manchester university phd thesis guidelines

• Regulations  / PGR Presentation of Theses Policy

Presentation of Theses Policy

The Presentation of Theses policy is to be used by students to format their thesis for submission.

Our expectations of you under this policy:

This policy outlines the required format for the submission of a doctoral thesis.  It includes detailed guidance on how a thesis should be compiled.

Your expectations of us under this policy:

The University of Manchester will only accept a thesis for examination that meets the requirements set out in this policy.

View the full policy document

Who to contact.

Students should contact their Faculty/School Graduate Office in the first instance.

• See a list of School contacts

(University Switchboard) +44 (0) 161 306 6000

Open contact directory

The University of Manchester Oxford Road Manchester M13 9PL

Open campus map

Connect with us

Open social media directory

• MyManchester
• Faculty StaffNet

• Biology, Medicine and Health Doctoral Academy

Thesis submission

Submission and examination of your thesis is the culmination of years of hard work.

Ensuring that you plan for the submission of the thesis and understand the deadlines, requirements for presentation and key stages of the process will help to reduce the stress associated with thesis submission.

The following pages and documents offer a step-by-step guide to the thesis submission process.

Students whose course began before September 2022 may include a COVID Impact Statement in their thesis. For full guidance on the inclusion of a COVID-19 Thesis Impact Statement in the examination thesis please see Guidance on Inclusion of COVID-19 Impact Statements in Thesis Submissions

Please note that this guidance is for students in the Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, which includes the School of Biological Sciences, School of Medical Sciences and School of Health Sciences.

• Plagiarism and referencing
• Alternative format thesis submission
• Submission deadlines
• Notice forms and nomination of examiners
• Presentation regulations
• Electronic submission
• Viva/oral exam
• Examination flowchart (PDF, 195KB)
• Getting your result
• Essential information
• Alternative format

• MyManchester
• Faculty StaffNet

• PGR handbook - Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health

Writing up and submitting your research

You can find up-to-date guidance on submitting your thesis on the Doctoral Academy website:

• Thesis submission

The guidance includes information on:

• plagiarism and referencing
• how to format and present your thesis
• using a journal format for your thesis
• electronic submission
• submission deadlines, including submission pending
• thesis binding
• the viva/oral exam
• getting your result.

Presentation of thesis

The University has a specific format required for PGR theses. You will find this detailed in the Presentation of Theses Policy .

If you have queries about presentation, you can ask staff in the Doctoral Academy , or ask them to have a look at a draft document.

Traditional and journal thesis formats

You may hear your supervisors or other PGRS talk about the different types of thesis format that are accepted for examination at Manchester.

These are currently defined as 'standard' and 'journal' format, although you shouldn't get too concerned about the terminology used. One format is not inherently better or more widely regarded than the other.

The standard thesis will have an introduction, literature review, materials and methods, results and discussion and conclusion, references and appendices.

The journal format thesis comprises chapters that have been written in the form of journal papers.

These may be papers that have been submitted to a journal, already accepted and published or chapters that are written as journal papers but are not yet or even are not intended to be submitted.

The advantage of this format is that it gives you the experience of writing in journal paper format. This format is increasingly popular in some disciplines, and yet may not be appropriate for all projects. Your supervisory team is the best place to start discussing your thoughts on this.

There is no requirement to request permission to submit in journal format. However, it is important that you discuss the relative merits of this format with your supervisory team, and ensure that you pick the right format for you and your project. Further guidance is available in Journal Format Theses - Guiding Principles for Students and Staff (PDF).

Submission pending

• Three-year PhD, MD and part-time - 12 months
• MPhil and 3.5-year PhD - 6 months

If you are a PGR on one of the programmes above and you do not submit by the end of programme, you may be able to register for the submission pending period.

You will need to have completed all your research (such as data collection and experiments) and should have a draft of the thesis completed (usually 80% of chapters in a reasonable draft form).

Your Student Support Administrator will provide details on registering for submission pending and paying the fee (£225 in the 2023/24 academic year).

You should be aware that during this writing up period, you are not considered to be a full-time PGR at the University.

You will still have access to facilities and your supervisory team will continue to support you towards submission of the thesis and preparation for the oral examination (as appropriate).

Once you enter submission pending, you may be returning to full-time work or be involved in a number of external activities that will reduce the amount of time that you have to spend on writing your thesis.

Please note that due to HMRC requirements, the University cannot make stipend payments to a PGR during the submission pending period.

Submission deadlines

It is important for your career development that you submit your thesis within the period of your programme as set out in your initial offer letter.

If you are eligible to use the submission pending period, remember that it will be increasingly difficult to find time to dedicate to completing your thesis once you are in full-time work.

Your final submission deadline will be stated on your original offer letter. If you are granted any periods of interruption or an extension to your programme, you will be notified of any change in your final submission deadline in the letter confirming this change to programme.

You will also see your submissions deadline displayed in eProg ('Thesis Submission Deadline' on the 'My Profile' page).

Extensions to final submission deadlines

Extensions to your final submission deadline will only be considered in exceptional circumstances and where permission is sought at least two months prior to the final submission deadline. Visit the Forms page on the Doctoral Academy website for the relevant forms to complete.

You will need to provide clear, documented evidence as to how your mitigating circumstances have impacted your ability to meet the deadline. Examples of appropriate exceptional circumstances can be found within the policy on circumstances leading to changes to postgraduate research study .

It is expected that your mitigating circumstances will have occurred within the submission pending period, or the last 12 months of a four-year programme.

