PhD Program Structure


A PhD study is expected to take a minimum of three years. The first year of the program consists of intensive formal course work that prepares the student for his own research. Upon completion of the course work, an individual student research thesis program is assigned based on approved topics in the field of study and in-line with the priorities of the School. As a part of the program requirements, participants publish their research in an international refereed journal.

 

Required Courses

Criteria 1 for students without management background/courses

  • 12 credits from MBA required courses
  • 18 credits of coursework: 12 credits from PhD courses, plus one Special Study of 3 credits and 3 credits from MBA elective
  • Total = 30 credits before advancement to candidacy.

Criteria 2 for students with some management background but not MBA

  • 6 credits from MBA required courses
  • 18 credits of coursework: 12 credits from PhD courses, plus one Special Study of 3 credits, and 3 credits from MBA elective
  • Total = 24 credits before advancement to candidacy.

Criteria 3 for SOM MBA

  • 18 credits of coursework: 12 credits from PhD courses, plus 3-6 credits of Special Studies.

Criteria 4 for Non-SOM MBA

  • 18 credits of coursework (compulsory): 12 credits from PhD, plus 6 credits from MBA elective.

The course credits must be approved by the Program Committee. This minimum credit requirement must be completed before the student is advanced to candidacy.

Course No. Title Credit Semester
SM62.05 Communication for Business Research & Teaching (R) 2(2-0) August
SM62.07 Qualitative Research Methods (R) 2(2-0) August
SM62.09 Academic Writing for Business Research (R) 2 (1-2) January
SM62.12 Foundations of Management Research (R) 2(2-0) August
SM62.13 Quantitative Data Analysis (R) 2(2-0) January
SM62.81 Management of Education (E) 2(2-0) January

R – Required course

E – Elective

According to academic senate in 2007

 

Program Committee

A doctoral Program Committee to supervise the student’s study program and dissertation shall be appointed within the first two semesters of enrollment in the Program. The Committee shall consist of a minimum of three members (at least one from outside the Field/Area of Study or School) including the Advisor, who will be its Chair. Committee members shall be recommended by the Advisor through the Field/Area of Study Coordinator for approval by the School Dean. Any change in the Program Committee shall be recommended by the Advisor through the Field/Area of Study Coordinator for approval by the School Dean.

 

Assessment of Performance

  • Doctoral students are required to maintain a high standard (minimum GPA 3.5) of academic performance at all times.
  • Towards the end of each semester, full-time doctoral students should present to their Program Committees, at a formal meeting, their progress:
    • Coursework
    • Research
  • The qualifying examination for Advancement to Candidacy, when this is held.
  • Through this formal presentation, the Program Committee will evaluate the student’s eligibility to proceed to the next semester of study. In order to justify the time spent, a doctoral student not carrying a full load of coursework must submit an abstract of the progress of the dissertation work to the Program Committee.
  • A detailed report using the standard form is then submitted by the Program Committee to the Doctoral Progress Review Committee (DPRC). If, in the view of the DPRC, a student’s progress is not satisfactory, a recommendation will be made to the Academic Senate for consideration and action.
  • The probation status of students enrolled in the Doctoral Program indicates that improvement is needed in at least one of the following areas:
    • Coursework performance;
    • Independent research potential;
    • Commitment to work on doctoral studies.

 

Advancement to Candidacy

  • Before students can be advanced to candidacy for the degree of Doctor, they must
    • 1.1 have satisfied the minimum course credit requirement in;
    • 1.2 have maintained a satisfactory cumulative grade point average of not less than 3.5 on the Doctoral Program;
    • 1.3 have passed a qualifying examination, conducted by the Program Committee
      • To demonstrate a broad knowledge of the chosen field of study through a written and/or oral examination,
      • To give a public seminar on the dissertation topic, followed by a defens of their dissertation proposal in an oral examination.
  • Full-time doctoral students must complete their Advancement to Candidacy not later than the third semester of study.
  • Non-resident students must complete their Advancement to Candidacy not later than the fourth semester of study.
  • The dissertation proposal shall include
    • A comprehensive literature survey
    • A discussion of the research to be undertaken and of the experimental techniques to be used.
  • The dissertation proposal shall be typed in the format approved for theses and thesis proposals. One copy shall be made available to each member of the student’s Program Committee.
  • The student’s Program Committee shall conduct the qualifying examination at the earliest opportunity after the completion of the coursework requirement, but not earlier than one week after each member has received a copy of the dissertation proposal.
  • The Program Committee shall report the result to the School Dean using the appropriate form. If the Program Committee does not recommend Advancement to Candidacy, a report shall be submitted through the DPRC to the Academic Senate.
  • Students who fail to pass the qualifying examination are entitled to one re-examination, failing which they will be recommended for dismissal.
  • Dissertations are submitted as part of the requirements for the Doctoral degree program. It is worth 66 credits for the regular doctoral program.

