Faculty of Veterinary Medicine logo faculty

Supplementary faculty regulations education and examination code for doctoral matters

For the full regulatory framework of the doctorate programme, we refer to the current version of the Education and Examination Code ‘Doctorates’ of Ghent University.

Article 1. Enrolment and re-enrolment

 1.1 First enrolment

All applications for a new doctoral candidate’s first enrolment are to be initiated through the supervisor with administrative responsibility or their proxy on Oasis.

This new online enrolment and registration procedure replaces the form ‘Application for the first enrolment for the doctorate’ for students with a Belgian/Luxembourg/Dutch diploma and the PhD Wizard for international candidates.

Procedure (EN)

General info

Info regarding payment: betaling

Once enrolled, the doctoral candidate is free to add course units to the curriculum that are offered through the Doctoral Schools at http://oasis.ugent.be.

Every newly enrolled doctoral student is obliged to complete a digital introductory trajectory (online learning path), offered by the Doctoral Schools. Exemptions for this mandatory introduction programme may be granted, after receiving a favourable recommendation from the involved director of the Doctoral School, in the following cases: for doctoral students who first enrolled before the academic year 2020-2021 and who, after having been disenrolled for a minimum of one year, must first enrol in or after the academic year 2020-2021, for doctoral students preparing a joint doctorate in the context of which they will only be present at Ghent University for a limited time, or for doctoral students who enrol solely to complete the doctoral examination at Ghent University after a period of independent research without affiliation.

 

Practical info: http://www.ugent.be/nl/onderzoek/doctoreren/doctoraatsopleiding.htm.

Contact: doctoralschools@UGent.be.

Foreign students can turn to PhDadmission@UGent.be for their administrative questions.

Jointly supervised doctorate

Students may do a PhD under the joint supervision of UGent and one or more partner institutions in the framework of a collaboration agreement between the student and the institutions involved in accordance with the Resolution of the Executive Board of Ghent University regarding the establishment of collaboration agreements for the joint supervision and awarding of a doctorate (‘Gezamenlijk doctoraat’/ ‘Jointly Supervised PhD’/ ‘Cotutelle’). Application for joint PhDs must be submitted to the Joint PhD coordinators on jointPhD@ugent.be no later than a year before the finalisation of the research.

Joint PhDs with European institutions or with non-European institutions with which the faculty has a valid Cooperation Agreement are governed by the student-specific joint PhD agreement ‘Partnership agreement governing the joint supervision and awarding of a doctorate between Ghent University and [name partner institution]’.

For joint PhD’s between Flemish universities, use the following template: Download Template contract joint PhD.

For joint PhDs with non-European institutions with which the faculty does not have a valid Cooperation Agreement, a preliminary quality control and an ‘Info Sheet New Cooperation Joint PhD’ should be carried out. After submitting the Info Sheet to the relevant faculty through the Faculty Committee for Internationalisation (FCI) and its approval by the faculty, a joint PhD framework agreement referred to as ‘Partnership agreement governing the joint supervision and awarding of a doctorate between Ghent University and [name partner institution]’ will be negotiated between the faculty and the partner institution. The student-specific joint PhD agreement will in such case take the form of an appendix to the framework agreement referred to as ‘Appendix to the Partnership agreement for the joint supervision and awarding of a doctorate between Ghent University and [name partner institution]’.

Practical info:

https://www.ugent.be/en/research/doctoralresearch/enrolment-doctorate/joint-phd.

Contact: jointPhD@UGent.be

Combined doctoral title for interdisciplinary doctorates

Doctorates that have an interdisciplinary character and result in a combined doctoral title may be undertaken under the joint supervision of two or more UGent supervisors belonging to different disciplines/faculties (at least one per discipline) in accordance with the Resolution of the Executive Board of Ghent University with regard to awarding combined doctoral titles for interdisciplinary doctorates (‘Interdisciplinary doctorate’).

More information is available at http://www.ugent.be/en/education/degree/practical/studentadmin/enrolment/doctorate/interdisciplinaryphd.htm and contact should be taken with jointPhD@UGent.be. The application must be based on the enrolment of the doctoral student and an addendum for the interdisciplinary doctorate.

The contact person in the principal faculty shall be responsible for the further coordination of the application procedure, including testing the criteria for interdisciplinarity (by the FCWO* subcommittee ‘Doctorates’ (FDOC) when the principal faculty is the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine), consulting with the contact person of the partner faculty(ies) and the final signing of the documents by the Dean or representative in the event the interdisciplinary character was approved.