Should your request for an extension to the final submission deadline be rejected, you will have the right of appeal.

Please note that even if you submit an appeal, you should still submit your thesis for examination by the final submission deadline.

Oral examination/viva

An integral part of the PhD/MD process is the oral examination (viva). This will take place at Manchester with your internal and external examiner.

The Academic and Researcher Development Team provide courses on preparing for this examination, and you will also receive guidance from your supervisory team on what to expect.

MPhil PGRs may have to undertake an oral examination, and this will be determined by the examiners following initial review of the thesis.

You may find it useful to refer to the full University policies on PGR examination .

Examiner recommendations

• A (i) no corrections
• A (ii) subject to minor corrections (four weeks to complete, exceptionally up to 12 weeks can be granted for completion of minor corrections)
• B (i) permitting submission of a revised thesis without further research and without further oral examination (six months to complete)
• B (ii) permitting submission of a revised thesis without further research but with a further oral examination (six months to complete, exceptionally up to 12 months)
• B (iii) permitting submission of a revised thesis with further research and with a further oral examination (12 months to complete)
• C (i) but award the degree of MPhil
• C (ii) award the degree of MPhil subject to minor corrections (four weeks to complete, exceptionally up to 12 weeks)
• C (iii) advising that the thesis be submitted, after revision, for examination for the degree of Master (six months to complete)
• C (iv) not permitting resubmission
• Your programme

PGR handbook - School of Environment, Education and Development

Thesis submission and examination

Submission pending.

If you cannot submit your thesis by the end of the standard period of the degree programme, you need to apply for a period of submission pending for the purpose of preparing the thesis for submission. A fee will be payable for any such submission pending registration that is granted by the University.

Thesis presentation

Your thesis should be presented in accordance with University of Manchester guidelines. The University has also prepared a statement on proofreading and some useful information about writing your thesis.

Thesis submission

It is expected that you will complete your PhD within the standard length of the programme. However, the University recognises that there may, on occasion be justifiable reasons for early or indeed late submission. You can also ask for permission to submit your thesis in the non-traditional format (eg three papers tied together).

Thesis submission and open access

Thesis examination.

You can expect your viva examination to take place around six to eight weeks after submission. To find useful information about your viva, tips on how to prepare and examination policies, please visit:

Results and award

The Doctoral Programmes Office will write to you with the outcome of your viva examination, along with the required next steps.

Thesis extensions

Please visit the 'Policies and guidance' section for more information about extending the 'Prescribed Period of Programme':

• Extension to thesis deadline

Registration on Submission Pending Period

You are expected to complete all research degree work, including the writing up of the thesis, within the standard period of the degree programme.

If you cannot submit your thesis by the end of the standard period of the degree programme, you need to apply to register for a period of submission pending for the purpose of preparing the thesis for submission.

To check eligibility and apply for the registration, please refer to the Faculty Guiding Principles and for the Submission Pending Period and the University Submission Pending Procedure for PGR Students and submit the application to the School PGR Office.

• Faculty of Humanities Guiding Principles for the Submission Pending Period
• Submission Pending Procedure for PGR Students

You are required to submit the thesis no later than the end of Submission Pending Period, providing six weeks notice is given and should follow the usual thesis submission procedures.

Progress will be monitored via eProg during the Submission Pending period. Students and supervisors should meet prior to the Submission Pending year to formalise the timetable for thesis writing and to agree on a schedule for supervision during this period. Students who have not submitted their thesis by the end of the Submission Pending period will have their automatic right to submit withdrawn.

To apply for registration to the Submission Pending period, please complete the Submission Pending Application form  in liaison with your supervisory team and send it to [email protected] . 

A £225 fee will be payable for the submission pending period registration. 

The thesis must be presented according to the University’s ‘Presentation of Theses Policy’. The document can be found here: 

• Presentation of Theses Policy

Theses that do not adhere to the University’s ‘Presentation of Theses Policy’ may not be accepted for examination. You must submit an electronic version of your thesis through the My Manchester portal .  We recommend using Firefox or Chrome for submissions. Please also ensure that your ‘pop up blocker’ is turned off.

Standard of written English and proofreading information

Theses must achieve a universally acceptable standard of writing. Prior to submitting your thesis, you are advised to have it professionally proofread and corrected. You can find more information about this in the following document:

• Guidance on Proofreading Your Thesis .

The final draft of the thesis should be submitted to your supervisor(s) before forwarding to the proof-reader.

University statement on proofreading

If a student chooses to approach another person to proofread their written work or seeks to use the services of a proofreading service or agency, they must take account of the following principles:

• It is the responsibility of students to ensure that all work submitted is their own, and that it represents their own abilities and understanding. Any proofreading of work that is undertaken by a third party must not compromise the student’s own authorship of the work
• Proofreading undertaken by a third party must not take the form of editing of text, such as the adding or rewriting of phrases or passages within a piece of student’s work
• Proofreading undertaken by a third party must not change the content or meaning of the work in any way.

No allowance will be made for English not being the first language in the examining of the thesis.

Notice of submission

To prepare your thesis submission, you must give at least six weeks’ notice through eProg. A ‘Notice of Submission Form’ must be completed six weeks prior to your intended submission; this is the first stage in the examination process. Please log in to eProg to give notice of submission.

Please read the University policies related to the thesis examination carefully before submitting your thesis.

