Target Groups: Doctoral student

At minimum, three months is required for the examination and grading of a doctoral dissertation, and often more time is needed.

Instructions for revising the manuscript for pre-examination

• It is advisable for the author of a doctoral dissertation to obtain oral permission from supervisors to submit the manuscript for preliminary evaluation.
• Plagiarism detection must be carried out before submitting the doctoral dissertation for assessment. The primary supervisor provides the doctoral candidate with the title of the Moodle course and the course key, enabling them to find the Turnitin plagiarism detection tool. Supervisor(s) check the plagiarism detection report and, if necessary, go through the results with the doctoral candidate.
• The cover sheet of the manuscript must bear the title of the doctoral dissertation, the author's name and student number, the major subject, and the date of submission for examination (e.g., January 2024).
• The manuscript must include an abstract approximately one page in length.
• The table of contents should correspond to the manuscript’s main chapter and subchapter numbering as well as titling and manuscript pagination.
• Text settings: Page margins 2–2.5 cm; Font of a readable size, e.g., Open Sans 11 or equivalent; Line spacing recommendation 1.5 (line spacing 1 is also possible if the manuscript is long). You can also utilize the accessible thesis template found in Kamu.
• The recommendations of one’s own scientific field can be used in references and bibliographies. It is important that the notation style is logical and similar throughout the entire manuscript.
• An article-based research must include a list of articles or manuscripts contained within the thesis. Articles must be attached to the manuscript. Articles are usually attached to the manuscript in their original form. In this case, the appearance of the article and the text with page numbers will be in accordance with the original publication.
• N.B! The manuscript submitted to the preliminary examination is usually not on the accessible layout template of the faculty series. The faculty pays for the basic layout done by a professional in the printing house after permission to defend the doctoral dissertation has been granted and the dissertation has been finalized for printing.
• The Faculty supports proofreading costs for a foreign-language dissertation only once, and the language check must be carried out before or after the pre-examination of the dissertation, except for already published articles in the article thesis. You can find more information on proofreading here: Philosophical Faculty's instructions for publishing the doctoral dissertation - UEF Kamu

Pre-evaluation process and permission for a public examination

• The author of a doctoral dissertation submits the manuscript for evaluation as a single PDF document to the postgraduate Academic Affairs Specialist via email at [email protected]. At the same time, they apply for permission for a public examination by filling out the required form and attach it to the same email.
• Head of the department and the supervisor present the pre-examiners by sending an email to [email protected]. The amount of the fee for separately specified duties paid to pre-examiners can be found on UEF Intranet (requires UEF login).
• Dean decides on the pre-examiners.
• Academic Affairs Specialist delivers the decision, the PDF manuscript, and pre-examination instructions to the pre-examiners. The paper copies of the manuscript will be asked from the author of the doctoral dissertation if needed. The PDF file and the paper copy of the manuscript must match.
• Doctoral candidate is not permitted to be in contact with the pre-examiners during this process.
• Pre-examiners write statements in which they recommend either that permission for a public examination of the dissertation be granted or refused. The pre-examiners must give their statements within thirty (30) days of the date on which the thesis has been sent to the examiners (for holiday times or some other particular reasons evaluation may occasionally last longer).
• Academic Affairs Specialist delivers the pre-examiners’ statements to the author of the doctoral dissertation.
• Author reports if s/he has any remarks on the statements.
• Dean either grants or denies permission for a public examination.
• Please note that if the pre-examiners’ statements are negative, the pre-evaluation may be interrupted once by a decision of the dean upon written request by the author of the doctoral dissertation.

Examination and grading of the doctoral dissertation

• After having received permission for a public examination, the doctoral candidate makes the possible corrections to the manuscript.
• Doctoral candidate is responsible for arranging the publication and delivery of the doctoral dissertation.
• The doctoral dissertation can be published under the faculty's publication series or by an external publishing house. Distribution lists for printed dissertations can be requested by e-mail: [email protected]
• The primary supervisor and head of school make a proposal on the date of the public defence, place, opponent(s), and custos.
• The Dean makes the decision on the date of the public defence, place, opponent, and custos. The decision also mentions the final title of the dissertation.
• The doctoral candidate ensures that the examination hall is reserved and, if necessary, that network connections have been agreed with the Service Desk, [email protected]. Department secretary Tuula Nissinen looks after the hall arrangements on the defence date as well as the examiners’ travel and accommodation arrangements.
• The doctoral candidate is responsible for communications together with the university's Communications and Media Relations. Please see instructions.
• Coffee service after the public examination and the post-doctoral party, karonkka, are arranged and financed by the doctoral candidate.
• After the public examination, the opponent(s) writes a statement with a proposal for grading. The Custos writes a statement about the proceedings of the public examination. The statements must be submitted to the faculty within two weeks of the public examination.
• Academic Affairs Specialist delivers the statements to the doctoral candidate.
• Doctoral candidate reports if they have anything to remark on the statements.
• On the basis of the statements, the Faculty Council assesses the doctoral dissertation with a grading fail-pass-pass with distinction. When planning the graduation schedule, please note the following: The Faculty Council meets once a month, the meeting dates are shown on the on the UEF Intranet. The agenda is always sent one week before the meeting. The custos and opponent's statement as well as the doctoral candidate's notification of the statements must have been submitted to the faculty before the agenda is sent so that the dissertation can be taken up for grading at the Faculty Council meeting. Statements submitted after this date will not be considered by the faculty council, and the grading of the dissertation will be deferred to the next month's meeting.
• The doctoral researcher applies for a doctoral degree using an electronic degree application form after the Faculty Council has made a decision on the grade of the dissertation.

The University of Eastern Finland uses an electronic plagiarism detection system, Turnitin. In addition to verifying the originality of a thesis, the system can also be used to guide doctoral candidates towards the correct quotation and referencing practices required in high-quality academic texts. The Turnitin system has been integrated into the Moodle online learning environment.

• The principal supervisor provides the doctoral candidate with the title of the Moodle course and the course key, enabling him/her to find the Turnitin plagiarism detection tool.
• Doctoral candidate submits his/her texts to the Turnitin tool as a single doc or docx file. Doctoral candidate should note that one of the Turnitin tools will save the doctoral candidate's work and the other one will not.
• Doctoral candidate must inform their principal supervisor once the Turnitin report is completed.
• Plagiarism detection must be carried out before submitting the licentiate thesis or the doctoral dissertation for assessment. If the authors of licenciate theses or doctoral dissertations wish, they may save or archive their work in the Turnitin database at this stage.
• In the case of doctoral dissertations and licentiate theses consisting of articles, only previously unpublished texts will be checked, i.e., the summary and any previously unpublished articles. They must be submitted in the Turnitin tool as a single file!
• If significant changes are made to the doctoral dissertation after the preliminary assessment, the author should run the plagiarism check again before publishing the work.
• The principal supervisor checks the plagiarism detection report and, if necessary, goes through the results with the doctoral candidate. The principal supervisor must check the report within two weeks of its completion and the notification received from the doctoral candidate.
• The doctoral candidate will make corrections to his/her work according to any feedback given. After corrections, the work can be submitted for plagiarism detection only one more time.
• Before the assessment process begins, the principal supervisor will notify the faculty administration in writing about whether, in their opinion and based on the plagiarism detection report, the work is acceptable. This notification is sent via email to [email protected].
• The reports are stored for one year.
• If s/he wishes, doctoral candidate may run the Turnitin tool on their texts at various stages of the research process. We recommend that authors of licentiate theses and doctoral dissertations check any articles intended for the thesis in students' Turnitin before sending the work to publishers.