* Facultaire Commissie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek or Faculty Committee for Scientific Research

The application shall take place no later than three years after the first PhD enrolment.

If multiple faculties are involved, as a rule, the procedures and (supplementary) regulations of the principal faculty must be followed. At the outset, the faculties involved determine which regulations will be applied in the “Application form for the enrolment in a combined degree for an interdisciplinary doctorate”. The application form signed by the doctoral student and the relevant deans and supervisors serves as an interfaculty agreement for the interdisciplinary doctorate. Additional and/or different conditions that must be met (e.g. terms of publication) shall be evaluated ad hoc by the FCWO ‘Doctorates’ subcommittee.

For the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, this FCWO ‘Doctorates’ subcommittee comprises a chairperson and four FCWO ZAP (Zelfstandig Academisch Personeel or Independent Academic Staff) members. This committee shall also ask for the advice of the ZAP members appointed by the partner faculties regarding the interdisciplinary nature and regarding any additional and/or different conditions. To be considered interdisciplinary, the planned doctoral research must meet the following minimum criteria for interdisciplinarity:

  1. The disciplines and expertise brought together in the research proposal should be sufficiently distinct.
  2. The expertise, knowledge and methodologies contributed by each of the disciplines involved must be of similar magnitude to carry out a successful doctoral project. The implementation of the research proposal is only possible through an integrated, concerted approach. It must not be possible to divide the research into various monodisciplinary research topics which can then each be carried out under the supervision of separate supervisors. Any discipline involved may not turn into an auxiliary science for any other discipline involved.
  3. The understanding gained from carrying out the research proposal must result in new scientific insights in each of the disciplines involved or in a knowledge enhancement in a new (nascent) discipline.

Practical info: http://www.ugent.be/intranet/nl/reglementen/onderwijs/reglementen/gecombineerde_doctorstitels_interdisciplinaire_doctoraten.

Contact: jointPhD@UGent.be

 1.2. Re-enrolment

Every academic year, the doctoral student receives an invitation to enrol again (= re-enrolment, which is free of charge) through http://oasis.ugent.be.

This is mandatory and is done by uploading a self-reflection report (contains at least a research report). If this report is approved by the supervisor(s) (favourable opinion), the re-enrolment can be effected. If the supervisor(s) and/or, as the case may be, the doctoral advisory committee were to issue an unfavourable (negative) opinion on the self-reflection report, the self-reflection report and the unfavourable opinion will be sent on to the FCWO subcommittee ‘Doctorates’ (FDOC). This committee shall assess whether the doctoral student was given sufficient opportunity to achieve progress in the research. The doctoral student and the supervisor(s) have the right to be heard. The faculty ombudsperson for doctoral students attends the meeting(s) of the committee as an observer. Within 60 calendar days from the date the unfavourable opinion was issued, this committee shall offer a recommendation to the Dean, whereafter the faculty management will decide whether the doctoral student will be permitted or denied re-enrolment. This decision shall be communicated by the Rector to the doctoral student in writing within 30 calendar days, and also via email by the Doctoral Schools Office.

Important: A doctoral student can only obtain the title of doctor if the student is enrolled as a doctoral student with a diploma contract and, in keeping with the current Education and Examination Code ’Doctorates’, if the doctoral student is registered for the doctoral examination at the moment of the defence!

1.3. Modification or discontinuation

Modifications to the doctorate: the supervisor(s) and doctoral student may submit a substantiated request to the Dean in writing to change the language, the research topic, the previously approved supervisor(s) and/or members of the doctoral advisory committee (see Art. 3 infra). The Dean shall present this request to the faculty board which decides whether or not the modification is permissible. Applications to this end shall be made by submitting the ‘Modifications form doctorate enrolment (minor modification)’ (with link).

Discontinuation: If you wish to discontinue your doctorate or doctoral training, you must first consult with your supervisor(s). Only then will you inform the Central Student Administration (Ufo) either personally or by registered mail. The FDO should also be notified (fdo.di@ugent.be).

You must hand in your student card and you will lose your UGent account. If you terminate your contract within four months after enrolling then your tuition fee will be refunded, minus a flat fee.


1.4. Data managementplan (DMP)

Doctoral students must draw up a data management plan (DMP) at the start of their research and submit this plan no later than 6 months after their enrolment for the doctorate in the manner requested by the administration. The DMP must be drawn up on the basis of one of the templates made available at DMPonline.be.