• Examination of Doctoral Degrees Policy
• eProg Student Guide

Also, we recommend that you prepare for your eThesis submission in advance by:

• Familiarising yourself with the University's  Presentation of Theses policy
• Considering any third-party claims on the Intellectual Property (IP) and  copyright  of your thesis
• Considering and discussing with your supervisor the appropriate access level for your final thesis

Submitting a journal format thesis 

There is no requirement to request permission to submit in journal format. However, it is important that you discuss the relative merits of this format with your supervisory team, and ensure that you pick the right format for you and your project. Further guidance is available in  Journal Format Theses - Guiding Principles for Students and Staff .

Early submission or deadline extension

If there are mitigating circumstances that prevent you from submitting the thesis by the deadline, you must apply for permission to extend the deadline. Please contact your School PGR office for advice.

If you intend to submit your thesis early (three months before your programme end date for a full-time student or six months for part-time students), please contact your School PGR office to apply for special permission to submit early.

All applications for early or late submission need to be formally considered by your school office.

• Change of Circumstance Application Form

You should seek the advice of the Doctoral Academy when the thesis is nearing a standard suitable for submission and when to give notice of submission in eProg. You should also seek your supervisor’s opinion on your proposed submission date, though please note that whilst this is advised, you may decide when to submit and if to follow the advice of your supervisor(s). Equally, the agreement of the supervisor(s) to the submission of a thesis does not guarantee the award of the degree.

Submission  

The University of Manchester requires the mandatory submission of electronic theses for all PhD, Professional Doctorate and MPhil degrees through the University eThesis system. The Doctoral Academy has responsibility for the handling and processing of PhD theses. For further information on how to submit your thesis electronically please visit: 

You will need to upload to eThesis – Go to ' My Manchester ' and log in using your usual University username and password. We recommend using Firefox or Chrome for submissions. Please also ensure that you ‘pop up block’ is turned off.

Thesis binding

Bound copies of the thesis are not required. However, if you require your own copy, binding services include:

• U-Print.com
• MuPrint.com
• The Document Centre

Guidance for resubmission 

Resubmission procedures are identical to those for first submission except that you must pay a fee, when you submit your Notice of Resubmission form. You must submit a Notice of Resubmission form in eProg at least six weeks before you wish to resubmit. 

It is important that candidates who are required to resubmit their theses will be made aware of any points which the examiners require to be covered in the resubmission. Candidates are expected to liaise with the supervisor(s) regarding the nature of the revisions required. Should any of the points raised by your examiners be unclear you may ask for clarification from your internal examiner. When conducting the examination for a resubmitted thesis, examiners will pay particular attention to the manner in which the candidate has revised the thesis in response to their original report

Open access

What is open access.

Open Access (OA) means that items of scholarly work are made available online, in a digital format, at no charge to the reader and with limited restrictions on re-use.  The University Publications Policy which applies to all research staff and students sets out to ensure that output arising from publically funded research is widely disseminated and made freely accessible. The Policy is based on the Open Access requirements of various research funders:  the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), the UK Research Councils (UKRI) and the Wellcome Trust. 

• The University of Manchester Publications Policy

For you, making your research Open Access can support the development of a researcher profile by increasing visibility of your research and allows you to gain experience of OA without compromising future publication strategies (many publishers do not consider a thesis to be a prior publication).

Postgraduate research thesis

The University's Presentation of Theses policy requires that all final postgraduate research theses are made Open Access within 12 months of submission unless an exception to the policy is required. You will select your preferred access level for your final eThesis submission. This is subject to approval by your supervisor. Most students will be able to comply with the policy by selecting either immediate Open Access or Open Access with a 12-month embargo. It may not be possible for some students to comply with the policy, in which case an exception to the policy can be requested. More information on access requirements for your final postgraduate research thesis can be found via the eThesis Support Service webpages:

• eThesis Support Service

Final eThesis submissions are available via the institutional repository, Pure , and discoverable via the University’s Research Explorer and Library Search .

For students funded by UK research councils, their PhD theses must also be made open access through the University’s repository (eThesis). Please see more information in the UKRI Terms and Conditions of Research Council Training Grants.

• UKRI Terms and Conditions of Research Council Training Grants

As a PGR student, what output do I make open access?

If you are publishing research outputs during your time at Manchester, you need to make them Open Access. There are two ways of doing this and the best option for you will depend on your funding situation and output type.

You may wish to publish your work Gold OA, where it’s immediately available on publication via the publisher’s website and with limited restrictions on reuse. This method is required by certain funders. Some publishers levy an Article Processing Charge (APC) for Gold OA, so it is worth investigating your funding options.

Alternatively, most authors will be able to make their work Open Access via a repository, a method known as Green Open Access. The Library can advise you on depositing the appropriate version of your work, and setting any embargo required by the publisher. There is no additional cost associated with Green Open Access.

Further information regarding different types of Open Access, institutional and funder requirements, how to deposit your publication and funding for APCs can be found here:

• Open Access

Appointment of examiners

Examiners are appointed by the candidate’s School and approved by the Chair of the School PGR Committee. Two examiners (normally one internal and one external) will be appointed, their function being to make a recommendation to the Committee about the award of a research degree. Your supervisor(s) must not serve as the internal examiner.

Consultation in the appointment of nominated examiners

You should be consulted when deciding upon appropriate examiners. Although you do not necessarily have the right to veto any particular nomination, you can appeal against an examiner nomination. If you are unhappy with the choice of examiners you should put your objections in writing to the Doctoral Academy .

Substantial grounds for objecting to a particular examiner might be:

• That the candidate has had too close a connection with either examiner, on either a personal or professional basis.
• That there is felt to be too close a relationship between the examiners themselves (e.g. they are partners/relatives or they are directors of the same company).
• That there is evidence of dispute between an examiner and the candidate.