 

Final Examination

  • Before a comprehensive examination for the degree of Doctor can be conducted, a student must satisfy the minimum four-semester residency requirement, one semester of which may be taken after advancement to candidacy.
  • The dissertation must contain evidence of scholarly distinction and a contribution to the advancement of knowledge in the chosen field of study. The substance of the dissertation should be of a quality acceptable for inclusion in a refereed publication.
  • The student must have at least one scientific paper based on the dissertation published in or accepted by an international refereed journal before the final examination (applicable to students entering in May 1996 Term and onward).
  • The student must be the first author of the publication unless there is a document evidence that the journal required that the authorship should be written in a different order (Academic Senate, 27 February 2002).
  • An External Examiner shall be recommended by the Program Committee for approval by the Doctoral Progress Review Committee, which shall subsequently recommend to the Vice President for Academic Affairs for appointment. The recommendations must be accompanied by curriculum vitae, list of publications in English, doctoral research supervision experience of the proposed External Examiner’s and the candidate’s dissertation abstract.
  • The External Examiner may attend the final comprehensive examination of the candidate.
  • The External Examiner should normally not be a former AIT Faculty who has served the Institute on full-time or part-time assignments or has taught a course at AIT during the previous five years. He/She should normally have experience in supervising doctoral students and must be actively in research as evident from publications in refereed journals.
  • Not-doctoral degree holders may be appointed as External Examiners only if they are currently full professor or of equivalent rank in recognised academic or research institutions.
  • The External Examiner will be asked to comment on the extent to which the dissertation satisfies the criteria for assessment outlined in 8.2 above and to submit the assessment of the dissertation using the “Report of External Examiner” form, stating one of the following:
    • Satisfactory and meets the normal requirements for a doctoral dissertation
    • Acceptable after revision according to comments attached;( ) I would like to see the response of the student on my comments;( ) I request the Program Committee to ensure that my comments on the dissertation are addressed by the student. It is not necessary to send the response to me.• to be re-submitted for a further review after the attached comments have been answered; or• not acceptable for reasons attached.In all cases where the dissertation is assessed as satisfactory, the doctoral candidate, in coordination with the Chair of his/her Program Committee, is obliged to respond to comments received from his/her External Examiner, to assure the External Examiner that his/her comments have been appreciated , and incorporated into the text, to the extent deemed necessary by the candidate’s committee (Senate, 25 November 1998).In all cases where the dissertation is assessed as acceptable after revision by the External Examiner, it is required that the doctoral candidate, in coordination with the Chair of his/her Program Committee, satisfy the requirements specified by the External Examiner by preparing a detailed statement and/or producing evidence of revisions as deemed necessary by his/her Program Committee (Senate, 25 November 1998).In all cases where the dissertation must be re-submitted for further review, it is required that the doctoral candidate, in coordination with the Chair of his/her Program Committee, satisfy the requirements specified by the External Examiner by preparing a detailed statement and/or producing evidence of revision . Only after the External Examiner’s written acceptance is received, can in such cases the final examination and defense conducted (Senate, 25 November 1998).
  • The examining committee must have the full written comments of the External Examiner and the Report of External Examiner(Section 8.4) before the comprehensive examination is held.
  • The student must address all points raised by the External Examiner.
  • If the External Examiner is of the opinion that the dissertation does not wholly satisfy the criteria for assessment outlined in 8.2 above, and if this opinion is at variance with the view of the examining committee, the committee shall seek the opinion of a second External Examiner (whose appointment will be made according to 8.3).The Program Committee will conduct the final examination publicly. The examination will consist of ( DPRC R&P, 6 October 1999):
    • a public presentation and defense on the dissertation. The presentation and defense must be announced publicly within the Institute at least one week before the date of the examination. The External Examiner, members of faculty and other persons may attend the seminar
    • an assessment of the dissertation.
  • Payment of the External Examiner will be arranged on receipt of the completed Report of External Examiner. The External Examiner will also receive a hardbound copy of the dissertation.