Doctoral students are expected to keep their DMP up-to-date during the duration of the project. At the end of the project, but before the public defence of their dissertation, doctoral students must submit the final version of their DMP.

Artikel 2. Supervisor

Each doctoral student has at least two coaches. These are usually two supervisors of which at least one is an active ZAP member or a visiting professor with research assignment within the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine or a retired professorial staff member who has been granted permission to continue (part of) his/her paid educational activities. A further appointment may be made of one additional supervisor who may or may not be associated with UGent. One supervisor ZAP member or visiting professor with research assignment within the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine or a retired professorial staff member who has been granted permission to continue (part of) his/her paid educational activities, is designated the ‘supervisor with administrative responsibility’ and acts as the contact point for this doctorate within the faculty. In case of an interdisciplinary doctorate with a combined doctoral title, it is possible that the supervisor with administrative responsibility belongs to another faculty than the faculty of Veterinary Medicine (in case the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine is not the principal faculty, but partner faculty). Exceptionally, four supervisors may be appointed on condition that one of the supervisors does not belong to the faculty and only after the Faculty Committee for Scientific Research has given a favourable opinion. This advice has to be requested at least one month before submission of the doctoral thesis to the faculty board.

Article 3. Doctoral Advisory Committee

A doctoral advisory committee may be established for each doctoral student. The doctoral advisory committee is proposed by the supervisor and approved by the faculty. The doctoral advisory committee consists of at least three and at most five members, including the supervisor(s). At least one member must be an expert from outside the department and preferably an expert from outside UGent; members without a doctoral title are allowed as well. The moment at which the doctoral advisory committee is appointed is to be determined freely by the supervisor in consultation with the doctoral student. If a doctoral advisory committee is set up at the moment of the first application for the doctorate and the doctoral training programme, the requirement that each doctoral student is supervised by at least two persons shall also be satisfied. Proposals are made by submitting the form ‘Appointment doctoral advisory committee’ ‘Aanstelling doctoraatsbegeleidingscommissie.

Article 4. Thesis requirements upon submission

The criteria referred to below are the minimum requirements prescribed by the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine which must be met by the thesis on submission. The examination board judges autonomously on the merit of the thesis presented. Therefore, meeting these minimal requirements may not necessarily be sufficient.

A thesis may be submitted when it meets any one of the following conditions:

  • it contains three original articles (articles includes "full articles", "short communications" and "meta-analyses" but does not include "letters to the editor", "opinions", "commentaries" or "reviews") with the doctoral student as the first author which, at the moment of submission, must have been accepted for publication in an international peer reviewed journal and with an impact factor greater than 0.5*.
  • it contains two original articles (cfr. above) of which the doctoral student is the first author and which, at the moment of submission, must have been accepted for publication in an international peer reviewed journal in the top 50% of the discipline or with an impact factor >2*.
  • it contains one original article (cfr. above) of which the doctoral student is the first author and which, at the moment of submission, must have been accepted for publication in an international peer reviewed journal in the top 10% of the discipline or with an impact factor >4*.

*Impact factor and ranking of the journal may be from the year of publication, from the year before or from two years before.

  • in the event the thesis includes research results that can create value, a submitted patent application is on par with a publication in an international peer reviewed journal in the top 50% of the discipline or with an impact factor >2. The value potential of the doctoral research results and the necessity for postponement of publication must be corroborated by UGent Tech Transfer and/or by a business developer of an Industrial Research Fund (IOF or Industrieel Onderzoeksfonds) consortium.
  • articles with two first authors (both authors having contributed equally to the study) are counted in full to meet the above-mentioned faculty standard.
  • deviations to these requirements may be permitted by the FCWO if well-reasoned and if the doctoral advisory committee has given its approval, and at least one month before submission of the doctoral thesis to the faculty board. If no doctoral advisory committee has been established, such responsibility falls to the supervisor(s).

Joint PhD students between Flemish universities may submit their doctoral thesis with only one paper with IF<4 or not in the top 10%, but this PhD thesis will be submitted to an extra quality control by the examination board. To be able to perform this quality analysis correctly, it is mandatory to include a member of the FCWO in the examination board.

Thesis format:

  • Table of contents
  • List of abbrevations
  • General introduction
  • Objectives
  • Doctoral research divided into different chapters. In case these chapters are based on published papers, the impact factor and ranking of the journals should be mentioned too.
  • General discussion and conclusions
  • English summary
  • Ducth summary
  • Acknowledgements
  • C.V.