Oral examination

All candidates for the degree of PhD and MPhil will be required to attend an oral examination. (There are circumstances, however, where the internal and external examiners may agree to dispense with the oral examination for an MPhil thesis.) The oral must take place without undue delay, normally within 12 weeks. The external examiner should liaise with the internal examiner on the timing of the examination of the thesis. The internal examiner may also consult the candidate’s supervisor(s) and the candidate about the oral examination arrangements.

Through the oral, the examiners satisfy themselves that the thesis is the candidate’s own work, and clarify any ambiguities in the thesis. It also allows the candidate to relate the thesis to a broader field of study, and to demonstrate a knowledge and appreciation of adjoining fields which is up to the standard expected for the award of the degree.

Oral examinations must be held on University premises and will be attended by all the examiners. It is the internal examiner’s responsibility to book a room and to notify the PGR Office in eProg, at least ten days in advance, of the date, time and room for the oral. Oral exams are automatically open to University staff, PGR students and the supervisors, but the candidate has the right to exclude any individual.

Useful links in preparation for your viva

• Postgraduate Online Research Training - Preparing for your viva video
• Good Viva video
• Viva Survivor video
• Vitae - Your viva

Submission and confidentiality of examination reports

Examiners are asked to ensure that there is no unnecessary delay between the examination of a thesis and their submission of a report. Completed examiners' reports (pre-oral and joint Examiners Report Form) must be submitted to eProg within five working days of the oral examination and will be made available to you via eProg once the recommendation has been ratified.

Examination policies

• Examination of Doctoral Degrees Policy  - full details of the regulations for examination of a PhD thesis
• Examination of MPhil Degrees Policy  - full details of the regulations for examination of an MPhil thesis
• Resubmission and Re-examination of Postgraduate Research Degrees Policy  - full details of the regulations for the examination of a resubmitted PhD or MPhil thesis
• Nomination of Examiners and Independent Chairs for PGR Degree Examinations Policy  - the regulations governing the nomination of examiners for thesis.

Criteria for the award of the degree 

A successful PhD thesis must show evidence of originality and independent critical judgment and constitute an addition to knowledge (such as can reasonably be achieved within the period of registration). Original research is not a basic requirement for the degree of MPhil in the way that it is for the PhD, although naturally it is not ruled out, but the candidate must demonstrate full knowledge of existing scholarship in the field specified by the thesis title, show competence in the relevant methods of research, and present material with clarity and evidence of independent judgment. 

Details of the possible outcomes of your viva examination can be found in relevant Examination Policies .

The Doctoral Academy will write to you with the outcome of your viva examination, along with the required next steps.

When you have been recommended for award of the degree, you will be asked to submit a final version of your thesis through electronic theses submission. 

When you have submitted your final thesis into the eThesis window and it has been checked against the Presentation of Theses Policy, your student record will be completed and marked for graduation.

Appeals procedure

In accordance with the University’s Regulations XIX governing academic appeals, if you believe your case has not been dealt with properly or that the outcome is unreasonable, you may appeal against this decision by writing to the University Student Appeals and Complaints Coordinator .   

Examiners will be made aware, that, under the University’s Regulations Governing Academic Appeals at Postgraduate Research Level, in the event of an appeal, and notwithstanding their confidential nature, the examiners’ reports would be made available later to the Graduate Appeals Committee. 

Before initiating an appeal, you are strongly advised to discuss the matter with your supervisor(s), or the School PGR Director or any other appropriate person in the School. If the matter remains unresolved, you may invoke the formal appeal procedure. 

• A basic guide to academic appeals

Important note: access to your IT account following degree completion

You have access to IT facilities including email, eProg and personal storage space during the prescribed period of your programme, the submission pending period and the time leading up to and including your thesis examination. Access to these facilities is terminated on the date of graduation. We, therefore, advise you to ensure all data and files you wish to retain beyond the date of your graduation are safely transferred ahead of that date to prevent loss of work.

• Docs »
• Thesis, Viva, and Corrections
• View page source

Thesis, Viva, and Corrections ¶

All PGRs must produce a thesis, which describes in full detail the wider context of the research field including a literature review, the motivation for the research, the research which was carried out, an evaluation of the results, and a discussion of the contribution made to the field by the research and what should be done in the future. This needs to be submitted by three days before the end of the fourth year. For the relevant University policies, see ‘Policies’ Chapter.

There are two formats in which the thesis can be produced: traditional format and alternative format. Traditional format is probably what most people imagine a thesis is like, a very substantial report presented as a self-contained exposition. The alternative format thesis “… allows a postgraduate doctoral or MPhil student to incorporate sections that are in a format suitable for submission for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.” Presentation of Thesis Policy 2 . The alternative format thesis is often thought of as a collection of publications, with a short commentary associated with each one, tying the works into a unifying thread, or “thesis”.

Which you use is a decision you will need to make with your supervisor .

The advantages of the alternative format thesis are that if you already have several papers, you can more easily produce a thesis out of them. Also, if you have plans to write several papers, you can write your thesis in such a way that it will be easier to facilitate these plans, because writing the thesis will be build around writing papers. The papers can be submitted after the thesis.

The disadvantage of the alternative format is that it is less widely used in the UK, so many supervisors and examiners may be less comfortable with it.

