ºÚÁÏÍø

Objectives of the midterm review

Midterm review is a formal checkpoint and constructive discussion between the doctoral researcher and advising faculty about the objectives of the research and the plans for completing the doctoral studies including potential artistic components​.

Midterm review strengthens the link between the doctoral researcher, supervising professor, and advisor(s) and provides identification of any problems at an early stage. It provides a possibility to receive feedback also from an independent reviewer.​

Midterm review illuminates how the original study plan and research plan have been realized until the tie of the review and how the studies will be finalized in the following two years. ​The review supports graduation in the target time of four years for fulltime doctoral researchers​.

Midterm review provides agreed criteria and a process for promoting doctoral researchers to a higher salary level.​

Midterm review provides a checkpoint for the employer not to offer an employment contract extension if the studies are not proceeding as expected without an acceptable reason.

Midterm review for fulltime employed doctoral researchers

Midterm review is mandatory for doctoral researchers with full time employment contract starting 1.8.2025 or after.

The length of the first employment contract for new doctoral researchers should preferably be 2 years on the lower doctoral researcher salary level.​Midterm review is conducted before the 2 years is completed, minimum of 4 months in advance of the contract ending.

Supervising professor initiates the review. Doctoral researcher may also request for the review.

Midterm review for other doctoral researchers

The midterm review is recommended for doctoral researchers who have started earlier than 1.8.2025, work on their own funding, part-time funding and/or shorter than 2-year contracts with their department.

Midterm review is conducted when the doctoral researcher or the supervisor estimates that passing the review is likely and the doctoral researcher has progressed to the estimated halfway of the studies and research.

The midterm review committee 

Midterm review is done by and ad hoc committee which consists of the doctoral researcher’s supervisor, advisor(s) and possibly an independent examiner.

Independent examiner is a person qualified for advising doctoral students but has no prior role in the doctoral researcher’s studies. Independent examiner is a recommended member in the committee. When supervisor acts as the advisor an independent examiner is required. Typically, independent examiner belongs ºÚÁÏÍø faculty but not the same research group as the doctoral researcher. 

Aalto external advisors and independent examiners need to be compensated by the department.

Materials submitted for midterm review ​

Doctoral researcher submits material for the midterm review minum one week before the review presentation. The material includes the following documents:

• Copy of the transcript of records (opintosuoritusote)​
• Publications to be included in the thesis (or other texts relevant to doctoral researcher’s research)
• Documents of artistic components (if relevant)​
• Updated research plan ​including detailed schedule and publication plan
• Midterm review report which includes a summary of the progress during the first half of the studies, reflections on major deviations from the original plan and a detailed plan about the second half of the studies. Midterm report functions as the outline for the midterm presentation.

Midterm review arrangements

Supervising professor is responsible for initiating the midterm review and its arrangements. Doctoral researcher can request the review to be organised.

The evaluation can be done as part of the MyDialogue discussion.​

The doctoral researcher is informed about the time and requirements of the midterm review presentation minimum of 2 months before the review.

The review committee has minimum of one week to study the material before the midterm presentation.

The review session is recommended to be organised face to face at the campus.

The doctoral researcher presents the material to the review committee. Committee asks questions, presents pieces of advice and comments it finds well-justified. Typically, one hour is reserved for the presentation and discussion.

The midterm review committee gives the doctoral researcher a written review report. If the review fails, the grounds are clearly explicated. 

The supervisor informs the doctoral researcher, doctoral programme and HR about the midterm decision within one week of the presentation.

Criteria for passing​ the midterm review

Midterm review committee decides the review results based on all available evidence of the doctoral researcher’s past achievements and progress as well as the credibility of future plans. Typically, passing the review requires the following criteria to be met:

• At least one publication that qualifies to be included in the thesis (article, exhibition, production, artistic work) has been submitted to a peer review forum. If the thesis is planned as monograph, equal amount progress in research​ should be demonstrated.
• At least 10 ECTS of studies completed which will be included in the doctoral degree​.
• Teaching experience is recommended, but it should not exceed 5% of working time (max. 80h/year).
• Accepted midterm review report​ and presentation based on which the midterm review committee can conclude that the graduation in target time is realistically achievable.

Passing the midterm review

Midterm review committee decides to pass the doctoral research whose progress meets the above-mentioned criteria.

The doctoral researcher is promoted to a higher job grade and salary level. 

Full-time employed doctoral researcher can be hired for the second 2-year contract. Part-time and short-term employment contract doctoral researchers will be compensated on the higher salary level.

Failing the midterm review

When the doctoral researcher’s report and/or materials are inadequate and/or progress unsatisfactory without acceptable reasons the midterm review committee decides to fail the review.​

The committee explicates the reasons for failing and shares recommendations with the doctoral researcher.

If applicable, the review committee requires revisions and/or additional material. The second review will be organized for fulltime doctoral researchers as soon as possible but at least before the end of their contract. The second review for other doctoral can be organized 6 months later.

If the doctoral researcher fails also the second review, fulltime doctoral researcher’s contract is not continued. Other doctoral researchers will continue to be compensated on the lower salary level when employed.

The doctoral researcher’s study right continues.

Disagreements about the midterm review results

In case of disagreement between the midterm committee members or the committee and doctoral researcher, the decision will be made by the Head of Department.

Midterm review documents

The material are accessed by the doctoral researcher, supervisor, advisor(s), independent reviewer and doctoral education services.

Midterm review evaluation reports are stored by the doctoral programme.