Article 5. Submitting the thesis

The supervisor with administrative responsibility requests an examination board to be formed. The application is made using the ‘Application form doctorate examination board’ ‘Aanvraagformulier examencommissie doctoraat’ (with link). The application also includes a proposed date for the examination board to meet for the first part of the doctoral examination. The doctoral student must submit the pdf version of the thesis to the Dean’s Office. Subsequently, the faculty board shall verify and, as necessary, approve the examination board and the date it will first meet. The doctoral student and the members of the examination board shall be notified of its decision in writing.

In the event there is legal protection of research results that can create value or such is under preparation, the necessary measures are taken to ensure the confidential treatment of the thesis by all members of the examination board. Such circumstance does require the corroboration of UGent Tech Transfer and/or of a business developer of an Industrial Research Fund consortium (IOF or Industrieel Onderzoeksfonds). The members of the examination board employed by UGent are informed in writing by the supervisor with administrative responsibility of the confidentiality of specific parts of the thesis. The supervisor with administrative responsibility will send members of the examination board not employed by UGent the thesis after a non-disclosure agreement has been signed with the member or an affiliated organisation.

If the thesis is eligible for the ‘Best clinical doctorate’ or ‘Best non-clinical doctorate’ prize, the supervisor with administrative responsibility must propose it at the time the thesis is submitted along with a written argumentation mentioned on the ‘Application form doctorate examination board’, on which the proposition is based. Since only excellent PhD research is eligible, each supervisor with administrative responsibility can nominate maximum one candidate per academic year, and who belongs to the top 10% of their PhD students ever. One or more of the following criteria may apply:

  1. a) publications with exceptional impact
  2. b) special prizes for oral and/or poster presentations
  3. c) patent application and/or value resulting from the doctoral research
  4. d) distinctive societal value
  5. e) any other argument that indicates the exemplary character of the doctoral research.

The chairperson of the examination board will discuss such proposition with the examination board during the private and public defence. The examination board shall decide whether or not the doctorate is eligible for the prize of best clinical doctorate or best non-clinical doctorate of that academic year and shall pass this on to the ‘Doctorates’ FCWO subcommittee. To this end, this subcommittee is supplemented with additional FCWO members as proposed by the FCWO. At the end of the academic year, the subcommittee will then nominate one laureate for the ‘Best clinical doctorate’ prize and one laureate for the ‘Best non-clinical doctorate’ prize and submit their proposal to the FCWO. Finally, the nomination is submitted to the faculty board to make the final decision. The award ceremony takes place during the annual interfaculty ‘Research Day & Student Research Symposium’ organised by the Committees of Scientific Research and the student councils of the faculties of Medicine and Health Sciences, Pharmaceutical Sciences and Veterinary Medicine: (https://www.ugent.be/ge/nl/onderzoek/rd-srs.htm). The laureates are expected to give an oral presentation during this symposium.

The composition of the examination board follows UGent’s official rules of the current Education and Examination Code ‘Doctorates’. Members of the examination board must be:

  • ZAP members of UGent;
  • other persons, whether or not affiliated with UGent, who are particularly familiar with the doctoral subject.

A relative by blood or by marriage of the doctoral student or the supervisor up to and including the fourth degree or anyone who cannot guarantee an objective evaluation of the dissertation due to personal involvement with the student or the supervisor, cannot be a member of the Examination Board. Any relations arising from a legal partnership are hereby considered equivalent to those arising from marriage.

The examination board comprises at least five and at most eight voting members, including the chairperson and the secretary and excluding the supervisors. In addition, one or more supervisors may be included in the examination board but they are not entitled to vote. It is not possible to add more members to the examination board at a later point. As of the first meeting of the examination board, its composition can no longer be changed, with exception of the position of the chairperson. When the chairperson is detained, the Dean may appoint a substitute. The appointment of voting members is governed by the following provisions:

  • at least two voting members are not part of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine of whom at least one member is not part of UGent;
  • at least 50% of the voting members are entitled to act as a supervisor of a doctorate at the institution to which they are affiliated;
  • at least 50% of the voting members are appointed full time or part time at UGent or are postdoctoral researcher of the Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (FWO - Research Foundation Flanders) with UGent as its host institution. Retired members of the professorial staff at Ghent University who have been authorised to continue certain activities can also be member;
  • at most half of the voting members are members of the doctoral advisory committee or have co-authored a publication or patent that is an integral part of the thesis.

