Coursework and Residency Requirement

The following requirements shall be fulfilled before the award of a PhD Degree:

• The students shall complete the coursework of at least 18 credit hours if they are from the same discipline.
• The courses shall be offered through regular classes (i.e., classes taught on campus by full-time faculty members of the university)
• The courses shall preferably be of 800 level.
• PhD degree should be based on research, not only on credit hours.

Comprehensive Examination

• Following the completion of coursework, every PhD student shall be requiredto pass the comprehensive examination to be granted candidacy as a PhD researcher, with the provision that the student failing to pass the comprehensive exam, shall be allowed to retake the exam once.
• The required coursework, comprehensive exam, and defense of synopsis/research proposals should be completed within the 1st six semesters of the registration into a PhD program. The responsibility in this regard rests collectively with the PhD student and the university. In case of noncompliance, the registration shall be cancelled and transcripts for completion of coursework may be issued to the student.
• In an event of force majeure i.e., noncompliance on account of circumstances beyond the control of students, the university may consider the matter in accordance with the procedure prescribed at 3.12(iv) of HEC graduate policy.

The following are the guidelines for conducting Comprehensive Examination:

• The exam should be based on recapitulation of the conceptual knowledge of the discipline to which the student is admitted.
• The exam shall cover the courses studied, preferably at the graduate level, conducted on one composite question paper.
• The evaluation shall be on an aggregate basis, expressed in terms of pass/fail and shall not be graded.

Doctoral Dissertation

Each PhD researcher shall write a doctoral dissertation reflecting relevance, credibility, effectiveness, and legitimacy of the research. The dissertation must be an original and innovative contribution to knowledge that contributes to solving socioeconomic problems. To improve the quality of a doctoral dissertation, some regulations have been suggested in the following areas:

Selection of Research Area

The research area of the PhD researcher shall:

• Correspond to the community needs at regional and local levels and comply with the priority national research agenda.
• Reflect the basic and pure research.
• Signify emerging areas of research that coincide preferably with sustainable development goals (SDGs)

Quality in Reporting

The quality of presentation and reporting in dissertation shall reflect the following characteristics:

• The document is well written.
• The contents are balanced, well organized, appropriately styled; clearly structured, and well cohered.
• The document is free from grammatical and spelling errors and flawed terminology.
• Minor shortcomings such as inaccurate use of acronyms and clumsy looking sentence structure have been addressed.
• Quantitative research proposals must include a valid statistical design for data analysis. Formatting shall be compatible with international standards.

Methodological Quality

To produce PhD researchers capable of conducting research independently, ensuring the technical soundness of their PhD dissertations is integral. The following guidelines shall be useful in making the PhD research methodologically sound.

Appropriateness of the Methods to the Aims of the Study

To achieve the research objectives, the alignment of the research approach and methods is necessary. Therefore, a PhD dissertation, at least, shall:

• Reflect a fair proportion of latest knowledge of contemporary techniques and methods in relation to study objectives.
• Contain detailed and easily comprehensible discussions regarding the applied methods and techniques.
• Justify the use of methods and techniques to achieve study objectives.
• Show evaluation of obtained results in relation with study objectives.
• The methods and techniques used should justify the results obtained.
• The obtained results should support the study objectives.

Relevance to the Policy and Practice

The research should have significantly answered questions related to policy and practice in that area, establishing its usefulness and usability. Accordingly, a PhD dissertation, at least, shall:

• Reflect judicious evaluation of study results in relation with policy related aims and goals undertaken while starting the research.
• Discuss the practical implications of the study results in association with the developing practices in that area.
• Establish usefulness of the study results for devising policy as stated in the beginning.
• Discuss how the resulting policy would be useful for the organization/society.
• The study output should be significant enough to be published or patented.
• The assessment of the results performed by the author must not be superficial and lacking substance.

External Evaluation of PhD Dissertation

The PhD dissertation must be evaluated by at least two external experts who shall be:

• PhD faculty member from the world top 500 universities ranked by the Times Higher Education or QS World Ranking in the year corresponding to dissertation evaluation year OR
• Pakistan-based Distinguished National Professors, Meritorious Professors from any national university; or professors from top universities ranked by HEC; or professors from any Pakistani University having a minimum H-Index 30 for Sciences, 15 for Social Sciences or 8 for Art & Humanities as determined by Web of Science. OR
• At least one external expert qualifying any one of the conditions mentioned at ‘a’ above if the PhD candidate publishes dissertation research in a peer-reviewed journal that is classified by the HEC in category W for Sciences and X or above for Social Sciences

The following general guidelines shall, at least, be observed while selecting external evaluator:

• Relevance of Expertise: in the same or related fields as in the dissertation.
• No Conflict of Interest: in personal, financial, or professional stakes in a particular decision or outcome.
• Objectivity: capable of making unbiased evaluations.
• Diversity: in terms of geography, culture, professional backgrounds etc.
• Reputation: must be good in the field, with a track record of fair and thorough evaluations.
• Availability: should have the time and availability to review the dissertation.
• Professionalism: capable of conducting themselves in a professional and respectful manner throughout the evaluation and defense process(if applicable).
• Communication: capable of providing clear and constructive feedback on the dissertation.
• Confidentiality: capable of maintaining confidentiality and protecting the intellectual property of the dissertation.
• Compatibility: well-versed with the research methodology, approach, and theories used in the dissertation.

Plagiarism, Similarity Test and Open Defense

• Under no circumstances shall a dissertation based on plagiarized research be acceptable. It is the primary responsibility of both PhD researchers and their supervisors to prevent plagiarism.
• For Plagiarism COPE guidelines must be followed.
• If a PhD dissertation is found to be plagiarized, it will be handled in accordance with the Anti-Plagiarism Policy issued by the Higher Education Commission, Pakistan, as updated from time to time.
• A similarity test, in accordance with the HEC’s Anti-Plagiarism Policy, must be conducted on the dissertation before its submission to the external experts by the student.

An open defense of the dissertation is required after positive evaluation of the dissertation by committee members. In general, the following minimum principles and guidelines shall be ensured:

• Public Announcement: On the university website and other forums of communication, so that anyone interested can participate.
• Public Access: Within or outside the university such as community/town halls important public venues.
• Neutral Chair: To ensure that defense was conducted fairly and in accordance with the rules and regulations.
• Review Committee: To evaluate the dissertation and defense.
• Presentation: of the dissertation by the PhD researcher
• Question and Answer Session: To provide a basis for defense evaluation.
• Objective Evaluation: based on the quality of the research and the researcher’s ability to defend.

Final Decision: expressed in the following terms:

• Pass or
• Pass with minor amendments or
• Deferred for resubmission and re-defense or
• Fail (in exceptional circumstances and for the reasons to be recorded by the defense committee)