Definition of a doctoral dissertation

A doctoral dissertation is defined as a coherent scholarly presentation based on independent research and producing new knowledge in the field. It may be a monograph or a collection of research articles.

A collection of research articles refers to an entity consisting of the following parts: 1) a sufficient number of scientific publications or manuscripts, which examine the same set of problems. The number of articles required is determined by the Philosophical Faculty. 2) An independently compiled summary based on them. An article-based dissertation contains at least three peer-reviewed articles, two of which must have been accepted for publication, and the third accepted for the review process. Peer review refers to the practice of the scientific community in which an independent reviewer prepares a preliminary review of an article or part of a compilation. That assessment shall be verifiable. The summary must present the background of the research and its aims, methods, and results. If the publications include collaborative works, the doctoral candidate must attest to his/her independent contribution either in the summary or in a separate appendix. The doctoral candidate must be the first author (responsible author) of at least three articles. A collaborative publication may be included in no more than two person’s licentiate theses or doctoral dissertations.

An article-based dissertation may not include material from any previous dissertation by the candidate. The pre-examiner must present his/her evaluation of the scholarly level of the dissertation as a whole, regardless of whether the articles have been previously published. The report should take a stand on whether the compilation of articles forms a sufficiently broad and complete entity that meets the definition of a doctoral dissertation. The candidate is not expected to rewrite published articles in order to create a consistent monograph. Repetitions and overlap between the articles dealing with the same topic should not, therefore, be judged too harshly.

Examination process

The examination process of a doctoral dissertation is divided into two stages: the preliminary examination and the public examination.

Each manuscript is appointed with two pre-examiners who are expected to submit an individual report on the manuscript. In their written statement, the pre-examiner must clearly recommend that permission for a public examination of the dissertation be either granted or refused. S/he should state whether the manuscript in its current state, or after minor corrections, meets the minimum requirements of a doctoral dissertation. The pre-examination is, thus, a process of acceptance or rejection. The pre-examination statement should not be conditional, i.e., state that permission for public defence can only be recommended after certain corrections. It is possible for a dissertation to be rejected at its public examination, but this is extremely rare and should be avoided. The pre-examiners play an important role in ensuring that a manuscript with serious shortcomings does not get as far as the public examination.

The following dissertation evaluation criteria should be taken into account in the preliminary examination:

• Compliance with research ethical practices
• The topic and research problem of the research project and narrowing the research problem
• Conceptual clarity
• Research methodology and methods
• Material
• Reporting the results and conclusions
• The dissertation in general and its presentation

If an article-based dissertation includes a manuscript of an article that has not been reviewed or published, special attention must be paid to its evaluation.

The pre-examiner must recommend that permission to defend the dissertation be denied if it is clear that the work does not contain new scholarly knowledge based on original, independent research. Other major shortcomings that would be expected to lead to a negative report include:

• the research has clearly problems with ethical principles
• the theoretical framework of the manuscript is clearly inadequate
• the research material is too insubstantial for a doctoral dissertation
• there are significant gaps in the candidate’s familiarity with the relevant literature
• there are other indications of incomplete work.

On the other hand, a positive report need not be withheld on account of defects that can be relatively easily corrected by simple editing, supplying additional material, or filling minor gaps in references to the literature and so on.

A negative report generally leads to the examination process being temporarily halted at the request of the candidate. After the manuscript has been corrected and the supervisor of the dissertation recommends that it is ready for a new preliminary examination, the Dean appoints the same or new pre-examiners. A doctoral candidate may discontinue the assessment of his/her final thesis only once.

The report of the pre-examiner should be from three to five pages long. According to the Education Regulations of the University of Eastern Finland (1.8.2025), preliminary examiners of doctoral dissertations must give their statements within thirty (30) days of the date on which the thesis has been sent to the examiners. It is requested that the deadline for the report be observed, so that the examination process may continue without unreasonable delay. The report may contain recommendations for correction and improvement. If the pre-examiner wishes to point out minor errors, s/he may append a list of corrections and return the manuscript with annotations to the faculty, which forwards the list or the returned manuscript to the candidate.

Dissertations written in other language than candidate’s native language

When a manuscript is submitted for the preliminary examination, it may still lack a professional language check. It is the candidate’s responsibility to ensure that the dissertation is corrected by a competent expert of the language after the preliminary examination. The pre-examiners need not, therefore, make corrections to the language. However, if the pre-examiner feels that the language used has some effect on the scholarly value of the work, s/he may comment on it.

Ethical instructions

The faculty pays particular attention to the impartiality and transparency of the preliminary examination process. The pre-examiner is an expert appointed to the task by the faculty, and in order to avoid any legal problems concerning the dissertation, s/he should therefore deliver the report directly and exclusively to the faculty. The faculty will send a copy of the report to the candidate. The candidate has the right to send comments on the report to the Dean before s/he decides whether to grant permission to defend the dissertation.

After the preliminary examination, the pre-examiners no longer have the right or duty to ensure that the suggested corrections have been made. Responsibility for implementing the corrections belongs to the candidate and his/her supervisor, and ultimately to the opponent.

The dissertation receives its final approval and grade from the Faculty Council after the public examination.

Time limit for delivery of statements

According to the Education Regulations of the University of Eastern Finland (1.8.2025), preliminary examiners of doctoral dissertations must give their statements within thirty (30) days of the date on which the thesis has been sent to the examiners. The Dean decides on granting permission for public examination based on the preliminary examiners' statements.

Please, send your signed statement to:

E-mail: [email protected]
Postal address:
University of Eastern Finland
Philosophical Faculty
P.O. Box 111
FI-80101 Joensuu, FINLAND

Should you have any questions, please contact Academic Affairs Specialist Salli Anttonen
[email protected]
Tel. +358 50 367 0127

In matters relating to the payment of your fee, please contact:
HR Controller Lea Pulli
[email protected]

Definition of a Doctoral Dissertation

A doctoral dissertation is a coherent presentation of new scientific knowledge, which is based on the doctoral candidate’s independent research. A doctoral dissertation may be published either as a monograph or as a collection of research articles.

A collection of research articles refers to an entity consisting of the following parts: 1) a sufficient number of scientific publications or manuscripts, which examine the same set of problems. The number of articles required is determined by the Philosophical Faculty. 2) An independently compiled summary based on them. An article-based dissertation contains at least three peer-reviewed articles, two of which must have been accepted for publication, and the third accepted for the review process. Peer review refers to the practice of the scientific community in which an independent reviewer prepares a preliminary review of an article or part of a compilation. That assessment shall be verifiable. If the publications include collaborative works, the doctoral candidate must attest to his/her independent contribution either in the summary or in a separate appendix. The doctoral candidate must be the first author (responsible author) of at least three articles. A collaborative publication may be included in no more than two person’s licentiate theses or doctoral dissertations. The summary of the article-based dissertation is written independently by the author of the dissertation. An article-based dissertation may not include material from any previous dissertation by the candidate. The evaluation should take a stand on whether the compilation of articles forms a sufficiently broad and complete entity that meets the definition of a doctoral dissertation. The candidate is not expected to rewrite published articles in order to create a consistent monograph. Repetitions and overlap between the articles dealing with the same topic should not, therefore, be judged too harshly.