Interdisciplinary doctorates are additionally governed by the following provisions:

  • every discipline involved is represented in the examination board by at least one voting member;
  • at least two voting members are not affiliated with the involved faculty or main faculties of whom at least one member is not affiliated with UGent.

In case of joint PhDs, the joint examination board:

  • Shall be an interuniversity board; preferably, its composition is international and shall include, among others, members of all partner institutions. Ideally, both partner institutions are equally represented in the examination board.
  • If the partner institution is another university in the Flemish Community, the composition of the joint examination board shall follow the guidelines of the main institution, after consultation between the supervisors of both institutions. The supervisors may be part of the joint examination board but may not chair the Board. If Ghent University is the main institution, the supervisors do not have the right to vote in the joint examination board.
  • If the partner institution with which Ghent University is not a university in the Flemish Community, the regulations of all partner institutions shall apply to the composition of the joint examination board. If the regulations of Ghent University and those of the partner institution conflict in terms of the composition and duties of the examination board, the regulations of the partner institution where the public defence takes place shall be followed. In those cases where the joint examination board deviates from the provisions of the Education and Examination Regulations for doctoral matters, the faculty will check, upon approval of the examination board as part of the admission procedure for the doctoral examination, whether the examination board has sufficient expertise and diversity to examine the candidates.
  • Ideally, the joint examination board includes at least one external member (i.e., external to both partner institutions).

 

The position of chairperson of the examination board is observed by the Dean or by a ZAP representative. Also retired members of the ZAP who have been given permission to continue certain activities may be delegated by the Dean as chairperson. The position of chairperson of the examination board and that of the supervisor of the thesis are irreconcilable. The examination board appoints one of its voting members as secretary; supervisors may not be appointed secretary.

The tasks of the examination board are set out as follows:

  • each of the voting members must read the thesis, judge its quality and draw up a report (with the exception of the chairperson). This is established by filling out the ‘Form for the evaluation of the PhD thesis by the members of the Examination Board’ (with link). These reports must be submitted to the administration of the Dean’s Office no later than ten days before the meeting of the examination board for the first part of the doctoral examination;
  • testing the knowledge and competencies of the doctoral student followed by a deliberation by the voting members (see Art. 6 infra);
  • establishing, on the basis of the report by the assessment committee and on the basis of the doctoral examination result, whether the doctoral student passes the doctoral examination;
  • if applicable, certain tasks may be set by the faculty board like, for instance, certain parts of the thesis being judged by a member with that specific expertise;
  • in the case of interdisciplinary doctorates, the examination board evaluates the interdisciplinary character of the thesis (based on the minimum criteria for interdisciplinarity) in addition to the quality. There will be explicit mention of this in the individual reports and in the reports on the deliberations.

The administration of the Dean’s Office makes all reports available to all members of the examination board as well as to the doctoral student and does so at least four days before the meeting of the examination board for the first part of the doctoral examination.

Article 6. Doctoral examination

The doctoral examination comprises two parts:

- the first part: private defence, no earlier than 30 and no later than 90 calendar days after the appointment of the examination board (deadlines are suspended by adjournments). At least 60% of the examination board’s voting members must be present, if necessary by video conferencing. If for any reason a member can no longer participate in the deliberation/assessment or has to withdraw due to newly identified conflicts of interest, the examination board can continue its work as long as 60% of all members with a vote can participate in the deliberation/assessment. The members present in the conference room must sign the attendance list. Members who participate by video conferencing must be mentioned on the attendance list. The doctoral student concerned must be physically present for each part of the doctoral examination. In exceptional cases, this provision can be deviated from on the basis of an extensive and motivated application. The dean decides on the basis of this application whether the doctoral student will be allowed to carry out one or more components of the doctoral examination through video conferencing. Deviations from this provision are also possible if the doctoral student cannot physically attend part of the doctoral examination due to a general situation of force majeure as determined by the rector. In those cases where the doctoral examination takes place entirely through video conferencing, a publicly accessible live stream must be provided in order to safeguard the public nature of the public defence.

The doctoral student is heard by the examination board for a maximum of one hour (in Dutch and/or English). In this period of time, the voting members of the examination board may ask questions and make remarks pertaining to the substance or the format of the thesis. The doctoral student answers the questions but does not engage in an oral presentation of the thesis.

