John Presper
`
`From:
`Sent:
`To:
`Subject:
`Attachments:
`
`Mark Hadfield <MHadfield@bournemouth.ac.uk>
`Thursday, November 12, 2015 4:25 AM
`John Presper
`BU PhD - for information only
`17 Examiners' Joint Recommendations 2011 v2.doc; 18 Chair's Report 2011 v2 (not
`protected).doc
`
`Hi John,
`Please find the current form used to examine PhD’s at BU. This was similar to 2002.
`It can be seen that no percentage points are issued by the examiners – just recommendations. All of the PhD
`examinations that I have done around the UK are similar and do not give credits or percentage points for a PhD
`qualification. A transcript containing subjects/credits/percentages/grades is therefore not used for research PhD
`qualifications and never mixed with teaching programmes.
`
`An examination Chair (BU independent staff member) is responsible for the administration of the examination – see
`attached.
`
`Regards
`Mark
`
`
`
`Mark Hadfield PhD BEng (Hons) CEng FIMechE FHEA FLF
`Professor of Design and Technology
`Faculty of Science and Technology
`Bournemouth University
`Poole House, Talbot Campus, Fern Barrow,
`Poole, Dorset, BH12 5BB
`United Kingdom
`Tel: +44 (0) 1202 965983, Fax: +44 (0) 1202 965314, mobile: 07515187700
`Twitter: http://twitter.com/mhadfield530
`
`
`
`
`BU is a Disability Two Ticks Employer and has signed up to the Mindful Employer charter. Information about
`the accessibility of University buildings can be found on the BU DisabledGo webpages This email is intended
`only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
`email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email, which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed
`to any other person. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
`represent those of Bournemouth University or its subsidiary companies. Nor can any contract be formed on
`behalf of the University or its subsidiary companies via email.
`
`1
`
`Blackberry Ex. 1056, pg. 1
`Blackberry v. Zipit
`IPR2014-01507
`
`

`
`Research Degree
`Examiner’s Joint Recommendations
`
`
`
`
`Notes: The Examiners are required, where possible, to complete a joint recommendation on this form on the Viva Voce
`examination, the result of the examination as a whole and the recommendations to the University’s Senate.
`If the provisional recommendations of the Examiners in their independent preliminary reports were not in agreement, an
`explanatory statement of the final joint recommendation must be made below.
`If an agreed joint recommendation cannot be submitted, each Examiner should therefore complete separate copies of this form,
`and details of the disagreement should be stated below and, where appropriate, related to the preliminary report.
`1. EXAMINATION DETAILS
`Student Number
`
`
`
`Candidate’s full
`name
`
`
`
`Joint Examiners’
`Recommendation for
`the Award of
`
` MPhil
`
` PhD
`
` PhD by
`Pub
`
` Practice-
`Led PhD
`
` DBA
`
` DProf
`
` DEng
`
`Title of thesis
`
`Date of Viva Voce
`
`
`
`
`
`External Examiner (1)
`
`
`
`External Examiner (2)
`
`
`
`Internal Examiner (1)
`
`2. REPORT OF THE EXAMINER ON THE VIVA VOCE EXAMINATION
`The Examiners are requested to give a report on the viva voce examination of the candidate, giving a
`reasoned assessment of the candidate’s performance
`Are you satisfied that the thesis presented is the candidate’s own work?
`Yes
` No
`If NO, please explain why:
`
`
`
`Did the candidate show a satisfactory knowledge and understanding of matters relating to the thesis?
`Yes
` No
`If NO, please explain why:
`
`
`
`Did the candidate show a satisfactory knowledge and understanding of background studies to the subject of the
`thesis?
` No
`Yes
`If NO, please explain why:
`
`
`
`In the case of a candidate whose research programme is part of a collaborative group project, did the viva voce
`examination indicate clearly the individual contribution and the extent of the collaboration?
`
`Joint Examiners’ Report
`June 2011
`
`
`
`1
`
`Blackberry Ex. 1056, pg. 2
`Blackberry v. Zipit
`IPR2014-01507
`
`

`
`
`
`Research Degree
`Examiner’s Joint Recommendations
`
`
`
` No
`Yes
`If NO, please explain why:
`
`
`
`3. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THE VIVA VOCE EXAMINATION
`A report of about 300 words should suffice
`
`
`
`
`
`4. RECOMMENDATION
`Note: The Examiners are requested to indicate which recommendations apply and to delete those that do not.
`Where corrections, amendments or resubmission is required, instructions MUST be given to the Chair
`The examiners may recommend one of the following recommendations for outcome of the viva voce
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`that the appropriate award be made
`
`that the appropriate award be made subject to CORRECTIONS being made to the thesis
`
`to the satisfaction of the Internal Examiner by: (please specify date)
`
`that the appropriate award be made subject to AMENDMENTS being made to the thesis
`
` Internal Examiner by: (please specify date)
` External Examiner and/or
`to the satisfaction of the
`that the candidate be permitted to RE-SUBMIT for the degree and be re-examined
`to the satisfaction of the
` External Examiner and/or
` Internal Examiner by: (please specify date) and be re-
`examined as follows:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the thesis must be revised and if deemed satisfactory by the Examiners, the candidate will be exempt from further
`examination, oral or otherwise
`
`the thesis must be revised and the candidate undergo a further oral or alternative examination
`
`the thesis is satisfactory, but the candidate must undergo a further oral or alternative examination
`
`the thesis is satisfactory, but the candidate must undergo a further examination, to take the form of:
` (as specified by the Examiners)
`
`NB Where the thesis has already been examined, a second re-submission is not permitted.
`
`that the candidate be awarded the lower research degree of MPhil
`
`subject to presentation of the amended thesis to the satisfaction of the
`by: (please specify date)
`
` External Examiner and/or
`
` Internal Examiner
`
`that the candidate NOT be awarded the degree and not be permitted to be re-examined
`
`5. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THE THESIS OR ANY OTHER ASPECT OF THE EXAMINATION
`
`
`
`Joint Examiners’ Report
`June 2011
`
`
`
`2
`
`Blackberry Ex. 1056, pg. 3
`Blackberry v. Zipit
`IPR2014-01507
`
`