Examination and Grading of a Dissertation

A doctoral dissertation is examined in two stages, of which the first is the preliminary reading and the second is the public examination. Based on the statements of the preliminary examiners, the Dean shall give the doctoral candidate permission to defend the dissertation in a public examination, after which the Dean will set a date and venue for the public examination. The Dean shall also appoint one or two opponents, and the custos.

The custos is usually the principal supervisor or supervising professor working at the University of Eastern Finland and their task is to guide the course of the public examination. The opponent must come from outside the University of Eastern Finland and be at least a docent or a doctor with scientific merits corresponding to the title of docent. A person cannot be appointed as an opponent if s/he has written publications or participated in research projects with the doctoral candidate during her/his doctoral studies or if s/he is otherwise disqualified.

The Custos writes a statement about the proceedings of the public examination. After the public examination, the opponent(s) submits a written statement about the dissertation and the public examination, where they propose one of the following grades to the approved dissertation: fail, pass, pass with distinction. To protect the rights of the doctoral candidate, the opponent’s statement cannot include any new criticisms, but only comments to which the doctoral candidate has been able to respond in the public examination. The statements must be submitted to the faculty within two weeks of the public examination. Before the dissertation is graded, the doctoral candidate must be reserved the opportunity to write a rejoinder to the statements. The Faculty Council will grade the dissertation on the basis of the statements of the opponent(s), and the custos.

Evaluation criteria of the doctoral dissertation

The topic and research problem of the research project and narrowing the research problem:
The topic has significant information value and generates new information in the field of research or opens a new line of research. The research tasks and questions have been appropriately narrowed down. The research project has a meaningful connection to earlier research.

Conceptual clarity:
The concepts used in the research project are clear and justified. They have been analysed and assessed critically and extensively with the help of high-quality scientific literature.

Research methodology and methods:
The research project is methodologically justified. The researcher demonstrates his/her knowledge of earlier theoretical and methodological discussion. The methods employed in the research project are described and their choice is explained. The researcher demonstrates that the methods can be used to solve the research problems which have been set.

Material:
The material used in the research project is of high quality. It is relevant and sufficient in light of the research topic.

Reporting the results and conclusions:
In light of the research tasks, the results have been reported in a logical way from multiple viewpoints. The significance of the results to the field has been assessed in a relevant manner. The research report lists the most important questions for future research. The social and international significance of the research project is assessed.

The dissertation in general and its presentation:
The research project is a logical entity both in terms of structure and argumentation, and the language is clear and readable. The text focuses on essential questions. The research project has been completed independently and it demonstrates independent critical thinking towards earlier research, research methods and research concepts.

Grading scale of an approved doctoral dissertation

Pass: The dissertation meets the evaluation criteria satisfactorily and complies with research ethical practices.

Pass with distinction: An exceptionally high-quality and meritorious dissertation may receive a grade of pass with distinction. The dissertation has an ambitious topic and in light of the evaluation criteria its merits are exceptional, and it complies with research ethical practices.

Please send your signed statement to:

E-mail: [email protected]

University of Eastern Finland
Philosophical Faculty
P.O. Box 111
FI-80101 Joensuu, FINLAND

Should you have any questions, please contact the custos or Academic Affairs Specialist Salli Anttonen
[email protected]
Tel. +358 50 367 0127

In matters relating to the payment of your fee, please contact:
HR Controller Lea Pulli
[email protected]

• The examination shall begin 15 minutes past the hour.
• The persons involved in the examination shall enter the hall in the following order: the candidate, the custos (moderator) and, finally, the opponent(s).
• The candidate, custos and opponent shall wear formal dress or a dark suit. The form of dress shall be agreed together before the examination. The custos and the opponent(s) may wear or carry the appropriate regalia of their academic status.
• When all have arrived the custos shall begin the examination as follows: “Having been appointed by the Philosophical Faculty custos of these proceedings, I now declare the examination open.”
• The candidate shall stand to present his/her lectio praecursoria to the custos, the opponent(s) and the audience, and this shall not exceed 20 minutes. A foreign opponent shall receive a translation of the lectio praecursoria if it is presented in Finnish. The candidate shall begin: “Madam/Mr Custos, Madam/Mr Examiner, Ladies and Gentlemen.”
• The candidate shall conclude the lectio praecursoria with: “I now ask you, Professor X (Doctor X, etc.), as the opponent appointed by the Philosophical Faculty to present those criticisms which you feel is justified concerning my dissertation.”
• The opponent shall stand to present a short statement, in which s/he details the content of the dissertation and its scholarly significance. The candidate shall remain standing, facing the opponent, to hear this statement. Following this statement both the candidate and the opponent shall be seated.
• At the beginning of the actual examination, the opponent shall direct his/her attention to the methods and general questions, after which s/he should begin a detailed examination.
• The correction of typographical errors should be avoided in the examination. The candidate may provide the opponent and the audience with a written list of errors s/he has noted, which the opponent shall attach to the statement s/he submits to the Faculty.
• The opponent may not exceed four hours in his/her examination, including the time allowed for a possible second opponent. If the examination lasts longer than three hours, the custos shall declare an interval.
• At the conclusion of the examination, the opponent shall rise to present a final statement which the candidate shall rise to hear (facing the opponent). If the opponent considers that the dissertation fulfils the requirements, s/he should conclude his/her final statement with the following words: “I will be happy to recommend to the Philosophical Faculty that this dissertation be accepted with respect to the fulfillment of the requirements of the doctoral degree”.
• The candidate shall remain standing and express his/her thanks to the opponent.
• The candidate shall turn to the audience and say: “I now invite those members of the audience who wish to question the content of my dissertation to ask the custos for the floor.”
• The custos shall recognise speakers and ensure that the candidate has an opportunity to respond to each question and that the discussion remains germane.
• The custos shall rise to say: “I now declare the examination concluded.”
• The persons involved in the examination shall leave the hall in the following order: the opponent(s), the custos and, finally, the candidate.

Evaluation criteria of the doctoral dissertation

The topic and research problem of the research project and narrowing the research problem:
The topic has significant information value and generates new information in the field of research or opens a new line of research. The research tasks and questions have been appropriately narrowed down. The research project has a meaningful connection to earlier research.

Conceptual clarity:
The concepts used in the research project are clear and justified. They have been analysed and assessed critically and extensively with the help of high-quality scientific literature.

Research methodology and methods:
The research project is methodologically justified. The researcher demonstrates his/her knowledge of earlier theoretical and methodological discussion. The methods employed in the research project are described and their choice is explained. The researcher demonstrates that the methods can be used to solve the research problems which have been set.

Material:
The material used in the research project is of high quality. It is relevant and sufficient in light of the research topic.

Reporting the results and conclusions:
In light of the research tasks, the results have been reported in a logical way from multiple viewpoints. The significance of the results to the field has been assessed in a relevant manner. The research report lists the most important questions for future research. The social and international significance of the research project is assessed.