The administration of the Dean’s Office shall provide the doctoral student with the reports of the examination board no later than four days before the first meeting of the examination board. The members of the examination board are strongly encouraged to submit their report within ten days before the first meeting of the examination board. If the doctoral student has not received all the reports in a timely manner, he/she may petition the chairperson of the examination board to postpone the first part of the doctoral examination. If in such circumstance the doctoral student does not ask for a postponement, the first part of the doctoral examination will take place at the time provided, even if one or more reports are missing. In such case, the faculty aspires to provide the doctoral student with the missing reports as soon as possible after the first assessment.

The voting members of the examination board deliberate in absence of the doctoral student and may arrive at any of four final decisions:

  • authorisation to continue with the second part of the examination. In such case, the public defence shall take place within 60 calendar days after such admission was granted (deadlines are suspended by adjournments) unless the doctoral student asks the faculty board for a postponement.
  • authorisation to continue with the second part of the examination provided some minor adjustments are made. In such case the public defence will take place within 60 calendar days of granting the admission (deadlines are suspended by adjournments) unless the doctoral student asks the faculty board for a postponement.
  • authorisation to continue with the second part provided major corrections are made to the thesis. In such circumstances, the public defence takes place within a term set by the examination board unless the doctoral student asks the faculty board for a postponement.
  • no authorisation to continue with the second part of the examination.

The voting members of the examination board decide by simple majority of the votes cast, abstentions are not counted. If there is a tie after the first round of voting, a second round will be held. If the result of the second vote is again a tie, the vote will rule against the doctoral student.

If minor and/or major corrections must be made, these will first be checked by the supervisor(s) after which the doctoral student will send an amended version of the thesis (including highlights and rebuttal letter) to all members of the examination board. This is to be done no later than one week before the public defence after which the members require one to two days to give their approval. If the corrections are not applied or do not meet the predetermined requirements, the examination board may still decide not to authorise continuing to the second part of the doctoral examination.

The examination board, in consultation with the supervisor(s), will subsequently suggest a date and place for the second part of the examination, the public defence.

After the meeting, a deliberation report will be drawn up (incl. the attendance list) by the secretary in which the deliberation decision is clearly mentioned. All members of the examination board, the doctoral student and the administration of the Dean’s Office receive a copy of this deliberation report.

- second part: public thesis defence

If the doctoral student was given authorisation to proceed to the second part of the examination, the public defence, the doctoral student must send the invitation for the doctoral defence (as per the example on the faculty website) no later than two working days after the meeting of the examination board by email to doctoraat.di@ugent.be. The final print of the thesis and/or the pdf version thereof is presented or emailed to all members of the examination board before the public defence.

In the second part of the examination, the doctoral student orally and publicly defends the thesis before the examination board. At least 60% of the examination board’s voting members must be present, if necessary by video conference. The participation by members by video conference must be mentioned as such on the attendance list. The members of the examination board sign the attendance list. The public defence comprises two parts:

  • oral presentation of the thesis, in Dutch and/or English. This takes about 45 minutes.
  • questions for about 45 minutes, in Dutch and/or in English.

The voting members of the examination board deliberate immediately after the defence in closed session on the entirety of the examination. The supervisor(s) may attend this deliberation as observer(s). The voting members decide by simple majority of votes cast, abstentions are not counted, on whether or not to grant the academic title of doctor. If there is a tie after the first round of voting, a second round will be held. If the result of the second vote is again a tie, the vote will rule against the doctoral student. The examination decision is publicly announced by the chairperson immediately after the deliberation.

A deliberation report is drawn up by the secretary in which the examination decision is clearly mentioned. The secretary sends a copy of the deliberation report to each of the members of the examination board and to the administration of the Dean’s Office, along with the attendance list.

After a successful public defence, the doctoral student sends the final digital copy of the defended doctoral thesis to the university library. Without detracting from the rights of the author, Ghent University or third parties, the university library will make the doctoral dissertation accessible by way of an open access system. Where appropriate, this public access is subject to publication restrictions such as based on research results that can create value, or on contractual non-disclosure obligations to which Ghent University is bound.

Article 7. Fraud and irregularities in the doctorate and the doctoral training programme

If fraud and/or irregularities in the doctorate and/or the doctoral training programme are established, a procedure of inquiry for infringement of scientific integrity will be commenced pursuant to the current Education and Examination Code ‘Doctorates’.