Charles University, Faculty of Social Sciences

Dean’s Measure no. 22/2021

Title:

Amendment to the Dean’s Measure no. 5/2021 Organization of Doctoral Studies at FSV UK

In effect from:

1. 1. 2022

In Prague on 16 December 2021

                                                                                   doc. PhDr. Alice Němcová Tejkalová, Ph.D.

                                                                                   Dean of the Faculty

1. Dean’s Measure no. 5/2021, Organization of Doctoral Studies at FSV UK has been amended as follows:

Article 6 para 2:

“2. Along with the application for the state doctoral examination in SIS, the student must submit to the Student Services Office the Advisor’s assessment of the course of doctoral study for admission to the state doctoral examination. In the assessment, the advisor confirms that all the study requirements necessary for admission to the state doctoral examination have been fulfilled. If a student does not comply with any of these requirements, s/he may not proceed to SDE.”

Article 6 para 4:

“4. The Dean of the Faculty appoints the chairperson and the examining committee from the ranks of professors, associate professors, and experts. Experts must be approved by the scientific board of the faculty as the examiners for the state doctoral examination. At least one member of the committee may not be a member of the faculty's academic community. The number of members of the examining committee present shall not be less than three in the state doctoral examinations. The committee decides on the outcome of the state doctoral examination in a closed session after a discussion by voting in the form of a raised hand. If any member of the committee presents such a request, voting shall be conducted in secret, using ballot papers. The present members of the committee may not abstain from voting. The voting is supervised by the chairperson of the examining committee. The committee decides by a majority vote, in the event of a tie or failure to achieve a majority of votes, the student is evaluated with the classification more favourable to him/her.”

State Doctoral Examination (SDE) - Administrative Procedures

D = the day of SDE                  D- dates prior to SDE               D+ dates following SDE

Article 7 para 1:

“1. The defense of the dissertation is held before the examination committee for the defense of the dissertation thesis. The committee is appointed by the Dean from the ranks of the professors, associate professors, and experts. The expert members must be approved by the scientific council of the faculty as members of the committees for defense of dissertation theses. At least one member of the committee may not be a member of the academic community of the faculty. The function of the chairperson of the examination committee is incompatible with the function of advisor, consultant, and external reviewer, but these may be other members of the committee. External reviewers of the dissertation thesis are usually associate professors, professors, or important experts in the given field with a Ph.D. or CSc. scientific degree.”

Article 7 para 2:

“2. The committee decides on the outcome of the defense of dissertation thesis in a closed session after a discussion by voting in the form of a raised hand. If any member of the committee presents such a request, voting shall be performed in secret, using ballot papers. The presented members of the committee cannot abstain from voting. The voting is supervised by the chairperson of the examining committee. The committee decides by a majority vote, in the event of a tie or failure to achieve a majority of votes, the student is evaluated with the classification more favourable to him/her.”

Article 7 para 3:

“3. If the committee for the defense of dissertation thesis assesses the grading as "failed", it shall determine whether it is necessary to rewrite or supplement the thesis; a repeated defense is possible six months at the earliest following the failed defense.”

Defense of Dissertation Thesis - Administrative Procedure

D = the day of the defense         D- dates prior to the defense      D+ dates following the defense

2. The full version of the Dean’s Measure is attached to this Measure.

3. The Academic Senate of FSV UK expressed its favourable opinion on this Measure on 7 December, 2021.   

4. This Measure takes effect from 1 January, 2022.

doc. PhDr. Alice Němcová Tejkalová, Ph.D.

                                                                                                          Dean of the Faculty

In charge of accuracy:

doc. Ing. Tomáš Cahlík, CSc.

Vice-Dean for Doctoral Studies and Other Forms of Education

********************************The full version of the Dean’s Measure**************

Charles University, Faculty of Social Sciences

Dean’s Measure no. 22/2021

Title:

Amendment to the Dean’s Measure no. 5/2021 Organization of Doctoral Studies at FSV UK

In effect from:

1. 1. 2022

In Prague on 16 December 2021

                                                                                   doc. PhDr. Alice Němcová Tejkalová, Ph.D.

                                                                                   Dean of the Faculty

Article 1

Introductory Provisions

1. This measure follows the Study and Examination Regulations of Charles University (hereinafter referred to as “Regulations” and “University”), the Rules for Organization of Studies at the Faculty of Social Sciences of Charles University, as amended (hereinafter referred to as “Rules” and “Faculty”), and the Rector's Measure no. 19/2018 and 5/2020 Manual for Doctoral Studies.