The dissertation in general and its presentation:
The research project is a logical entity both in terms of structure and argumentation, and the language is clear and readable. The text focuses on essential questions. The research project has been completed independently and it demonstrates independent critical thinking towards earlier research, research methods and research concepts.

Grading scale of an approved doctoral dissertation

Pass: The dissertation meets the evaluation criteria satisfactorily and complies with research ethical practices.

Pass with distinction: An exceptionally high-quality and meritorious dissertation may receive a grade of pass with distinction. The dissertation has an ambitious topic and in light of the evaluation criteria its merits are exceptional, and it complies with research ethical practices.

Here you will find information and instructions regarding the dissertation process. The stages of the dissertation process are:

1. Preliminary examination of the dissertation
2. Granting permission to defend
3. Decision on the public defense
4. Publication of the dissertation
5. Communication about the defense
6. Arranging the public defense
7. The defense itself
8. Evaluation of the dissertation

If you have questions about the assessment and examination process, you can contact Academic Affairs Specialist Salli Anttonen ([email protected]).

Preparing the Dissertation Manuscript for Preliminary Examination

Finalizing the Manuscript for Preliminary Examination

Before submitting for preliminary examination, the manuscript must be complete in content and carefully finalized in terms of language and appearance.

• Obtain verbal permission from your main supervisor to submit the manuscript for preliminary examination.
• Submit your manuscript for preliminary examination using the template:
  • When publishing your dissertation in the Philosophical Faculty’s publication series, make sure to use the faculty’s layout template. After August 1, 2026, manuscripts not in the faculty’s publication template will not be sent to preliminary examiners.
  • If you are not publishing your dissertation in the faculty’s series or are using an external publisher, you may use an accessible thesis template if you wish. If you are not publishing in the faculty’s series, you cannot use the faculty’s layout template.
• When the manuscript is ready for preliminary examination, finalize the language and layout:
  • Carefully check the headings, table of contents, and list of references.
  • Ensure the table of contents matches the numbering and headings of the main and subchapters, as well as the pagination of the manuscript.
  • Follow the referencing and citation conventions recommended in your field, and ensure the referencing style is logical and consistent throughout the manuscript.
• Language editing of a foreign-language dissertation manuscript is usually done after the preliminary examination. More details can be found in the section “Finalizing the Dissertation and Arranging the Public Defense.”
• For more on typesetting and printing, see Philosophical Faculty’s instructions for publishing and printing dissertations

Abstract

• The manuscript must include an abstract of about one page. At this stage, the abstract may be in either Finnish or English, or in both languages. The final dissertation must contain abstracts in both Finnish and English.

Parts of an Article-Based Dissertation Manuscript

• An article-based dissertation manuscript includes a summary chapter, a list of the articles included in the research, and the articles themselves.
• Articles are usually appended as published, retaining their original format, text, and page numbers.

Preliminary Examination and Permission to Defend

Before the preliminary examination:

Plagiarism check

• Conduct a plagiarism check of the thesis together with your main supervisor. Instructions are in the section “Plagiarism Check for Doctoral Dissertations and Licentiate Theses in the Philosophical Faculty.”

Submitting the manuscript and application for permission to defend:

• Apply for permission to defend by completing the application form.
• Email the following to the Academic Affairs Specialist at [email protected]:
  • The finalized dissertation manuscript in the template, as a PDF file, and
  • The completed permission to defend application form as a separate attachment

Nomination and Conflict of Interest of Preliminary Examiners:

• The Head of Department and main supervisor make a proposal for preliminary examiners to [email protected].
• The main supervisor cannot act as a preliminary examiner, nor can anyone who has had joint publications or research projects with the doctoral candidate during their doctoral studies or is otherwise disqualified. The university’s guidelines for conflicts of interest are on UEF Intranet (login required). If conflict-of-interest questions arise, the main supervisor should discuss them with the Head of Department.
• The Vice Dean makes the decision on preliminary examiners.

Submission of the manuscript to preliminary examiners:

• The Academic Affairs Specialist sends the Vice Dean’s decision, instructions for preliminary examiners, and the dissertation manuscript by email to the examiners.
• The faculty does not mail printed manuscripts to preliminary examiners.
• If a preliminary examiner requests a printed copy, the doctoral candidate must provide one as instructed by the Academic Affairs Specialist. The PDF file and the printed copy must be identical.

Contact with preliminary examiners:

• You may not contact the preliminary examiners during the process, except if you need to provide a printed copy.

Impact of university holidays:

• University Christmas and summer holidays affect the preliminary examination process. During the last two weeks of December and in July, dissertation evaluation processes do not proceed due to holidays.
  • If you want your manuscript to be sent for preliminary examination before Christmas holiday, submit it and all attachments by 15 December to [email protected].
  • If you want your manuscript to be sent for preliminary examination before summer holiday, submit it and all attachments by June 15 to [email protected].
• This ensures that the department and faculty leadership have time to approve the decision before the holidays.
• Manuscripts ready for preliminary examination can also be submitted during the holidays, but processing will begin after the holidays.

After the Preliminary Examination

Preliminary examiners’ statements

• Preliminary examiners provide statements either supporting permission to defend or noting deficiencies so serious that permission cannot be granted.

Schedule and handling of statements:

• Preliminary examiners must provide their statements within thirty (30) days of receiving the manuscript. Note that holidays may extend this period.
• The Academic Affairs Specialist emails the statements to you.
• Read the statements carefully and inform the Academic Affairs Specialist if you have any comments.

Decision on permission to defend:

• The Dean decides on permission to defend based on the examiners’ statements and the doctoral candidate’s notification and possible response.

Interrupting the preliminary examination:

• If the examiners do not support permission to defend, it is recommended to interrupt the preliminary examination.
• The process may be interrupted at the doctoral candidate’s written request.
• The examination of the thesis can be interrupted once.

Checklist for Doctoral Candidates for the Preliminary Examination Process

• Verbal permission from the main supervisor to submit the manuscript for preliminary examination.
• Finalization of the manuscript in the template (content, language, and appearance).
• Plagiarism check.
• Application for permission to defend and submission of the finalized manuscript to the Academic Affairs Specialist.
• The Academic Affairs Specialist sends the manuscript and instructions to the preliminary examiners.
• Preliminary examiners’ statements within 30 days (unless otherwise agreed).
• Commenting on the statements: notify the Academic Affairs Specialist if you have comments.
• Decision on permission to defend if the examiners support it.
• Interruption of the preliminary examination if the examiners do not support permission to defend.

If you wish, you may use Microsoft Planner or another planning tool to manage the preliminary examination process. Such tools help you visualize the process steps, schedule tasks, and monitor progress.

Finalizing the Dissertation and Arranging the Public Defense

Once permission to defend has been granted, finalize the dissertation for publication. Agree with the main supervisor on the opponent and the date for the defense. It is advisable to reserve at least three months for the finalisation of the manuscript and the smooth implementation of the publication process. Please take this into account when planning the date of the public examination with your main supervisor.

