Neutral Chair Responsibilities & Procedures – Master’s

Jump to:

Neutral Chair’s Responsibilities

Procedures During the Oral Defence

Procedures During the In-Camera Deliberations

Appendix A: Master’s Thesis Defence Outcomes

Appendix B: Defence Outcome Flowchart

Preamble:

The College of Graduate Studies will approve an appropriate faculty member to serve as Neutral Chair of the Examination as based on the criteria in the Graduate Policy and Procedure Manual.

When you agree to serve as Neutral Chair of an exam, the College of Graduate Studies (CoGS) will send you a link to the Neutral Chair’s Report for Master’s Thesis Defence form, along with all required information needed for the Report. We recommend that you review the Report prior to the defence to ensure you record the required details during the defence.

This report can be filled out by the Chair either during or after the defence, but it must be submitted to CoGS electronically within two business days after the defence. Please remember to have this Neutral Chair’s Responsibilities & Procedures site open so that during the committee’s deliberations, you have ready access to the definitions (in Appendix A) and timeframes (in Appendix B) for the various outcomes.

 A) Responsibilities

The College of Graduate Studies will approve an appropriate faculty member to serve as Neutral Chair of the defence as based on the criteria in the Graduate Policy and Procedure Manual.

The Neutral Chair’s roles and responsibilities are to:

  1. Represent the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies.
  1. Moderate the defence; ensure procedures are followed by the committee.
  1. Brings copies of the following forms to the defence:
  1. Ensure that once the defence starts, the door to the room remains closed, if in-person, and if remote or hybrid, that only invitees are present by videoconference.
  1. Ensure that all members of the defence committee are in attendance, whether in-person or remote, prior to the start of the defence, and that all committee members remain present for the duration of the defence, including the student’s presentation, questioning, and committee’s deliberations. Any irregularities in this regard must be noted in the Neutral Chair’s Report.
  1. If an examiner has failed to appear for the appointed start of the examination, the Neutral Chair will:
    • Contact the examiner immediately to see if they are in transit and will arrive shortly.
    • If the examiner arrives within the first 30 minutes, the Chair will poll other examiners to determine if they are all able to stay for at least 3 hours commencing from that moment (taking into account time needed for the student’s presentation, questioning, and the deliberation periods).
      • If the entire committee is able to stay for the duration, the Neutral Chair can start the defence.
      • If any committee member is unable to remain for the full duration, inform the Director of the College of Graduate Studies by phone at 250.807.8702 or email both deanna.roberts@ubc.ca and gradtheses.ok@ubc.ca to notify the College that the defence has been postponed.
  1. For remote or hybrid defences: The Chair will verify that all members who are remote have functioning audio and, ideally, video. Throughout the defence, the Chair ensures that communication among all participants is clear, understandable, and sufficiently audible.

       If technical problems arise, the Chair should:

    • temporarily pause the defence until these problems have been resolved.
    • troubleshoot and attempt to resolve poor connection issues.
    • If video conferencing is being used by an examiner and it fails for longer than 5 minutes, the Neutral Chair can connect with the remote member by telephone to complete the defence as long as the presentation elements can be shared by email.
    • If the situation cannot be resolved within 30 minutes, where the connection is poor and interferes with the integrity of the defence and/or the candidate’s ability to proceed unencumbered, the Chair postpones the defence.
    • Immediately following this postponement, the Chair must inform the Director of the College of Graduate Studies by phone at 250.807.8702 or email both roberts@ubc.ca and gradtheses.ok@ubc.ca documenting the problems and decision to postpone in order to start the process of scheduling a new defence.
  1. The Neutral Chair is not required to read the thesis, does not vote, and does not ask questions of the student regarding the thesis or subject matter under defence.
  1. The Neutral Chair moderates the defence and deliberations, ensuring that CoGS’ policies and procedures are followed, and marks the “initial vote” recommendations on the Final Master’s Thesis Oral Examination – Neutral Chair’s Report.
  1. On the Final Master’s Thesis Oral Examination – Neutral Chair’s Report, the Chair comments on the overall proceedings of the defence, records voting and final recommendations, and provides an overview of any revisions required.
  1. The Neutral Chair submits the Final Master’s Thesis Oral Examination – Neutral Chair’s Report to CoGS within two business days following the defence.
  1. If an Examiner alleges academic misconduct during the defence or in the post-defence discussion, the Neutral Chair must:

B)     Procedures during the Oral Examination

  1. The defence starts with an introduction of the candidate and members of the defence committee by the Neutral Chair.
    • For remote/hybrid defences, the Chair should:
      • ensure they have been made the meeting host
      • admit all approved attendees from the waiting room
  1. The Chair then announces the following:
    • No audio or video recording and/or pictures are to be taken during the defence.
    • The candidate will be given 30 minutes to present a synopsis of the thesis.
    • The candidate may speak from notes and may use audio-visual equipment, but must not read the synopsis.
    • Examiners and audience members are asked to silence and refrain from using electronic devices during the defence, and, for remote participants, to mute their microphones when they are not speaking.
  1. The candidate presents their synopsis. If the presentation exceeds 30 minutes, the Chair must intervene and announce that the presentation will now be stopped.
    • The Chair periodically checks that any remote examiners have not been disconnected.
  1. After the presentation, the Chair informs members of the audience that they may now leave the room/videoconference should they wish to do so, and that those who remain must stay for the entire duration of the question period.
  1. The Chair summarizes the procedures for the question period by:
    • announcing the duration and order of questioning as follows: two hours are allotted to the question period. Examiners will pose questions and receive answers from the candidate in the following order:
      • University Examiner
      • Examination Committee Members
      • Supervisor and/or Co-Supervisors, as applicable
    • providing guidelines for the timeframe for each questioning session:
      • For a four- or five-member committee, each committee member has about 20 minutes in total to pose and receive answers to questions, usually apportioned into a first round of 15 minutes per examiner, and a follow-up round of approximately 5 minutes each.
      • For the University Examiner, this time frame is a guideline, so is flexible if more time is needed.
      • If the examining committee has more than six members, these time frames will be reduced by the Neutral Chair appropriately.
      • At the end of the second round, an opportunity for further questions can be given if time permits.
      • Only if the committee has finished all of their questioning, and only if time remains in the two-hour questioning period, questions from the audience can be solicited.
    • providing guidelines for examiners to bear in mind while questioning the candidate:
      • Questions should be posed succinctly to ensure the candidate has ample time to give a thorough response.
      • The student should be provided with reasonable time to respond to the question.
      • Each examiner’s conversation should be with the candidate, not with other committee members.
      • If needed, the student may ask for clarification of specific questions.
      • If the student does not know the answer to a question, the questioner should move on to the next question.
  1. The Chair exercises discretion in managing the question period in order to ensure the candidate is given sufficient time and opportunity to respond to questions. The Chair may, for example, need to:
    • invite an examiner who is delivering a lengthy preamble to pose their question;
    • curb hostile questioning;
    • stop any interventions by the Supervisor to assist the student in their responses; and/or
    • intervene when committee members begin to talk amongst themselves instead of interacting directly with the student.
  1. The Chair is responsible for ensuring that the student:
    • is given reasonable time to answer each question;
    • is given an opportunity to clarify the question whenever necessary; and
    • has understood the If the student understands the question but cannot answer, the Chair directs the committee to move onto the next question.
  1. The Chair is responsible for ensuring that:
    • Examiners comply with the guidelines provided (see 5 above);
    • the supervisor does not attempt to help the student in any way with the answers;
    • Examiners do not collaborate amongst themselves on questions;
    • Examiners’ editorial comments on the thesis are not discussed at the oral defence.
  1. At the end of the two-hour questioning period the Chair announces that the question portion of the defence has now ended, and requests that the student and all individuals not on the defence committee leave the room prior to the in-camera discussion.

c) Procedures during the In-Camera Deliberations

  1. Before any discussion of the candidate’s performance, the Neutral Chair:
    • reads the full list of possible recommendations to the examiners (see the definitions for a decision of “Pass” on the thesis in Appendix A and in the Defence Outcome Flowchart in Appendix B (also included in the Neutral Chair’s Report), or consult the “Master’s Thesis Examination Outcomes” in Section 8.8 of the CoGS Policy Manual).
    • Explains that the initial vote is confidential and passes out the printed ballots to each in-person examiner; and
    • Asks that online participants message their initial votes by private message to the Neutral Chair. Alternatively, a Zoom poll can be used for this purpose.
  1. The post defence discussion begins with the Neutral Chair:
    • summarizing the outcomes of the initial votes on the thesis from each of the ballots on the thesis and oral examination;
    • recording the 1st round of initial votes onto the Final Master’s Thesis Oral Examination – Neutral Chair’s Report.
  2. If consensus is not reached on the thesis in the first round of votes:
    • the Neutral Chair invites the examiners to discuss the outcome of the first round of votes in order to see if the committee can come to a consensus on the thesis and the oral defence . After this 1st round of discussion, the Neutral Chair can then continue with up to 2 additional rounds of voting and discussion to reach a consensus.
    • If after 3 rounds of discussion no consensus is reached, the Neutral Chair declares a hung jury and documents this outcome on the Chair’s Report. The Chair then instructs each committee member to download the Final Oral Examination – Committee Member Report from the College of Graduate Studies’ website to record their final vote and provide a rationale for their recommendation to the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies. This Report must be submitted to the College of Graduate Studies within 5 business days of the examination.
  1. If a consensus is reached, then the following procedures are followed, depending on the outcome recommended: 

a) Decision of fail on the thesis:

If the defence committee unanimously determines that the underlying research of the thesis is not acceptable, then the defence committee recommends a Fail on the thesis to the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies. No deliberations will be necessary at this time on the oral defence.

b) Decision of pass with or without revisions on the thesis:

If a consensus on the thesis is reached by the defence committee on one of the following:  pass, pass with minor revisions, or pass with substantive revisions, then the committee next discusses the outcome of the oral defence.

c) Decision of fail on the oral defence:

If the defence committee unanimously determines that the oral thesis defence is not acceptable, it recommends a failed oral defence to the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies. The final decision will be at the discretion of the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies. Should the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies uphold the recommendation of “fail,” the candidate will be allowed a second, final attempt to present an acceptable oral defence of the thesis within three months of the first defence. For a retake of the oral defence, the composition of the defence committee, including the university examiner, will remain the same, but the Dean or the Dean’s designate will act as Neutral Chair for the second defence. If the student fails the oral retake, they will be required to withdraw from the graduate program.

d)      Decision of pass on the oral defence:

If consensus has been reached to recommend pass on the thesis and pass on the oral defence, the deliberations are now concluded. The Neutral Chair will:

    • record the final outcome and record of voting on the Neutral Chair’s Report and note what revisions, if any, are required;
    • instruct the supervisor to obtain the appropriate signatures of each examiner on the printed copy of the Master’s Thesis Approval and Program Completion form. The supervisor’s signature should be withheld until all required changes have been made and approved if minor or substantive revisions are required.
    • If a decision is reached of substantive revisions, the Chair asks one additional examiner to withhold their signatures until the revisions are completed and approved.
    • The Supervisor holds onto the Master’s Thesis Approval and Program Completion form and submits it to the College when complete.
    • The Chair indicates in the Neutral Chair’s report if the committee recommends that the thesis be nominated for an award. 
  1. After deliberation, the Neutral Chair:
    • Recalls the candidate and, in the presence of the defence committee, informs the candidate of the recommendations that are to be made to the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies, while avoiding the implication that a final decision has been made.
    • Submits the Master’s Thesis Oral Examination – Neutral Chair’s Report to the College of Graduate Studies within 2 business days of the exam.

Appendix A: Master's Thesis Examination Outcomes

Master’s Thesis EXAMINATION OUTCOMES
UNANIMOUS PASS ON THESIS

If the unanimous final decision is that the thesis is a pass, the committee must choose whether the thesis is accepted with:

  1. No Revisions: A decision in this category deems the thesis acceptable in its present form. The student must submit their thesis to the College of Graduate Studies within three working days fromthe date of the oral examination.
  2. Minor Revisions: A decision of minor revisions deems the thesis acceptable with minor modifications, such as correction of typographical or grammatical errors, minor editorial revisions of style or expression and/or minor additions for clarification. The supervisor(s) withholds their signature on the Master’s Thesis Approval and Program Completion form until they approve the revised thesis. Students must complete the minor revisions and submit the revised thesis to the College of Graduate Studies normally within four weeksfrom the date of the oral examination.
  3. Substantive Revisions: A decision in this category indicates the thesis is not acceptable in its present form, but could be acceptable with substantial modifications, such as rewriting one or more chapters, reinterpretation of data, additional analysis, correction to calculations, and/or additional minor research in order to attain acceptable standards of coherence, integrity, and accuracy in argument and presentation. The supervisor(s) and at least one other member of the examination committee withhold their signatures on the Master’s Thesis Approval and Program Completion form until they approve the revised thesis. Students must complete the substantive revisions and submit the thesis to the College of Graduate Studies normally within six monthsfrom the date of the oral examination.
DECISION ON THE OUTCOME OF THE ORAL DEFENCE

If the examining committee chooses any of the above three options, they must also select the outcome of the oral examination:

  1. Unanimous Pass
  2. Fail

If the examining committee unanimously determines that the oral thesis examination is not acceptable, it recommends a failed oral defence to the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies. The final decision will be at the discretion of the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies. Should the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies uphold the recommendation of ‘fail’, the candidate will be allowed a second, final attempt to present an acceptable oral defence of the thesis within three months of the first examination.

FAILED THESIS

If the examining committee unanimously determines that the underlying research of the thesis is not acceptable, then the examination committee recommends a Fail on the thesis to the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies. The final decision will be at the discretion of the Dean of Graduate Studies. Should the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies uphold the recommendation of ‘fail’, the candidate will have a second opportunity to present and defend an acceptable thesis. No judgment should be made on the oral defence because the new thesis will need to be defended.

In the case of a failed thesis, only one re-submission will be allowed and a new defence will be required. The second oral defence will be scheduled and normally heard by the original examination committee no sooner than six (6) months and no later than twelve (12) months from the first examination date. Any necessary revisions to the thesis must be completed by the candidate and approved by the committee before the second oral examination is scheduled.

FAILURE TO REACH A UNANIMOUS DECISION

If the examiners are unable to achieve unanimity regarding the thesis and/or the oral examination, there must be no further discussion regarding that component of the examination. The Neutral Chair must select “Failure to Reach Unanimous Decision” on the Final Master’s Thesis Oral Examination-Neutral Chair’s Report and immediately inform the College of Graduate Studies of “lack of unanimity”.

In the case of a “hung jury,” the Neutral Chair informs the student of the result and asks all committee members to submit a confidential report, called the Final Oral Examination Committee Member Report to the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies, documenting the exam and their rationale for their recommendation within five business days.

When the Neutral Chair reports lack of unanimity, the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies will examine the reports submitted by the Neutral Chair and the examination committee members, and then may consult with anyone involved in the post-examination deliberation and the student before rendering a final decision.

Appendix B: Defence Outcome Flowchart