`
`Date
`
`
`
`Date
`
`
`
`Date
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`Research Degree
`Examiner’s Joint Recommendations
`
`
`
`
`
`6. EXAMINERS SIGNATURE
`Signature of External
`
`Examiner
`Signature of External
`Examiner
`Signature of Internal
`Examiner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Joint Examiners’ Report
`June 2011
`
`
`
`Blackberry Ex. 1056, pg. 4
`Blackberry v. Zipit
`IPR2014-01507
`
`

`
`Research Degree Examination - Chair’s
`Report
`
`
`
`
`
`Notes: The Chair must complete this form and return it to the School Research Administrator. For further guidance, please see
`the Code of Practice for Chairs and Examiners of Research Degrees.
`1. CANDIDATE’S DETAILS
`Student number
`
`
`
`Candidate’s full
`name
`
`Title of thesis
`
`
`
`
`
` MPhil
`
` PhD
`
`Award for which
`thesis is being
`examined
`2. EXAMINATION ARRANGEMENTS
`Date of Viva Voce
`
`
`
` PhD by
`Pub
`
` Practice-
`Led PhD
`
` DBA
`
` DProf
`
` DEng
`
`Time
`
`
`
`Location
`
`Chair of Viva Voce
`
`
`
`
`
`External Examiner (1)
`
`
`
`External Examiner (2)
`
`
`
`Internal Examiner (1)
`
`
`
`1.
`
`Supervisors (if
`present)
`3. OUTCOME OF THE VIVA VOCE
`The examiners may recommend one of the following recommendations for outcome of the viva voce
`
`2.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`that the appropriate award be made
`
`that the appropriate award be made subject to CORRECTIONS being made to the thesis
`
`to the satisfaction of the Internal Examiner by: Click here to enter text. (please specify date)
`
`that the appropriate award be made subject to AMENDMENTS being made to the thesis
`
`to the satisfaction of the
`date)
`
` External Examiner and/or
`
` Internal Examiner by: Click here to enter text. (please specify
`
`that the candidate be permitted to RE-SUBMIT for the degree and be re-examined
`
` External Examiner and/or
`to the satisfaction of the
`date) and be re-examined as follows:
`
` Internal Examiner by: Click here to enter text. (please specify
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the thesis must be revised and if deemed satisfactory by the Examiners, the candidate will be exempt from further
`examination, oral or otherwise
`
`the thesis must be revised and the candidate undergo a further oral or alternative examination
`
`the thesis is satisfactory, but the candidate must undergo a further oral or alternative examination
`
`the thesis is satisfactory, but the candidate must undergo a further examination, to take the form of: Click here to
`enter text. (as specified by the Examiners)
`
`Chairs Report
`June 2011
`
`
`
`1
`
`Blackberry Ex. 1056, pg. 5
`Blackberry v. Zipit
`IPR2014-01507
`
`

`
`Research Degree Examination - Chair’s
`Report
`
`
`
`
`
`NB Where the thesis has already been examined, a second re-submission is not permitted.
`
`that the candidate be awarded the lower research degree of MPhil
`
`subject to presentation of the amended thesis to the satisfaction of the
`by: Click here to enter text. (please specify date)
`
` External Examiner and/or
`
` Internal Examiner
`
`that the candidate NOT be awarded the degree and not be permitted to be re-examined
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4. REPORT ON THE VIVA VOCE
`Please provide a brief report on the following:
`Pre-Viva Voce discussion
`
`
`
`
`Viva Voce examination
`
`
`
`
`
`Post Viva Voce discussion
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Any other comments on the
`Viva Voce
`
`5. DOCUMENT CHECKLIST
`
`Chair’s Report completed
`
`RD14 Examiner’s Preliminary Reports attached for each examiner
`
`RD15 Examiners’ Joint Recommendation Form attached
` Where corrections, amendments or resubmission is required, instructions MUST be attached
`
`If thesis title is to be changed, please state new title:
`
`
`Date
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`6. CHAIR’S SIGNATURE
`Signature of Independent
`Chair
`
`
`
`
`
`Chairs Report
`June 2011
`
`Blackberry Ex. 1056, pg. 6
`Blackberry v. Zipit
`IPR2014-01507