The examination and grading of doctoral dissertations

A dissertation is a coherent document that is based on the doctoral candidate’s own, independent research and contains new scientific findings on the candidate’s discipline. It can be a monograph or a series of papers. A dissertation composed of a series of papers consists of peer-reviewed academic publications or manuscripts that have been approved for publication, along with their summaries. A monograph is a coherent scientific writing that is written by a single author, is based on research and has not been published before.

The recommended scope for a monograph is 250 pages, including appendices and the list of references. A series of papers is typically composed of 2–3 peer-reviewed articles and their summaries, which present the background and objectives of the study, the methods and data used, the research findings as well as reflection and conclusions.

A more specific description of the criteria set for doctoral dissertations can be found under Instructions for Students.

If the Faculty has more detailed instructions on the criteria for doctoral dissertations, they are found on the faculties’ external websites.

It is the duty of the supervisors to ensure that the dissertation manuscript is sufficiently finished to be submitted for preliminary examination and that the doctoral candidate has completed all the studies required for the degree. Once the doctoral candidate is getting close to completion, you should discuss the schedule of the preliminary examination and reserve enough time for you and the other supervisors to review the latest version of the manuscript.

You should also start considering who the preliminary examiners will be well in advance. The official proposal for the preliminary examiners is submitted by the doctoral candidate’s coordinating academic after they have consulted the supervisors and the doctoral candidate. In practice, the main responsibility for finding suitable examiners usually falls on the supervisors. When you are discussing suitable preliminary examiners, please consider the following:

• At least two preliminary examiners are always appointed.
• The preliminary examiners are always appointed from outside the doctoral candidate’s home faculty and usually also from outside the University of Helsinki.
• The preliminary examiners must hold the title of professor or docent, or a doctorate with corresponding scientific merits. Members of the doctoral candidate’s thesis committee may not be appointed as preliminary examiners.
• The persons included in the proposal must accept the role before the proposal is submitted.

Disqualification rules must be taken into account when appointing preliminary examiners. The preliminary examiners must be impartial towards the doctoral candidate, the dissertation and the supervisors. Thus, people disqualified from acting as preliminary examiners include:

• individuals who have co-authored one of the articles included in the dissertation,
• individuals who are or who have been in research collaboration with the doctoral candidate during the dissertation project,
• individuals who have conducted close research collaboration with the dissertation supervisor in the three years before the examination of the dissertation,
• close relatives of the doctoral candidate,
• immediate supervisors or subordinates of the doctoral candidate or their supervisor, or
• members of the thesis committee.

Instructions for Students contains instructions for submitting a dissertation for preliminary examination.

Preliminary examiners must submit a preliminary examination statement within 4 weeks of the faculty council meeting where the preliminary examination has been initiated. The statement period is usually longer during the summer months.

Preliminary examiners, either separately or together, submit a statement where they either recommend granting permission to proceed to the public defence of the manuscript or state that, in its current state, the manuscript does not fulfil the minimum requirements set for a doctoral dissertation.

The preliminary examiners may suggest minor revisions to the manuscript even if the statement is favourable. Read the statements together with the doctoral candidate and agree on how to proceed with the revisions.

If one or both of the statements are unfavourable, the examination will expire. In these cases, the examination can be restarted once the doctoral candidate has completed the required corrections and the supervisors or the coordinating academic recommend that the examination is restarted. The doctoral candidate may submit a written objection to unfavourable statements to the faculty if they wish.

Faculties’ instructions for the preliminary examiners of doctoral dissertations are available on the faculties’ external websites.

If the preliminary examination statements are favourable, the faculty grants the doctoral candidate permission to proceed to the public examination. Depending on the faculty, the decision is made either by the dean or by the faculty council.

The grading committee includes the opponent, a custos and one or two faculty representatives as deemed appropriate by the faculty. The faculty council appoints the grading committee for the dissertation. Depending on the faculty, the grading committee is appointed either at the beginning of the preliminary examination, i.e. at the same meeting where the preliminary examiners are appointed, or after the preliminary examination, i.e. at the same meeting where the permit to defend is granted. Two opponents may be appointed in special cases; for example, if required by the dissertation’s cross-disciplinary subject. One of the preliminary examiners may also be appointed as an opponent.

The opponents are subject to the same competence and disqualification rules as the preliminary examiners. The doctoral candidate’s coordinating academic submits the proposal on the opponent once they have consulted the supervisors. In practice, the main responsibility for finding a suitable opponent usually falls to the supervisors.

A professor or an associate professor at the faculty is appointed to act as the Custos in the public examination. A supervisor of the thesis who holds the title of docent and is employed by the faculty can also act as a Custos. If Custos is a supervisor or is otherwise disqualified, he or she may not participate in proposing a grade for the dissertation.

The faculty representatives must be professors, docents or docent-level members of the teaching and research staff at the University of Helsinki. In most faculties, the custos can also act as a faculty representative if they are not one of the dissertation supervisors.

Faculties’ instructions for the members of the grading committee are available on the faculties’ external websites.

Once the doctoral candidate has been granted permission to proceed to public examination, the candidate must take care of the printing and distribution of the dissertation as well as the preparations and communications related to the public examination event.

The custos is responsible for ensuring that the doctoral candidate and the grading committee agree on the date of the public examination as soon as possible after the permission to proceed has been granted. All persons appointed to the grading committee must be present at the public examination.

The doctoral candidate’s home faculty covers the fees for the examination room and the travel and accommodation costs of the opponent. The doctoral candidate is responsible for the costs of organising a coffee service or a post-doctoral party.

Instructions for doctoral candidates on the printing and distribution of the dissertation and the preparations and communications related to a public examination are available under Instructions for Students. The procedures and protocol for public examinations are described in more detail on the university’s Welcome to the public examination page.

The opponent must submit a statement on the dissertation within one week of the public examination. In addition, the grading committee prepares a grade proposal together.

The faculty council issues a decision on the grade and approval of the dissertation on the basis of the statements made by the grading committee. However, the faculty’s decision is not bound to the grade proposal.

Doctoral dissertations are graded on a scale of Fail – Pass. Dissertation, for which the preliminary examination has been launched before 1 August 2025, the grading scale is Fail – Pass – Pass with distinction. The grading follows the university’s general dissertation criteria and the faculties’ more specific assessment criteria. Faculties’ assessment criteria are available on the faculties’ external websites.

The education planning officers at the doctoral study services of different faculties act as presenters in all matters pertaining to the examination of doctoral dissertations at the faculty council. The education planning officers instruct the doctoral candidates, the examiners and the members of the grading committee on the different steps of the process, ensuring that all relevant parties receive the examination statements and other necessary information at the right time.

If you or a doctoral candidate you are supervising have any questions on the examination process and its schedule, you can always turn to the doctoral student services at the doctoral candidate’s faculty. The contact details for doctoral student services at different faculties are provided under Instructions for Students.

The criteria, examination and the approval of dissertations are specified in the Rector’s decisions 498/2017, 134/2019, 2379/2021, HY/11925/2024 and 19700/2024. Specific dissertation assessment criteria and any specifications to the examination process are decided by the faculty councils.