A Q&A on the Alternative Format Thesis 1 can be found here . Note that it says in Section 4,

“…it may not be until year 2 or 3 that you feel you are in a position to use the alternative format.”

but it says in Section 5 that a request must be made in writing by the end of year 2. Thus, if you are considering using alternative format, apply for it by the end of year 2 . You can revert to traditional format without asking permission formally.

Plagiarism ¶

All PGRs should make sure they are familiar with what the university expects from its PGRs. All PGRs are also required to complete a plagiarism course.

In view of the serious consequences of plagiarism and academic malpractice, it is essential that all PGRs familiarise themselves with the accepted format for referencing work in their discipline, and that they start using the accepted form as soon as possible.

Ignorance of the proper format, or ignorance of the definitions of plagiarism and academic malpractice used by the university, is not a valid defence against a possible claim of plagiarism or other instance of academic malpractice.

Writing Advice ¶

Whichever format you choose, you must give yourself sufficient time to produce the thesis. You must know yourself, and how quickly you are able to write. Six months is a minimum time for most people. Some may need nine.

Be sure to leave enough time in your planning to write the thesis. Most people take between 6 and 8 months, depending on how quickly they write and how much of the writing already exists in papers and reports. Your supervisor can give you advice on how to write the thesis. It’s a good idea to use the LaTeXstyle 3 file for University of Manchester Thesis format.

Do not feel that you need to write it in order; start with the easiest parts first. Usually the technical sections on the research done by you are the easiest, because you know them well. The literature review may be next easiest. The introduction is usually the hardest to write, and many advise that it be written last.

The University COVID 19 Statement below can be included.

COVID Statement ¶

Acknowledging the impact of COVID-19 on postgraduate research programmes: guidance for PGRs, Supervisors and Examiners on inclusion of a COVID-19 impact statement with theses submitted by PGRs at the University of Manchester.

The University of Manchester recognises that the COVID-19 pandemic, and consequent closure of our campus (18 th March 2020) and national and international lockdowns, has directly or indirectly impacted the work of many of our postgraduate researchers (PGRs). Although the campus began re-opening from mid-June 2020, some researchers will be disrupted until all campus research facilities are open, and operational at adequate capacity, fieldwork can resume safely and/or personal circumstances become more manageable.

Many of our PGRs have been/will be able to accommodate the disruption to their research plans by changing the scope, phasing or design or their project; others have/will have circumstances that necessitate an extension to programme or to the thesis submission date.

We encourage PGRs who wish to make their Examiners aware of the impact COVID-19 has had on their research plans and thesis to prepare an Impact Statement for consideration during the examination process.

The University recommends that Examiners take the Impact Statement into account when assessing the thesis, and PGR at viva, albeit without compromising standards as set out in the University’s ordinances and the QAA’s expectations of doctoral outcomes , which emphasise that doctoral degrees should be awarded based on the quality, rather than quantity, of research undertaken and the candidate’s acquisition of intellectual and practical competencies.

Examiners should use their academic judgment when deciding whether, as set out in the Examinations of Doctoral Degrees Policy , the following criteria have been met:

the candidate possesses an appropriate knowledge of the particular field of learning within which the subject of the thesis falls; the research which is reported in the thesis contributes a substantial addition to knowledge; the results of the research show evidence of originality and independent critical judgement; the thesis is presented in a lucid and scholarly manner; the thesis and the work reported in it are the candidate’s own;

whilst bearing in mind that they should judge the ‘ substantial addition to knowledge ’ in relation to what can be reasonably expected within a period of study (3, 3.5 or 4yrs FT) that has been conducted in the context of disruption caused by COVID-19.The Impact Statement should include the following information:

Details on how disruption caused by COVID-19 has impacted the research (for example, an inability to collect/analyse data as a result of travel restrictions/restricted access to labs/additional caring and health responsibilities - 500 words maximum); A description of how the planned work would have fitted within the thesis’ narrative (e.g. through method development, development of analytical skills or advancement of hypotheses - 500 words maximum); A summary of any decisions / actions taken to mitigate for any work or data collection/analyses that were prevented by COVID-19 (500 words maximum).

PGRs are encouraged to discuss the statement with their supervisory team before submitting the statement within the thesis presented for examination and should refer to section 6.3 in the Presentation of Theses Policy for details.

Thesis Writing Advice ¶

Sage advice from Prof Bill Buchanan OBE, PhD, FBCS - Professor at Edinburgh Napier University:

Say up-front what the problem is, what other people have done, and how you have added to it. The Introduction chapter is the most important chapter of all, and you need to grab the reader, and tell them what the problem is, and how you have solved it. If the examiner understands the thesis after the Introduction, you are half way there. I’ve read a few thesis’ where I had no idea what the point was until I actually got to the end, and the contribution was revealed on the last page. This is a major gamble, as some readers may give up before that point, and not know the end contribution. Be fair on the reader and tell them the contribution, and keep telling them. Get rid of those typos! You wouldn’t believe the number of PhD thesis’ I have read that have a typo in the very first line of the thesis. A reader becomes annoyed if they have to keep correcting typos, and the more annoyed the reader, the more time they are taking away from actually reading the content. Try and start off on a good footing, so that the Abstract and Introduction chapter have been read over several times - typically talking them out loud. If possible get someone else to read the Introduction, and see if they understand what the point of work is. Bad grammar shows bad practice and a weak supervision. Part of doing a PhD is learning how to write and present ideas, and how to review and edit. One of the most important things that you learn in a PhD is how to write, so that others can understand your ideas. A good part of this is for supervisors to get involved reading the work, and in giving detailed feedback. It is often a good idea for supervisors to mark up early drafts with red pen, so that PGRs get an idea on the amount of checking and editing that is often required. Superlatives are not very good! A PhD is a scientific study, and the usage of superlatives should be avoided, along with weak words like “big” … “the measure gives a very big number”. If a number is large, define what large actually means, as everything is relative. Significance matters. I’ve read thesis’ that draw a graph, and then gives me values of 10 decimal places, and then to be told that there is an importance of one thing to another. But is it significant? If I move from 100.01254632 to 100.1263241, is that a massive change and why do we need so many decimal places? Every measurement has an accuracy, and this should always be included in the presentation of the values. Examiners want to know the significance of something, and if it isn’t significant, then just tell them. One table tells much more than a whole lot of numbers. Again I’ve read so many thesis’, where the writer continually presents a whole series of numbers and graphs, and where they could all be moved into an appendix, and compiled into a single table (or graph). A good supervisor should be able to spot how to collapse lots series of tables into a single one, as they often have to do it for papers. Many PGRs rely on drawing graphics for presenting trends whereas tables are often better, especially in defining changes within the figures presented. A great tip is to normalise values, and show how the values vary between each other. Relative values are often easier to understand than absolute ones - remember too that most values have units, and that units matter. I’ve quizzed many PGRs on whether they are talking about Mbps or MBps - there’s a difference of eight in there! Draw some pictures. There is no place for trivial graphics and clip art in a PhD thesis, but there is a place for the abstraction of complex ideas, especially in the introduction. There no real need to just copy the graphics from others, as they should come from the ideas inspired by the writer. I’ve read quite a few thesis, where the text just goes on and on. Break the text up every now and then, and give the reader something to ponder over. Break up and but keep a narrative. There’s a careful balance here. If you keep your sections short, it becomes to “bitty”, and if you make them too long, they become long and unwieldy. I personally read whole sections in a single sitting, and try and take in the ideas, and I won’t move on until I understand it. A long section, especially where there are no sub-sections, often introduces too many concepts which can make it difficult to read. I normally recommend a maximum of a page and a half of text before there should be a break (such as a sub-section break). Long paragraphs are not a good thing as it becomes difficult to take in all the concepts introduced. Try, if possible, not to make them too short, but not too long. A paragraph that goes on for half a page is probably too long, and one that has only two sentences is probably too short. Along try and avoid too many sub-sub sections, as it becomes difficult for the reader to put it all into context. Avoid using the words of others too much. A thesis is written by the writer, and it is their words. A long series of indented text items of quoted material becomes fairly generic, where you get little of the sense of the thoughts of the writer. If you must reference others, pull it out, and indent. Be precise. A PhD thesis should be a scientific document which abides to certain standards for the articulation of ideas. It is always sloppy to see a candidate writing 9*6^3, where the “*” is a sloppy way of writing a multiply symbol (x) and ^ should be “to the power off”. If it’s an equation, it should be pulled out of the text, and a proper equation editor should be used, with a proper numbering system for the equation. Every diagram and table should be referenced in the text. I have read many thesis’ (typically drafts) where the writer just assumes that the reader knows how a diagram or table should integrate with the narrative. Every figure and table should thus be referenced in the text, so that the reader knows when to look at it. If possible don’t break up your narrative with a diagram, and move it a little later on, as long as it is after then text which is referring to it. Don’t ever put a diagram in the text before it is actually referred to, as the reader is left confused as to why the diagram is there. Be critical of yourself and others. One of the key things within a PhD is the ability to critically appraise the work of others, both for the strengths and weaknesses of their work, and also of the candidate’s work. I often circle the first signs of critical thought in a thesis. If it happens on Page 50, there’s a problem in not being able to critically appraise work. Along with this some candidates can think that everything is perfect with their work, and that it addresses every single problem in their field. Try to always define both the strengths and weaknesses your own work, and identify how these could be improved. The scope of the impact should never be overestimated, but also not underestimated. If you’ve developed something that completely changed something, be up-front and tell the reader. Most of the times, be honest to say that you are just enhancing something a little bit. A thesis is not a diary! I have read so many thesis’ which are basically just a chronological flow of their research. You can often spot this as the literature review runs out of references which are up-to-date. I have read several thesis’ where the latest reference in the literature review is two years ago, and it points to the fact that it has not been updated since it was initially written. A literature review should be written for the thesis, and many parts of the original literature can be dumped, and replaced with newer references which fit in with the contribution. Focus the literature review on the contribution. One literature review of PhD thesis I read was almost 200 pages long, and my head was spinning at the end of it. It covered so many points, and few of them actually went anywhere in the following chapters. Try and focus the literature review on covering the 4 or 5 key concepts involved in the thesis, and not in the research project. A good supervisor can often spot redundant sections, and advise for them to be cut. If the thesis is still the same by taking something out, there’s no need for it to be there, as every paragraph and every word should count, and be carefully crafted as part of the whole story. Make sure the aim is “of the thesis, and not “of the initial research project”. Many thesis’ start with “The aim of this research project is …” which often is a sign that the original project aim has not changed in the writing of the thesis. Overall the aim is the aim of the thesis, as the research project has finished. Every should be written from a point-of-view that the work has finished, and this is the write-up. Get the flow right. A strong flow of literature, method, build and evaluation helps the flow of the thesis, and where you often see references to literature tailing off as the thesis develops. I’ve seen some thesis’ where there are whole chapters that lack any form of reference to other work. This is poor practice as a PhD thesis should show how every aspect of the work fits in with the work of others. I like to see a reference to other work in the introduction of a chapter, as it shows some key influences for the work. I personally don’t like an introduction that says “Section 1 says this, and Section 2 says that, and Section 3 says something else”, as I can see from the table of contents what the contents are. If possible the reader should tell the reader what is likely to be revealed and what the significance is. A reinforcement of the main drive of the work also helps to bring the focus onto the main contribution of the work. If you don’t know it … don’t say it! This one seems so obvious, but you won’t believe the number of times that you ask in a Viva about the detail of a paper, and the method used, and for the answer to be that they don’t actually know what it does. You always increase your exposure to probing if you include things you don’t quite understand, so dump them (if they are not a core topic). Explain it simply. There’s nothing nicer for an examiner when the candidate takes a complex idea and gives their own viewpoint on it, in a simple way, using new material. It shows that they can articulate complex ideas in a simple