Article 2

Subject Board

1. The studies in the doctoral study program are followed and evaluated by the subject board. The subject board in the doctoral study program has at least five members. At least two-thirds of the members of the subject board must be associate professors or professors. At least one third of the subject board must be persons other than members of the academic community of the faculty, at least one of them must be a person other than a member of the academic community of the university. The guarantor of the doctoral study program is the chairperson of the relevant subject board. The members of the subject board are appointed and dismissed by the Rector at the proposal of the Dean of the Faculty, following the statement by its scientific board.
2. Academic staff of the faculty and students enrolled at the faculty are members of the academic community of the faculty. Academic staff of the faculty are professors, associate professors, extraordinary professors, assistant professors, assistants, lecturers and scientific, research and development staff  who are employees of the university, are assigned to the faculty and employed there according to the agreed type of work in both pedagogical and creative activities.
3. The subject board reaches a quorum if at least half of its members are present at its meeting.
4. The proposal considered by the subject board is deemed approved if it has reached the approval of the majority of the members of the subject board present at the meeting.
5. The subject board may vote on the study matters per rollam. At least half of all members of the subject board must take part in the vote. A voting record must always be taken of the vote.

a)       The announcement of the vote, the text of the proposal and the voting form shall be sent out by the chairperson of the subject board to the members of the subject board through a closed electronic conference. The notice shall state the deadline for assessment and voting, which may not be shorter than one week following an act of sending.

b)      A proposal considered per rollam is deemed to have been approved if the majority of all members of the subject board approve it.

c)       The record of per rollam voting is approved by the subject board at its next ordinary session. A part of the per rollam voting record is the list of members of the subject board, indicating how each of them has voted. 

Article 3

Advisor

1. The advisor is usually associate professor, professor or holder of the scientific degree of DrSc. or DSc. The advisor may be an academic member of staff with the scientific degree of Ph.D. or CSc. if s/he is a prominent specialist in the relevant field. In this case, the chairperson of the subject board shall explain his/her proposal in writing. The advisor is appointed and dismissed by the Dean of the Faculty upon the proposal of the subject board.

Article 4

Individual Study Plan

1. Doctoral study programs are conducted according to an individual study plan (hereinafter referred to as ISP), which must be compiled in accordance with the curriculum defined by the accreditation of a given study program. The content of the ISP is in particular a plan for the preparation of a dissertation thesis, the outline of study obligations, scientific, research or other creative obligations, as well as planned or recommended study stays abroad or other internships or pedagogical activities. The ISP includes a timetable for fulfilling individual obligations. The student is responsible for the preparation of the individual study plan.  The first year student is obliged to submit an individual study plan through the Study Information System for approval by the supervisor. Should s/he fail to do so by November 15 of the academic year in which s/he enrolled as a 1st-year student, his or her study will be terminated. The ISP is approved by the subject board of a corresponding doctoral study program. The subject board will discuss the ISP by 15 January of the current academic year at the latest. Having been approved, the individual study plan becomes binding for the student. The Student services office will print the approved ISP and place it in the student's file.
2. Students who are leaving for a study stay abroad and irrespective of the source of the financing of this stay, are obliged to notify the International Office via email of this fact prior to their departure (in the case of a stay administered by the International Office), add the Student services office of FSV UK in a copy (if the stay is not secured by the International Office, the student will notify only the Student services office prior to the study stay by e-mail), and  enter information about the study stay in the module of internships in the Study Information System (hereinafter only SIS). This notice must include the time period of the study stay, the state and the name of the receiving institution where the stay will be undertaken.
3. Not later than before the beginning of each academic year and as part of the annual assessment in SIS, the student shall submit the specified study activities for the upcoming academic year through his or her advisor to the subject board, or shall propose any changes to the ISP. Any changes to ISP that have been approved by the subject board are entered in the appendix to the individual study plan.

Article 5

Course and Assessment of Studies

1.      The fulfilment of the individual study plan is subject to a regular, but not longer than a yearly assessment, which is presented by the advisor together with a proper justification, and is subsequently discussed and approved by the subject board. A student elaborates detailed records in the SIS to be used in the assessment of the individual study plan. The assessment contains information on the progress of the preparation of a dissertation thesis, publication outputs of a doctoral student, the completed subjects, completed coursework, the study stays, the grant researches and other study obligations. The advisor will then check all the records and write an assessment of doctoral student’s studies. In addition to the word assessment, s/he will mark one of the variants of assessment:

a)       has fulfilled his/her individual study plan,

b)      has not fulfilled some obligations according to his/her individual study plan

c)       has not fulfilled his/her study obligations according to the individual study plan.

