The document outlines different types of PhD programs (Standard, National Excellence, EU Excellence) and compares their selection processes, monitoring, and assessment practices. It notes that: - Selection processes include supervisors, topics, students, dissertation committees, reviewers, and examiners. - Monitoring during the program involves coursework assessment, research progress reviews, and supervision assessments. - Assessment also occurs before, during, and after the program through examination committees, annual reports, and student/supervisor evaluations. - Requirements vary between standard programs and excellence programs, with excellence programs requiring more international oversight and annual reporting. - Some areas for improvement are increasing international inclusion and requiring student assessments of lectures, programs,

1. Type of
PhD Pro-
gramme
Selection of
Supervisors
Selection of
Topics
Selection of
Students
Selection of
Dissertation
Commitee
Selection of
Reviewers
Selection of
Examiners
Standard
University
PhD-Pro-
gramme
(Standard)
YES
(Selection for acceptance
at Programme)
NO → YES
(Hearing pre-requisite
for Programme)
YES
from
Programme,
not ≥1 from
own institute
YES
1 Internal
1 External
not Supervisor
not Coauthor
→ Ext.=Internat.
YES
≥3 incl.
Supervisor
pref. External
pref.Internat.
National
Excellence
PhD-Pro-
gramme
(Nat-Exc)
YES
(Science
Record)
YES
(Compatibility
to Programme)
YES
(International
hearing)
see above YES
Ext.=Internat.
YES
≥3 incl.
Supervisor
1 x Internat.
EU
Excellence
PhD-Pro-
gramme
(EU-Exc)
YES
(Science
Record)
YES
(Compatibility
to Programme)
YES
(International
hearing)
No national students!
see above YES
Ext.=Internat.
YES
≥3 incl.
Supervisor
1 x Internat.
Executed
by
Consortium Consortium Hearing Dean of
Studies
Dean of
Studies
Dean of
Studies
Selection = Initial Assessment
Würzner, Innsbruck - Monitoring and Assessment of PhD training, Klaipeda, 08.05.17

2. Monitoring and Assessment
DP Assessment of
Core courses &
Skillscourses
Monitoring of
Research Progress
of Student
Assessment of
Supervisor
Monitoring of
Programme
Standard proposed by Consortium
approved by University
assessed by Students
Annual report in
front of dissertation
committee
Also at Annual
report in front
of dissertation
committee
→ & by student
after exam
NO → YES
Report by internat.
committee of 3
reviewers all 3 yrs.
→ & by student
after exam
Nat. Exc. proposed by Consortium
approved by University
evaluated by Reviewers
granted by GrantGivBody
assessed by Student
see above see above Annual retreat with
report by
3 reviewers
EU Exc. proposed by Consortium
approved by University
evaluated by Reviewers
granted by GrantGivBody
assessed by Student
see above see above Several retreats,
annual report by
advisory board,
meeting at annual
internat. meetings
Würzner, Innsbruck - Monitoring and Assessment of PhD training, Klaipeda, 08.05.17

3. • Before, during and after
• Before (S): Supervisor, Topic, Student, Dissert. Comm.
• During: Teaching, Research, Supervision, (Programme)
• During at final stage (S): Reviewer, Examiner
• After: Programme, Supervisor
• Based on requirements:
Standard vs. Excellent programmes
• Annually = enough!
• Balance between usefulness & overkill
Monitoring and Assessment
S = rather a Selection!
Würzner, Innsbruck - Monitoring and Assessment of PhD training, Klaipeda, 08.05.17

4. DP Selection of
Supervisors
Selection of
Topics
Selection of
Students
Selection of
Dissert.Comm.
Selection of
Reviewers
Selection of
Examiners
Standard YES
(Selection for acceptance at
programme)
NO → YES
(Hearing)
YES
from
programme;
not ≥1 from
own institute
YES
1 Internal, 1 External
notSupervisor,
notCoauthor
→ External=Internat.
YES
≥3 incl. Supervisor,
pref. External
pref. Internat.
Assessment of
Core courses &
Skills courses
Monitoring of
Research Progress of
Student
Assessment of
Supervisor
Monitoring of
Programme
Standard proposed by Consortium
approved by Univ.
assessed by Student
Annual report in
front of dissertation
committee
Also at Annual
report in front of
dissert. committee
→ & by student
after exam
NO → YES
Report by internat. committee
of 3 reviewers all 3 yrs.
→ & by student
after exam
HOROS proposed by Consortium
approved by University
reviewed & granted
assessed by Student
see above Also at Annual
report in front of
dissert. committee
→ & by student
after exam
NO → YES
Report by internat. committee
of 3 reviewers all 3 yrs.
→ & by student
after exam
CORVOS proposed by Consortium
approved by Univ.
reviewed & granted
assessed by Student
see above see above Several retreats, annual report by
advisory board, meeting at annual
internat. meetings
1. Selection of Students by Hearing? – Not yet for all!
2. Inklusion of International Reviewers? – Not yet for all!
3. Inklusion of International Examiners? – Not yet for all!
4. Assessment of Lectures by Student? – Not yet for all!
5. Assessment of Programme by International Reviewers, e.g. all 3 yrs? – Not yet!
6. Assessment of Programme & Supervisor by Student after the exam? – Not yet!
1. Supervisor or Coauthor as Reviewer? – No!
2. Inklusion of Supervisor as Examiner? – Yes!
3. Annual progress report assessing Student and Supervisor? – Yes!
Würzner, Innsbruck - Monitoring and Assessment of PhD training, Klaipeda, 08.05.17