way. The standard test for any thesis is that a 14-year old child should, at least, be able to read it, and understand some of the key concepts in it. Show that you love the subject and that it is relevant. Three years is a long time, but the sustainment of interest is a key part of the work, so try and show that this is an important topic and that your thesis is exactly what is required, and in the impact that it could have. Again the Introduction chapter is a great place to grab the reader, and show how important the work is. If possible try and find something that has just happened in the news in the introduction that shows how important your work is. The Introduction chapter, at least, should be readable by all, and where, at the end of it, most readers would want to read on, as it sounds so interesting. Make your thesis a sandwich. With a good thesis, we open with the Introduction and close on the Conclusions. The bit in-between justifies what you have opened with and the conclusions should show what you have uncovered to justify your argument. The same goes for each chapter, where the introduction (half a page, typically) shows what you’re going to tell them, and the conclusion confirms it. Do not make conclusion into a summary, as the reader has no time to read summaries, and just wants you to conclude the most important things that go forward (and so they can dump all the other things that you covered). If possible say why you are not taking some things forward in the conclusions (and justify using the work of others, if possible). Don’t just pick without reviewing and justifying. There is no justification in a thesis for picking something just because it is easy to get. If possible all the things that are selected have at least been reviewed, and a sensible solution is selected (and justified). Try always to select a few competing methods and tools and put them against each other. Validate before Evaluate. You won’t believe the number of Vivas that I’ve done where I’ve asked if they validated their system or software before they went onto evaluating it. So “How do you it takes 5 milliseconds to get from here to there?, the wrong answer is “… because the package said it was 5 milliseconds”. Good experimenters will do “fag packet” calculations, to estimate things and know the limits of what they expect. I always like to see validation tests within the test data, so that the researcher knows that their system is working correctly. There’s nothing work in finding there is a bug in your results, after you have published them … so always have a sanity check. Get that scientific method. There are so many occasions in a thesis where you have no idea what a graph is telling you, as the axis’ are not numbered properly, or where they are poorly scaled. If the variation is between 990 and 1000, don’t draw a graph which goes from 0 to 1000. Work out what the graph is trying to say, and pick the graph type (eg pie chart to show significant of one method against another) to show this. Must be based on a method and be repeatable. There must be a method in the processes used, and designed in a scientific way. Along with this the thesis should outline the procedure in a repeatable way, so that someone else can perform the same evaluation and get the same results. So candidates should always say to themselves… “Is there enough information for someone to build the artefact?”, “Is there enough information to repeat the experiment?”, and “Do I have the data that the examiner can look at, in order to verify the evaluation?” Evaluate your method against others. The standard method to show a contribution is to take your method and evaluate it against other competing methods. The best approach is to use the best competing method and show an improvement. This can sometimes be difficult, so, at least, there is an evaluation against other methods. Showing an improvement is obviously a good thing, but there is often nothing wrong with an evaluation which shows a negative impact, especially if it is backed-up with a strong critical appraisal. Be fair and honest with your experiments. Often an experimental procedure is selected to benefit your own method. If possible be fair on all the methods and do not bias your approach to your one. It does no harm to show weaknesses and downsides to your own contribution, as it gives you a chance to critically appraise and show how future work could improve things. Your experimental procedure and the associated data collection should be repeatable and verifiable, so don’t delete that data you have gathered. If possible, know your examination team. While the thesis should stand-alone you should also know your examination team before the Viva, so avoid patronising them with background theory which they know inside-out, or provide some background which might help the examiners to understand the area. Often an examiner, as part of the Viva, will give advice on moving things between the core material and appendices, in order to address the target audience for the thesis. Show that you are now an expert in your area. People expect those with a PhD to be an expert in the area of study, so make sure you know your core principles in the subject area. If you are doing a cryptography PhD read around the subject, and know the core principles of the most important methods. For me, anyone doing a PhD in electrical engineering, for example, should know Ohms Law, and the same should go for other subjects. Use appendices. Many PhD thesis’ are full of material that is irrelevant to many of the key arguments, and writers are often too sensitive about removing material. If you can, put unrelated material in an appendix, and just refer to it. As a measure, if any material doesn’t help your core arguments, then remove it, as you are wasting the reader’s time. Quality is better than quantity. Some of the best thesis’ I read have been relatively short and sharp, but where the quality is high. A good eye for moving material in appendices is important and helps the examiner. For some reason, candidates like to produce a thick thesis, and they think that the more pages there, the better the material. This is often the opposite, and a thesis written with self-contained papers for chapters - which link together - are often the best in their presentation. Define published work. A key part of PhD study is the dissemination of the work, especially with peer reviewed. The examiner often needs to know what has been published. Watch those unreliable references. In a PhD thesis, the references should be credible and verifiable references, and references to industry-focused white papers or general Web pages cannot be trusted providing credible viewpoints. Look for small-scale to large-scale experiments. A good researcher will often start small scale and prove the principle, and then look for a large-scale experiment. The sign of small experiments, along with a large-scale experiment which properly evaluates the methods presented, is a good sign of a strong research ethos. Few abstracts are actually any good in first draft. For some reason most PGRs struggle to write an abstract, and often it is written more as an introduction rather than a distilled version of the thesis. Remember that the abstract is the first thing that the reader reads, so if it is not focused on presenting the whole of the thesis, you have missed an opportunity to get the reader on your side. If possible an abstract should be a page in length, and outline the problem, the contribution, the most significant methods, the thing that has been designed/modelled, what has been evaluated, and what the most significant result is. Conclusions should conclude the whole thesis. Often the thesis just verifies aims and shows the significance of the results, but it should also recap the key parts of the literature and the other chapters. Mind those commas. Commas seem to be a dying breed, but are there to help speak directly to the reader. Try and read out loud, and if there’s a slight pause, add a comma. End on a high! Don’t spoil your thesis, by adding another chapter after the main contribution. Leave the reader on a high, and get them into the Conclusions, and leave the stage. I’ve read a few thesis’ where the last chapter is a real let-down, and contributes very little to the overall focus of the work. If you want, put your lovely new models in an appendix, and refer them in the main chapters, but try and finish the main chapters with the answer to the question posed at the start. The last dot of the last main chapter cements the argument, so don’t run on into something else that you just happens to be which you are currently looking at, as just feel your thesis isn’t thick enough yet! Sign post your work. Remember the thicker the thesis, the longer it takes to read, and if it doesn’t get to the point, the more annoyed the reader becomes in actually showing how you have addressed the problem and your main contribution. The more focused the thesis, the shorter time it will take to understand it, and the happier the examiner will be when they are reading it. Add pointers to “wake up” the reader and tell them that they really should read this bit … as I’m telling you something important. Guide but stay on the academic track. Guide them through difficult areas, and allow them to learn from your love of the topic and your new insights, but stick to well-defined academic principles for writing a thesis … such as not adding your own opinions in literature review parts. Leave your thoughts for the conclusion section with a chapter. Try not to hint that you’ve solved every problem in the area, and rely on showing your contribution on the back of others, including within the main conclusions. Be humble. Show that you are humble in your writing and respect (and know) the most important people in your area (including your external examiner), and that you want to be an active part of your community, and help them. The PhD is not an end-stop, but shows how you will work in the future … either in academia or industry. So just because you are off to a job in industry, doesn’t mean that your research career ends at the graduation … you have standards and methods to set for others to follow.

