✏︎

Mid-Term Evaluation in the Academic Year 2025/2026

DEADLINES RELATED TO THE MID-TERM EVALUATION

1/ by 30 April – possibility to submit an application for a change to the Individual Research Plan (IRP) together with the updated IRP*,

2/ by 29 May – submission of the complete set of documents for the mid-term evaluation to the doctoral school office,

3/ 30 June–3 July – planned dates of the mid-term evaluation. The date of the meeting between the Doctoral Candidate and the committee will be determined no later than 15 June of the current year. Information about the date and place of the mid-term meeting will be sent to each person undergoing the evaluation by email (with a request to confirm attendance).

COMPLETE SET OF DOCUMENTS FOR THE MID-TERM EVALUATION

Submitting the complete set of documents for the mid-term evaluation means their actual delivery to the doctoral school office (either in person, via a designated person, or by regular mail / courier delivery in such a way that the documents are delivered by the indicated date – 29 May) together with sending the required documents to the doctoral school office email address in the form of scans.

The requirement for both paper documentation and scans results from two factors: the doctoral school is formally obliged to collect documentation in paper form, while the scans are necessary for the members of the mid-term evaluation committee to review the complete set of information before the meeting with the Doctoral Candidate.

Paper documentation (submitted to the doctoral school office)

  • self-report* with the handwritten signature of the Doctoral Candidate on the last page of the document or a qualified electronic signature,
  • opinion* of the Supervisor / Supervisors / Supervisor and Auxiliary Supervisor, with a handwritten signature on the last page of the document or a qualified electronic signature. The opinion of all persons appointed to supervise the preparation of the doctoral dissertation is required. This may take the form of a joint opinion by the Supervisor and the Auxiliary Supervisor/second Supervisor or two separate documents,
  • annual report after the second year of education (activities completed in the current academic year up to the moment of submitting the documents for the mid-term evaluation + activities planned for the period June–September, provided they can be confirmed by the Supervisor). The report must include the personal signature of the Doctoral Candidate or a qualified electronic signature and the signature of at least the main Supervisor or two equivalent Supervisors (it is possible to omit the signature of the Auxiliary Supervisor, although we recommend obtaining both opinions).

Scans of documents (to be sent to: sdnjl@amu.edu.pl)

Please send three separate PDF files containing:

  1. self-report; PDF file named according to the following format:
    Surname_Name_self-report.pdf
  2. opinion of the Supervisor / Supervisors / Supervisor and Auxiliary Supervisor*; PDF file named according to the following format:
    Surname_Name_supervisor_opinion.pdf
  3. documents confirming academic achievements and other achievements* – all documents should be included in one PDF file named according to the following format:
    Surname_Name_other_documents.pdf

* HELPFUL INFORMATION

self-report – approx. ½ publishing sheet in length, i.e. approx. 20,000 characters including spaces; the self-report should include:

  • a commentary on the implementation of the Individual Research Plan (objectives completed, deviations, explanation of the reasons for any deviations);
  • the most important achievements of the first half of doctoral education (research results, publications, conferences, submission of a grant application, participation in a grant team, establishment of research cooperation, research queries, other);
  • self-assessment of progress in work on the doctoral dissertation (degree of advancement, completed stages of research, written chapters / fragments of chapters);
  • research challenges, difficulties, and unresolved issues related to the research problem;
  • priorities and a schedule for further work on the doctoral dissertation;
  • commentary on the implementation of the Individual Research Plan (objectives completed, deviations, explanation of the reasons for any shortcomings); the most important achievements of the first half of education at the doctoral school (research results, publications, conferences, submission of a grant application, participation in a grant team, establishment of research cooperation, research queries, other).

opinion of the Supervisor / Supervisors / Supervisor and Auxiliary Supervisor: contains a summary of the doctoral candidate’s work on the doctoral dissertation to date, as well as the implementation of the Individual Research Plan, cooperation with the Supervisor, etc.

documentation of academic and other achievements: published or submitted articles, written fragments of the doctoral dissertation, notes for the dissertation, confirmations of research stays, completed research queries, materials collected during research queries, conference presentations, certificates confirming the awarding / implementation of one’s own grant or a supervisor’s grant – as a collaborator, scholarship holder, or in another role; certificates confirming participation in research teams. Certificates issued by the Supervisor are accepted.

issue of changing the Individual Research Plan

The Regulations of the Doctoral Schools at Adam Mickiewicz University do not contain guidelines concerning situations in which updating the Individual Research Plan is necessary or recommended. The decision to apply for a change to the IRP is made by the Doctoral Candidate independently, in consultation with the Supervisor or Supervisors. The following remarks may be helpful:

  • if the research tasks etc. outlined by the Doctoral Candidate in the IRP do not differ significantly from their actual implementation, a change to the IRP is neither necessary nor recommended. It should be remembered that the self-report is submitted for the mid-term evaluation; this document allows the doctoral candidate to comment on the process of work on the doctoral dissertation, including changes made during the work, shifts in the emphasis of particular aspects, reasons for abandoning certain topics and replacing them with others, changes to the schedule of planned tasks, etc.
  • if, since the submission of the IRP, the overall concept of the doctoral dissertation has fundamentally changed or a decision has been made to change the research methodology, which would affect previously planned research tasks and necessary research queries, then a change to the IRP is advisable.