defence may be evaluated in a revised edition no earlier than six (6) months after the Dean has made their decision. A thesis may be submitted for re-assessment only once.
(2) In the event of a resubmission, the Ph.D. candidate must clearly state that the work has previously been evaluated and not approved for public defence.

Section 5-14.Requirements for the Printed Thesis

(1) Once the thesis has been approved for public defence, the Ph.D. candidate must submit the thesis to the University College in an approved format and in accordance with the provisions of the University College, cf. section 5-3.
(2) The Ph.D. candidate must submit a brief summary of the thesis in both English and Norwegian. If the thesis is not written in English or Norwegian, a summary must also be submitted in the language of the thesis.
(3) As with the thesis itself, the summary must be made available to the public.

Section 5-15.Publication

(1) The thesis must be made publicly available no later than two (2) weeks prior to the public defence. The thesis must be made available in the form in which it was submitted for assessment or following any revisions based on the Committee’s preliminary comments, cf. section 5-7.
(2) No restrictions may be placed on the public disclosure of a Ph.D. thesis, except in cases where a prior agreement has been made to delay the date of disclosure. Such a delay may occur to allow the institution and any external party that has wholly or partially funded the PhD project to consider potential patenting. External parties cannot demand that all or part of the doctoral thesis remain undisclosed, cf. section 2-6.
(3) Upon publication of the Ph.D. thesis, the candidate must follow the applicable guidelines for crediting institutions. The main rule is that an institution’s address must be listed in a publication if it has made a necessary and significant contribution to, or formed the basis of, the author’s ability to produce the published manuscript. All institutions that meet the requirements must be listed.

Section 5-16.Trial Lecture

(1) After the thesis has been submitted for assessment according to section 5- 3, the Ph.D. candidate must hold a trial lecture. The trial lecture is an independent part of the examination for the Ph.D. degree and must be held on an assigned topic.
(2) The intention is to test the candidate’s ability to acquire knowledge beyond the topic of the thesis and to convey this knowledge in a lecture situation.
(3) The title of the trial lecture is made known to the Ph.D. candidate ten (10) working days before it takes place. The topic of the trial lecture must not be directly connected to the topic of the thesis.
(4) The trial lecture is held in connection with the public defence, and the Assessment Committee sets the topic of the trial lecture and performs the evaluation.
(5) If the trial lecture and public defence takes place separately, the Dean appoints a separate Committee that also determines the topic. In such cases, at least one of the Assessment Committee members must participate in the trial lecture assessment.
(6) The trial lecture must be held in the language of the thesis, unless another language has been approved by the Dean.
(7) The Assessment Committee for the trial lecture decides whether the lecture is approved or not. Disapproval must be substantiated.
(8) The trial lecture must be approved before the public defence can be held.
(9) If the trial lecture is not approved by the Assessment Committee, a new trial lecture must be held. The new trial lecture must be held on a new topic and no later than six (6) months after the first attempt. A trial lecture may be re-held only once. The new trial lecture is normally assessed by the same committee as for the original.

Section 5-17.Public Defence of the Thesis

(1) The public defence of the thesis should take place after the trial lecture has been held and approved, and no later than two (2) months after the thesis has been deemed worthy of defence.
(2) The time and location of the public defence must be announced at least ten (10) working days prior to the scheduled date.
(3) The original Assessment Committee will also assess the public defence. The public defence is conducted in the language of the thesis, unless the Dean, upon the recommendation of the Assessment Committee, approves another language.
(4) There are normally two opponents. The opponents must be external members of the Assessment Committee and are appointed by the Dean.
(5) The public defence is chaired by the Dean, or someone appointed by the Dean. The chair of the public defence gives a brief account of the submission, the assessment of the thesis, and the trial lecture. Then the Ph.D. candidate presents the intent and results of their scientific investigation. The opposition is opened by the first opponent and closed by the second. Others in attendance may comment ex auditorio. The chair of the defence concludes the defence proceedings.
(6) The Dean may establish another division of tasks.
(7) The Assessment Committee gives its recommendation to the Dean and presents its assessment of the defence of the thesis.
(8) The recommendation concludes whether the public defence is approved or not. The grounds for non-approval must be substantiated.