S/he will then forward the assessment via SIS to the subject board. It will discuss and approve the assessments through voting.

2.    If, for reasons of special consideration and through no fault of his/her own, the student has failed to completely fulfil the individual study plan, it applies that the student has fulfilled the individual study plan. If the fulfilment of the obligations according to the individual study plan was prevented by serious circumstances which occurred without the fault of the student, s/he may not be assessed in accordance with c).

3.    If the student’s assessment is in accordance with letter b), the subject board shall determine how the deficiencies shall be corrected and shall specify the deadline; these attributes are considered to be part of the ISP. The subject board may in case of the assessment in accordance with letter b) decide to reduce the doctoral scholarship by up to 50%.

4.    If the student’s assessment is in accordance with letter c), the studies are terminated due to failure to meet the requirements related to the study program.

5. After the interruption of study, an extraordinary assessment of the study by the subject board is carried out whenever more than 3 months remain before the annual assessment deadline.

Article 6

State Doctoral Examination

1. The student applies for the state doctoral examination (hereinafter only “SDE) at least one month before the start of the period stipulated for the state doctoral examinations according to the schedule of the academic year. The student always signs up for a specific date of the state doctoral examination announced for the given academic year.
2. Along with the application for the state doctoral examination in SIS, the student must submit to the Student Services Office the Advisor’s assessment of the course of doctoral study for admission to the state doctoral examination. In the assessment, the advisor confirms that all the study requirements necessary for admission to the state doctoral examination have been fulfilled. If a student does not comply with any of these requirements, s/he may not proceed to SDE.
3. If the student fails to complete his/her state doctoral examination successfully by the end of the 4th year of his/her studies, this is the reason for the proposal for termination of his/her studies due to the failure to fulfil the obligations.
4. The Dean of the Faculty appoints the chairperson and the examining committee from the ranks of professors, associate professors, and experts. Experts must be approved by the scientific board of the faculty as the examiners for the state doctoral examination. At least one member of the committee may not be a member of the faculty's academic community The number of members of the examining committee present shall not be less than three in the state doctoral examinations. The committee decides on the outcome of the state doctoral examination in a closed session after a discussion by voting in the form of a raised hand. If any member of the committee presents such a request, voting shall be conducted in secret, using ballot papers. The present members of the committee may not abstain from voting. The voting is supervised by the chairperson of the examining committee. The committee decides by a majority vote, in the event of a tie or failure to achieve a majority of votes, the student is evaluated with the classification more favourable to him/her.

State Doctoral Examination (SDE) - Administrative Procedures

D = the day of SDE                  D- dates prior to SDE               D+ dates following SDE

Article 7

Defense of Dissertation Thesis

1. The defense of the dissertation is held before the examination committee for the defense of the dissertation thesis. The committee is appointed by the Dean from the ranks of the professors, associate professors, and experts. The expert members must be approved by the scientific council of the faculty as members of the committees for defense of dissertation theses. At least one member of the committee may not be a member of the academic community of the faculty. The function of the chairperson of the examination committee is incompatible with the function of advisor, consultant, and external reviewer, but these may be other members of the committee. External reviewers of the dissertation thesis are usually associate professors, professors, or important experts in the given field with a Ph.D. or CSc. scientific degree.
2. The committee decides on the outcome of the defense of dissertation thesis in a closed session after a discussion by voting in the form of a raised hand. If any member of the committee presents such a request, voting shall be performed in secret, using ballot papers. The presented members of the committee cannot abstain from voting. The voting is supervised by the chairperson of the examining committee. The committee decides by a majority vote, in the event of a tie or failure to achieve a majority of votes, the student is evaluated with the classification more favourable to him/her.        
3. If the committee for the defense of dissertation thesis assesses the grading as "failed", it shall determine whether it is necessary to rewrite or supplement the thesis; a repeated defense is possible six months at the earliest following the failed defense.

Defense of Dissertation Thesis - Administrative Procedure

D = the day of the defense         D- dates prior to the defense      D+ dates following the defense

Article 8

Final Provision

1. The Academic Senate of FSV UK expressed its favourable opinion on this Measure on 7 December, 2021.   
2. This Measure takes effect from 1 January, 2022.

                                                                                                doc. PhDr. Alice Němcová Tejkalová, Ph.D.

                                                                                   the Dean of FSV UK

In charge of accuracy:

doc. Ing. Tomáš Cahlík, CSc.

Vice-Dean for Doctoral Studies and Other Forms of Education