Finalizing the Manuscript and Language Editing for Publication

• Finalize the manuscript in terms of content and language for printing:
  • Make the necessary corrections to the manuscript,
  • Carefully check headings, table of contents, and list of references.
  • Prepare abstracts in Finnish and English, if you have not already done them at the pre-examination stage. The completed dissertation must include an abstract in both Finnish and English.
• Obtain republication permissions for articles included in the article-based dissertation for both print and e-version, unless already done during the original publication.
• Prepare the manuscript for black-and-white printing. Printing is done in black-and-white by default. Even a single-color page makes the entire publication color and significantly increases the cost. Color printing is only accepted for justified reasons—contact the Academic Affairs Specialist if needed.
• Foreign-language dissertations and abstracts must be checked by a language expert.
• Only the parts that require language checking (not e.g., reference lists or irrelevant appendices) are sent for checking. Request more detailed instructions from the Academic Affairs Specialist.
• Reserve at least 1–2 weeks for language checking, depending on the length of the texts.
• The faculty pays for one round of language checking.
  • For monographs, this covers the entire manuscript.
  • For article-based dissertations, language checking is paid once for each article included in the dissertation and for the summary chapter.
• The faculty does not pay for translation costs or for language checking of texts written in the author’s native language. These services can be purchased at your own expense from a provider of your choice.

Planning the Publication Schedule

• Familiarize yourself with the publication and distribution process of the dissertation.
• The editor of the faculty’s publication series will provide instructions after you have received permission to defend.
• Plan the publication schedule together with your main supervisor and the faculty series editor or external publisher.
• When planning, allow at least two months for typesetting, proofreading, printing, and distribution.
• The dissertation must be complete and published at least seven days before the defense.

Agreeing on the Date and Place of the Defense

• Discuss the date of the defense with your main supervisor.
• Negotiate the date also with the responsible editor of the publication series or external publisher, to ensure the schedule is realistic for the publication process.
• Once the opponent and defense date are agreed upon, decide with your main supervisor who will book the defense hall.
• Room reservations are made through Academic Secretary Iida Räsänen (from 1/1/2026: Riikka Hujanen).
• Philosophical Faculty defenses are held on the Joensuu campus.
• If you wish to have your defense live-streamed, submit a service request to the university’s technical support via the electronic service portal. More information about live streaming is available in Kamu’s instructions for technical preparations for the defense.

Selection and Disqualification of the Opponent

• The opponent must be an external person to the University of Eastern Finland, with at least the qualification of docent or equivalent scientific competence.
• The main supervisor and the Head of Department are responsible for selecting the opponent.
• The doctoral candidate has no authority in the selection but may be asked for suggestions or comments regarding possible conflicts of interest.
• The opponent must not have joint publications or research projects with the candidate during the dissertation project or be otherwise disqualified. The university’s conflict-of-interest guidelines are on UEF Intranet (login required).
• If there is uncertainty about the opponent’s qualifications or possible disqualification, the main supervisor should discuss it with the Head of Department.

Decision on the Opponent and Defense Arrangements

• The main supervisor and Head of Department make a proposal for:
  • The opponent(s)
  • The defense date
  • The defense hall
  • The custos
• The Dean makes the decision on the defense. The final title of the dissertation is also recorded in the decision.

Publication of the Dissertation

The dissertation may be published in the faculty’s own series, by an external publisher, or not published at all (self-publishing). The doctoral candidate is responsible for the publication process and distribution of printed copies. More information about the publication process is available in the instructions for publishing and printing dissertations.

Preparing for the Defense and Defense Day

Communicating about the defense: The university’s communications services disseminate information about the dissertation on the university’s website, social media, and to the media. Complete the electronic defense form at least two weeks before the defense. See the instructions on media communication and dissertation news releases.

Defense photograph: A photo of the doctoral candidate may be distributed to the media with the defense notice. Photos are optional. If you wish to have your photo included, arrange to be photographed at least two weeks before the defense. See the instructions on photography in Kamu.

Defense coffee reception: After the defense, you offer coffee to the audience. You are responsible for ordering and paying for the catering. More information is in the doctoral candidate’s checklist.

Karonkka (post-defense celebration): The karonkka is an academic celebration, usually held on the evening of the defense day to honor the opponent. You are responsible for organizing, hosting, and paying for the karonkka. More information is available in Kamu: Doctoral Candidate’s Checklist and Karonkka.

Support for defense communications: Familiarize yourself with the support materials available on the “Support for Doctoral Candidate's Communication” eLearn Moodle platform. These materials—videos, instructions, and examples—help you prepare your lectio, that is, your introductory lecture, and practice interaction with the opponent during the defense, as well as prepare for media interviews and speeches at the karonkka. Materials are available in both Finnish and English.

The Defense

The defense is a public event in which the doctoral candidate defends their research under the guidance of the opponent. The purpose is to evaluate the scientific quality of the dissertation and the candidate’s ability to justify their research decisions. The defense also provides an opportunity for scientific discussion and for a wider audience to learn about the research. More information about the proceedings and academic practices of the defense is provided in the section "Public defence procedures in the Philosophical Faculty.”

After the Defense

Statements of the opponent and custos, and the candidate’s response

• The opponent prepares a statement with a grade proposal.
• The custos writes a statement on the defense.
• Both statements are submitted to the Academic Affairs Specialist within two weeks of the defense.
• The Academic Affairs Specialist forwards the statements to the candidate.
• The candidate notifies in writing whether they have comments on the statements.

Faculty Council’s review and evaluation of the dissertation

• The Faculty Council evaluates the dissertation based on the statements and assigns a grade: failed – accepted – accepted with distinction.
• The Council meets once a month (not in July); meeting dates are available on UEF Intra (login required).
• The agenda is prepared one week before the meeting. To be included, the following must be submitted to the Academic Affairs Specialist at least one week before the meeting: the opponent’s statement, the custos’s statement, and the candidate’s notification regarding the statements.
• In June and December, dissertations may exceptionally be considered with a shorter preparation period.
• Please note that the evaluation of the dissertation may take several weeks depending on the Council’s meeting schedule. Plan your graduation schedule accordingly.

Applying for a Doctoral Degree

You may apply for the degree once the dissertation has been graded and all required postgraduate studies have been completed. The application form is available in Kamu.

The main supervisor of the dissertation plays a central role in the preliminary examination process, the preparation for the public examination, and the public defense itself.

If you have any questions regarding the dissertation examination and evaluation process, you may contact Academic Affairs Specialist Salli Anttonen ([email protected]), who manages the process administration in the Philosophical Faculty.

Preliminary Examination Stage

There is typically about a three-month interval between the completion of the preliminary examination and the public defense—often even longer. As a general scheduling guideline, if the public defense is to be held in the spring semester, the manuscript must be submitted for preliminary examination by January–February at the latest. If the defense is to be held in the autumn semester, the manuscript must be submitted for preliminary examination by August at the latest.

Permission for Preliminary Examination and Plagiarism Check of the Manuscript

• Postgraduate studies must be completed at the stage when the dissertation manuscript is sent for preliminary examination.
• Give the doctoral researcher verbal permission to submit the manuscript for preliminary examination when it is ready in terms of content.
• Conduct a plagiarism check together with the doctoral researcher using the Turnitin system.
• Inform the doctoral researcher of the name of the Moodle course and the course key needed to use Turnitin. Instructions for teachers can be found on the eLearn Moodle course "Turnitin – Plagiarism Detection System" (opens in a new tab, requires login), the course key is turnitin.
• Check the Turnitin report within two weeks of its completion and review it with the doctoral researcher if necessary.
• Notify the Academic Affairs Specialist when the manuscript is, based on the Turnitin report, ready for preliminary examination. The notification is sent to [email protected].
• Keep the report for one year.