Section 5-18.Approval of the Doctoral Examination

(1) The Dean decides whether the doctoral examination is approved, based on the Assessment Committee’s recommendation.
(2) If the Dean does not approve the public defence, the Ph.D. candidate can defend the thesis once more. A new defence can be held a minimum of (6) months later and if possible be assessed by the same committee as the first defence.

Section 5-19.

(1) Based on the Dean’s report of the approval of the training component, thesis and doctoral examination, the principal confers the Philosophiae Doctor degree on the Ph.D.- candidate.
(1) The diploma is issued by the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences. The diploma provides information about the academic education the candidate has participated in. The University College determines which information to include in the diploma.

Section 5-20.Diploma Supplement

The Western Norway University of Applied Sciences issues diploma supplements in line with applicable guidelines.

Chapter 6. Appeals, Supplementary Provisions and Entry into Force

Section 6-1.Appeals of Rejections of Applications for Admission, Decisions to Terminate a Student’s Admission Rights, and Rejections of Applications for Recognition of Parts of the Training Component

Appeals of rejections of applications for admission, decisions to terminate a student’s admission rights and rejections of applications for recognition of parts of the training component are made according to the provisions of section 28 and following of the Norwegian Public Administration Act. Appeals are handled by The Appeals Committee at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.

Section 6-2.Appeals Against Training Component Exams

(1) Exams taken as part of the training component may be appealed according to section 11-9 and section 11-10 of the University and University Colleges Act.
(2) Suspected plagiarism, cheating or attempts to cheat are handled in accordance with the established guidelines for plagiarism and cheating at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.

Section 6-3.Appeals of Rejections of Applications for Assessment and of the Doctoral Thesis, Trial Lecture or Public Defence

(1) Rejections of applications for assessment of the doctoral thesis and non- approval of the doctoral thesis, trial lecture or public defence may be appealed pursuant to section 28 and following of the Public Administration Act. Appeals are handled by The Appeals Committee at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.
(2) If the Dean finds it necessary, individuals or a committee may be appointed to evaluate the assessment that was carried out and the criteria it was based on, or to conduct a new or supplementary assessment before the case is sent to The Appeals Committee at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences for a final decision.

Section 6-4.Guidelines and Supplementary Provisions

The University College Board may determine guidelines and supplementary provisions within the scope of this regulation and in accordance with recommendations from the relevant Programme Committee.

Section 6-5.Joint Degrees and Cotutelle (Joint Supervision) Agreements

(1) The University College may enter into agreements with one or more Norwegian or foreign institutions to cooperate on joint degrees or cotutelle agreements.
(2) For cooperation on joint degrees and cotutelle agreements, exceptions from this regulation can be made if required by the regulations of the cooperating institution. Such exceptions, both individually and as a whole, must be clearly justifiable.

Section 6-6.Joint Degrees

(1) A joint degree is a collaboration between multiple institutions who are collectively responsible for admission, academic supervision, the conferral of the degree and other elements as described in this regulation. The collaboration is normally organised as a consortium and regulated by an agreement between the consortium members.
(2) For a completed joint degree, a joint diploma is issued in the form of:
a.a diploma issued by all consortium members,
b.a diploma from each of the consortium participants,

or a combination of a. and b.

(3) Joint degree agreements are normally made only if there is a previously established stable academic cooperation between the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences and at least one of the other consortium participants.
(4) The University College Board is responsible for establishing detailed guidelines for cooperation on a joint degree, including templates for cooperation agreements, cf. section 6-6, first paragraph.

Section 6-7.Cotutelle Agreements

Cotutelle agreements are agreements on joint supervision of Ph.D. candidates and cooperation on education of Ph.D. candidates. Cotutelle agreements are entered into for each individual candidate and should be built on stable academic cooperation.

Section 6-8.Requirements of Joint Degrees and Cotutelle Agreements

Admission requirements, the requirement that the doctoral thesis must be made publicly available and the requirement that the public defence must be assessed by an impartial committee cannot be deviated from.

Section 6-9.Entry into Force

This regulation enters into force on 1 August 2024 and replaces the Regulations 10 June 2021 no. 2111 for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (Ph.D.) at Western Norway University of Applied Sciences.