Proposal for Preliminary Examiners

• Make the proposal for preliminary examiners together with the head of the department. A preliminary examiner may later also act as the opponent in the public defense.
• Contact the preliminary examiners well in advance so they can prepare for the task and schedule their work. The preliminary examination period is 30 days starting from 31 August 2025 (UEF Education Regulations section 36).
• Ensure that the preliminary examiners are impartial and external experts.
• Discuss with the head of the department if there are any questions about the impartiality or qualifications of the preliminary examiners. The university's guidelines on impartiality are available on UEF Intranet (login with UEF credentials required).
• Send the details of the proposed preliminary examiners (title, name, email address, and affiliation) to the Academic Affairs Specialist at [email protected]. The Academic Affairs Specialist will request confirmation from the head of the department.
• The decision on the preliminary examiners is made by the Vice Dean.

Effect of University Holidays on the Preliminary Examination Process

• The university's Christmas and summer holidays affect the initiation of the preliminary examination process. During the last two weeks of December and in July, dissertation examination processes do not progress due to holidays.
• To ensure the dissertation manuscript is handled before the university holidays, the supervisor must observe the following deadlines:
  • Christmas break: Ensure that the doctoral researcher submits the final manuscript and the defense permit application to the faculty by 15 December at the latest by email to [email protected].
  • Summer break: Ensure that the doctoral researcher submits all materials required for preliminary examination by 15 June to the same address.
• This ensures that the department and faculty management have time to process the preliminary examination decision before the holidays begin.
• A manuscript ready for preliminary examination can also be submitted to the Academic Affairs Specialist during the summer and Christmas holidays, but the process will not start until after the holidays.

Preliminary Examination Statements and Defense Permit

• The preliminary examiners provide statements in which they either support granting the defense permit or state that the deficiencies in the manuscript are so serious that the permit cannot be supported.
• The preliminary examiners must provide their statements within thirty (30) days of receiving the dissertation manuscript. Holiday periods, such as summer and Christmas, may extend the examination period.
• The Academic Affairs Specialist sends the preliminary examination statements by email to you and the doctoral researcher.
• Familiarize yourself with the statements provided by the preliminary examiners and guide the doctoral researcher in finalizing the manuscript.
• The Vice Dean makes the decision on the defense permit based on the statements of the preliminary examiners, as well as the notification and any response from the doctoral researcher.
• If the preliminary examiners do not support granting the defense permit, it is recommended to interrupt the preliminary examination. The preliminary examination can be interrupted at the written request of the doctoral researcher. The examination of the thesis can be interrupted once.

Preliminary Examiner Fee

• At the University of Eastern Finland, the fee for acting as a preliminary examiner of a dissertation is €350.
• The payment is managed by HR Controller Lea Pulli ([email protected]), who will contact the preliminary examiners after the Vice Dean's decision and provide instructions on the process.

Preparation for the Public Defense

• Once the doctoral researcher has received the defense permit, discuss the date of the public defense with them. Preparations for the public examination usually take at least three months from the date on which the permission to defend has been granted.
• Negotiate the defence date also with the series editor of the faculty's publication series or an external publisher to ensure a realistic schedule.
• Series editors:
  • Department of Education and Psychology: Associate Professor Noora Heiskanen
  • Department of Applied Education and Teacher Training: Professor Katriina Maaranen and Postdoctoral Researcher Juho Kahila
  • Department of Theology: University Lecturer Harri Huovinen
  • Department of Humanities: Associate Professor Marja Sorvari
• Discuss the date and practical arrangements of the public defense with the future opponent.
• The opponent will receive instructions for travel and accommodation arrangements once the decision on public defense has been made.

Proposal for the Public Defense

• Ensure that the opponent is qualified and impartial (at least docent level, no close collaboration with the doctoral candidate). The preliminary examiner may also act as the opponent.
• Discuss with the head of the department if any questions arise regarding the opponent's impartiality or qualifications. The university's guidelines on impartiality are available on UEF Intranet (login with UEF credentials required).
• The doctoral researcher does not have the authority to choose the opponent but may be asked for suggestions or comments regarding possible conflicts of interest.
• Make the proposal for the opponent, defense date, defense venue, and custos together with the head of the department. Send the details of the public defense to the Doctoral Education Specialist at [email protected], who will request confirmation from the head of department:
  • date, time, location,
  • final title of the dissertation,
  • custos,
  • opponent (title and affiliation)
• Agree on reserving the defense hall with the doctoral researcher—either of you can handle the reservation. Bookings are made through Academic Secretary Iida Räsänen (from 1 Jan 2026: Riikka Hujanen).

Opponent's Fee

• At the University of Eastern Finland, the fee for acting as an opponent for a dissertation is €500.
• The payment is managed by HR Controller Lea Pulli ([email protected]), who will contact the opponent after the Vice Dean's decision and provide instructions on the process.

Public Defense

See also the university's general instructions on UEF Intranet ("Supervisor's Preparation for the Defense").

• The main supervisor of the dissertation usually acts as the custos. The custos represents the university and is responsible for guiding the proceedings of the defense.
• The tasks of the custos include:
  1. Leading the proceedings: opening the event, introducing participants, supervising the discussion, and closing the event. More information on the duties of the custos is available under "Public Defense Procedures and Academic Practices in the Philosophical Faculty"
  2. Writing a statement about the defense and delivering it to the Academic Affairs Specialist ([email protected]) within two weeks of the defense.

Faculty Council Processing and Grading of the Dissertation

• The Faculty Council evaluates the dissertation based on the opponent’s statement, assigning the grade: fail – pass – pass with distinction.
• The Council meets once a month (not in July), and meeting dates can be found on UEF Intranet (login with UEF credentials required).
• The agenda is prepared one week before the meeting. To be included, the following documents must be submitted to the Academic Affairs Specialist before the agenda is prepared: opponent’s statement, custos’s statement, and the candidate’s notification regarding the statements.
• In June and December, dissertations may exceptionally be considered with a shorter preparation time.
• Approval of the dissertation may take several weeks depending on the Council’s meeting schedule.
• The doctoral researcher may apply for the doctoral degree once the dissertation has been graded and all required postgraduate studies have been completed and recorded in the study register.

Purpose and Tools of the Plagiarism Check

Checking theses in a plagiarism detection system is mandatory before the work is sent for preliminary examination. If significant changes are made to the dissertation after preliminary examination, it is recommended to check the originality again before publication.

The system used at the University of Eastern Finland is Turnitin, which operates in eLearn Moodle. Turnitin is used not only for verifying originality but also as a supervisory tool, for example, to ensure correct use of quotations and references.

Turnitin Plagiarism Detection before Preliminary Examination

• Before submitting your manuscript for preliminary examination, you must check it with the Turnitin tool.
• Your main supervisor will inform you of the name of the Moodle course and the course key, enabling you to find the Turnitin tool.
• Submit the manuscript to Turnitin as a single doc or docx file.
• If it is an article-based dissertation, only the previously unpublished parts are checked: the summary and unpublished articles. Submit these as a single file to Turnitin.
• Note that there are two Turnitin tools in Moodle:
  • One saves the text to the Turnitin database
  • The other does not save the text to the database
• You may, if you wish, archive the manuscript in the Turnitin database at this stage.

Report Review and Feedback

• Inform your supervisor when the Turnitin report is ready.
• The main supervisor reviews the report and, if necessary, goes through it with you. The report must be checked within two weeks of you notifying that it is ready.
• Make the necessary corrections to the manuscript based on the feedback received.
• Note that the revised manuscript may only be resubmitted to Turnitin once.

Notification to the Faculty

• When the manuscript is, based on the Turnitin report, ready for preliminary examination, the main supervisor notifies the faculty administration. The notification is sent by email to: [email protected].

Storing the Report

• The main supervisor keeps the Turnitin report for one year.

Independent Checking with Turnitin

• You may, if you wish, check your texts independently with Turnitin at different stages of your work.
• It is recommended to check the articles included in the dissertation with Turnitin before submitting them to a publisher.

Welcome and thank you for serving as a pre-examiner! These instructions are intended for pre-examiners participating in the pre-examination of a doctoral dissertation at the Philosophical Faculty of the University of Eastern Finland. The instructions outline the pre-examination process, the duties of the pre-examiner, as well as the requirements and evaluation criteria for the dissertation.

If you have any questions related to the dissertation evaluation process, you may contact Academic Affairs Specialist Salli Anttonen, who is responsible for the administration of the process in the Philosophical Faculty. Email: [email protected], phone: +358 50 367 0127.

Pre-examination Process and Duties of the Pre-Examiner

• The doctoral dissertation is examined in two stages: the pre-examination is the first stage, followed by the public defense as the second stage.
• Before the public defense, the dissertation undergoes pre-examination, during which two experts external to the University of Eastern Finland and familiar with the dissertation’s field evaluate the manuscript’s scientific quality and its fulfillment of the required standards.
• The purpose of the pre-examination is to assess whether the manuscript meets the minimum requirements set for doctoral dissertations by the Philosophical Faculty.

Pre-examiners provide statements in which they either

1. 1. recommend that permission for a public defense be granted to the manuscript as it stands or with minor corrections, or
   2. state that the manuscript has such significant shortcomings that permission to defend cannot be recommended.

• The pre-examination statement cannot be conditional. That is, the statement cannot say that permission to defend will be granted only after certain corrections are made.

Submission of the Pre-Examination Statement

• The preliminary examiner’s statement is submitted using the statement form. The statement includes both the assessment items on the form and written rationales, in which the preliminary examiner explains their evaluation and outlines any possible requirements for revision.
• Each area evaluated (1–9) is assessed using a three-tier scale:
  • Adequate: The manuscript meets the minimum requirements for a doctoral dissertation.
  • Recommended actions: Deficiencies do not lead to rejection, but significant improvements are desirable.
  • Inadequate: The manuscript does not meet the minimum requirements and is seriously deficient or flawed.
• The final assessment of whether to recommend granting permission for a public examination is not based on the average of the areas, but on the pre-examiner’s overall evaluation.
• A manuscript may be considered recommendable for defense even if one area is still inadequate, as long as the overall work meets the minimum requirements.

Deadline for the Pre-Examination Statement: 30 Days

• According to the University of Eastern Finland’s education regulations, pre-examination of a doctoral dissertation must not, without special reason, take longer than 30 days from the date the manuscript is delivered to the pre-examiner.

Statement Supporting Permission to Defend

• A manuscript that meets the minimum requirements qualifies for a supporting statement.
• Problems that can be corrected with simple editing or that require reasonable further study of research literature or other materials are not considered obstacles to a supporting statement.
• The pre-examiner is not required to describe the contents of the manuscript or to provide suggestions for improvement, although such feedback can be useful for the doctoral researcher.
• Language editing and finalization of the manuscript’s language can be done after pre-examination. Therefore, pre-examiners do not need to make or list corrections related to language. However, if the language quality affects the evaluation, it is advisable to mention this in the statement. The doctoral researcher is responsible for ensuring that the manuscript’s language is properly checked after pre-examination.
• A supporting statement should include a brief rationale.

Statement recommending against approval

• Refusing permission to defend the dissertation is rare but necessary if the manuscript does not meet the minimum requirements set by the faculty.
• The pre-examiner should not recommend permission to defend if it becomes apparent that the manuscript is not an independent, unified work based on research that presents new scientific knowledge.
• A statement refusing permission to defend should also be considered if there are other very serious deficiencies or issues in the work, such as:
  • The research does not adhere to good scientific ethical principles
  • The research task is not clearly defined or lacks scientific relevance.
  • The methods used are not at all suitable for the research topic.
  • The theoretical framework is seriously deficient.
  • The research material is too limited to answer the research questions, or overly broad generalizations are made from the material.
  • There are serious deficiencies in the knowledge of relevant research literature.
• If the pre-examiner does not recommend granting permission to defend, they must provide a rationale for their decision and illustrate the observed problems.

Interruption and Restarting the Pre-Examination Process

• A statement refusing permission to defend usually leads to the pre-examination being interrupted at the request of the doctoral researcher.
• Once the doctoral researcher has revised the manuscript and the main supervisor supports restarting the pre-examination, the vice dean will appoint the same or different pre-examiners at their discretion.
• The examination process can be interrupted once.

Pre-Examiner’s Fee

• At the University of Eastern Finland, the pre-examination fee for a doctoral dissertation is €350.
• HR Controller Lea Pulli ([email protected]) handles fee invoicing and will contact pre-examiners to provide instructions concerning payment.

See the definition, requirements, and recommendations for the dissertation, as well as the evaluation criteria and grading scale, in other parts of this page.

Welcome and thank you for serving as an opponent! This guide is intended for the opponent participating in the evaluation of a doctoral dissertation at the Philosophical Faculty of the University of Eastern Finland. The guide describes the evaluation process, the tasks of the opponent, practical arrangements for the day of the public defense, as well as the definition and assessment criteria of a doctoral dissertation.

If you wish, you may familiarize yourself with the University of Eastern Finland’s instructions on doctoral defenses and the post-defense celebration (karonkka). You may agree on the practical arrangements for the day of the defense with the custos.

If you have any questions regarding the dissertation evaluation process, please contact Academic Affairs Specialist Salli Anttonen, who is responsible for the academic administration of the process in the Philosophical Faculty. Email: [email protected], phone: +358 50 367 0127.

Examination and Evaluation of the Doctoral Dissertation

The dissertation is examined in two phases: the preliminary examination is the first phase, and the public defense is the second phase. The Vice Dean of the Faculty decides on granting permission for the defense based on the preliminary examiners’ statements and determines the time, place, opponents, and custos for the defense.

Familiarize yourself with the course of the public defense and the academic practices of the Philosophical Faculty.

Eligibility and Disqualification of the Opponent

• The opponent must be an individual from outside the University of Eastern Finland who holds at least the qualification of docent or an equivalent scientific qualification (Education Regulations, Section 36).
• A person who has had joint publications or research projects with the doctoral candidate during the dissertation project, or who is otherwise disqualified (UEF disqualification guidelines), cannot act as an opponent.

Duties of the Custos

• The custos is usually the main supervisor of the doctoral candidate.
• The custos represents the university and is responsible for directing the course of the public defense.
• After the defense, the custos submits a written statement on the proceedings of the public defense.

Opponent’s Statement

• After the public defense, provide a written statement on the dissertation and the defense, in which you propose a grade for the dissertation: fail, pass, or pass with distinction.
• To protect the rights of the doctoral candidate, the opponent’s statement cannot include any new criticisms, but only comments to which the doctoral candidate has been able to respond in the public examination.
• Submit the signed statement to the Philosophical Faculty within two weeks of the public defense by email to [email protected].

Candidate’s Response and Final Evaluation

• Before the dissertation is evaluated by the Faculty Council, the candidate has an opportunity to respond to the statements.
• The Faculty Council evaluates the dissertation based on the statements of the opponent(s).

The Public Defense and the Opponent’s Travel and Accommodation Arrangements

• Public defenses of the Philosophical Faculty are held at the Joensuu campus.
• You will receive instructions for making travel and accommodation arrangements once the decision on the public defense has been made.

Opponent’s Fee

• At the University of Eastern Finland, the opponent’s fee for examining a dissertation is €500.
• The fee is managed by HR Controller Lea Pulli ([email protected]), who will contact you and provide instructions for the process.

Please see the definition, requirements, and recommendations for the dissertation, as well as the evaluation criteria and grading scale, in other parts of this page.

Stages of the Public Defense

1. Opening. The custos opens the event and introduces the participants.
2. Lectio praecursoria ("the lectio"). The doctoral candidate presents the background, objectives, and main results of their research.
3. Defense. The opponent discusses the content of the dissertation with the candidate and poses questions.
4. Conclusion. The custos ends the event after the discussion is completed.

The event usually lasts about 2–3 hours, but duration may vary depending on the field and extent of the discussion. If the event lasts more than three hours, the custos announces a break. The opponent may use up to four (4) hours for the examination.

Public Defense Procedures and Academic Practices

Dress and Academic Insignia

• The candidate, custos, and opponent dress in accordance with traditional academic tradition: tailcoat and dark vest (or official uniform without decorations), dark suit, or other dark attire. The parties agree on the dress code among themselves.

Event Schedule and Arrival

• The public defense begins 15 minutes past the hour of the announced start time.
• The participants enter in the following order: first the candidate, then the custos, and finally the opponent.
• The custos and opponent carry the doctoral hat in their hand when entering and leaving the hall. During the event, the hat is placed on the table with the lyre facing the hall.

Opening and Introductions

• Once everyone is seated, the custos opens the event by stating: "Having been appointed by the Philosophical Faculty custos of these proceedings, I now declare the examination open”.
• After this, the custos introduces the candidate, the dissertation under examination, and the opponent(s).

Lectio praecursoria ("lectio")

• The candidate stands and gives the lectio praecursoria, which may last up to 20 minutes. The audience is greeted by stating: "Madam/Mr Custos, Madam/Mr Examiner, Ladies and Gentlemen."
• If necessary, a translation is provided for a foreign opponent.
• After completing the lectio praecursoria, the candidate states: "I now ask you, Professor X (Doctor X, etc.), as the opponent appointed by the Philosophical Faculty to present those criticisms which you feel is justified concerning my dissertation."

Defense

• The opponent stands and gives a brief opening statement discussing the subject and significance of the dissertation in scientific research.
• The candidate listens to the statement standing at the lectern, facing the opponent.
• After the statement, both sit down.
• The examination usually begins with general questions such as the choice of research topic, methods, and data, and then proceeds to details.
• Correction of typographical errors is avoided during the event. The candidate may provide a written list of errors, which the opponent will attach to the statement.
• The opponent may use up to four hours for the examination.

Conclusion of the Event

• After the examination, the opponent stands and gives a final statement, which the candidate listens to standing and facing the opponent. If the opponent considers that the dissertation fulfils the requirements, s/he should conclude his/her final statement with the following words: “I will be happy to recommend to the Philosophical Faculty that this dissertation be accepted with respect to the fulfillment of the requirements of the doctoral degree”.
• After the final statement, the opponent sits down.
• Following this, the candidate thanks the opponent. The candidate then turns to the audience and says: "I now invite those members of the audience who wish to question the content of my dissertation to ask the custos for the floor.”
• The custos manages the requests for the floor and ensures that the candidate can respond to each remark and that the discussion stays relevant.
• The custos stands and ends the event by stating: "I now declare the examination concluded."

Leaving the Hall

• The event ends in the reverse order of entry: first the opponent, then the custos, and lastly the candidate.

Evaluation Criteria for the Doctoral Dissertation

1. Compliance with the principles and practices of research ethics:
   The research follows the principles and practices recognized by the scientific community: honesty, general diligence, and accuracy in conducting research, recording and presenting results, and in evaluating research and their results. (https://tenk.fi/en/research-integrity-ri)
2. Selection of the topic, definition of the research problem and research task, and formulation of the research questions:
   The topic is significant in terms of information value, and the research produces new knowledge in the field or opens up a new line of research. The research task and questions are appropriately defined. The research task is meaningfully related to previous research.
3. Conceptual clarity:
   The concepts used in the research are clear and justified. They have been critically and comprehensively analyzed and assessed using high-quality scholarly literature.
4. Selection and management of research methods:
   The research is methodologically justified. The researcher demonstrates knowledge of prior theoretical and methodological discussions. The methods used are presented and justified. The researcher demonstrates that the methods enable the research questions to be answered.
5. Data:
   The data used in the research is of high quality, relevant to the topic, and sufficient.
6. Knowledge of research literature:
   The doctoral researcher demonstrates command of previous scientific discussion on the research topic and can position their work within it.
7. Presentation and conclusions of the results, and their scientific novelty and significance:
   The research results are presented logically and comprehensively in relation to the research task, and their significance for the field is evaluated appropriately. The research assesses the societal and international significance of the results and presents key suggestions for further research.
8. Style and Formal Aspects:
   The language is clear. The style, presentation, and language are polished. The table of contents corresponds to the numbering and headings of main and subchapters as well as pagination. Citation practices for data and literature are consistent and uniform throughout the dissertation.
9. The work as a whole:
   The research has been done independently and demonstrates critical and original thinking in relation to previous research, research methods, and concepts. The work’s structure and argumentation are logical. The text focuses on essential points. In evaluating article-based dissertations, attention should be paid to whether the parts form a sufficiently unified and broad entity as defined for a dissertation. Repetition and overlap in articles closely related in topic due to the publication format should not be considered significant deficiencies in the assessment.

Grading Scale for Approved Doctoral Dissertations

Pass: The dissertation satisfactorily meets the evaluation criteria and adheres to research ethics practices.

Pass with Distinction: An exceptionally high-quality and meritorious dissertation may receive the grade “accepted with distinction.” The research is ambitious in its topic and, considering the evaluation criteria, particularly meritorious and adheres to research ethics practices.