Submission ¶

You must submit your thesis within three years and six months (allowing for any interruptions or extensions that you may have been granted). When you are ready to submit your thesis you need to complete a Notice of Submission Form not less than six weeks before submission.This form is available in eProg in the Examination Summary section. You will also need to read Regulations for the Presentation of Theses and Dissertations. Giving notice of submission triggers the process of appointing the examiners, who are then expecting the thesis to arrive on time.

If a thesis is not submitted before the end of the programme or submission pending period, you will not be able submit your thesis without exceptional circumstances.

You must submit an electronic copy of your thesis no less than 3 days before your final submission deadline. You must submit two hard copies to the Faculty Graduate Office by the deadline. The electronic and hard copies must be identical.

If you wish to submit a thesis more than 3 months before the end of your programme (or 6 months if part time) you will require a permission of your supervisor and the University. If you are granted permission to submit early then you will still be required to pay full fees for the degree period for which you originally registered.

Using eProg for everything. You first need to submit a notification that you are ready to submit within 6 weeks - a submission ‘window’ will then be opened. You can then submit at anytime within that six weeks. If you do not submit you have failed.

Open access: submit and share your research

‌Once you have submitted your thesis you should consider how you will share your research more widely. Making your outputs OA can provide important  benefits  to you as a researcher, to the research community, and the wider world.

University of Manchester Postgraduate research students are required to share journal articles and peer-reviewed conference proceedings under the institutional  Publications Policy . Making these outputs Open Access (OA) is also required by Research England in order for papers to be eligible for submission to the REF, and many research funders require OA for these outputs too. Use the  Library deposit form in the Open Access Gateway  to submit your papers for deposit to ensure they are made OA as required.

If you wish to ask a general question about Open Access, you can contact the Library’s OA team using the Open Access enquiry form or via email: uml . openaccess @ manchester . ac . uk

The Thesis Defence (Viva) ¶

You will need to defend your thesis in an oral examination which is often called a ‘viva’ (for viva voce). You will typically have two examiners comprising either (i) an internal examiner (a member of academic staff from Manchester who has expertise in your research area) and an external examiner (a member of academic staff from another university or another suitably-qualified and research-active expert), or (ii) two external examiners and an internal independent chair. The internal examiner or independent chair will arrange the date and time of your oral examination. There may also be an independent chair when one of the examiners lacks experience in examining doctorates and in other situations.

In the oral examination you will be examined orally on the content of your thesis and its wider context. After the examination the examiners will make a recommendation to the Faculty PGR Degrees Panel on the outcome of the exam. The examiners may communicate what their recommendation is to you, but it should be clear that this is unofficial and the final decision is made by Faculty.

The outcomes are:

recommend the award and no corrections are necessary.

recommend the award subject to minor corrections being completed.

refer: the thesis is satisfactory in substance but defective in presentation; allow resubmission without the need for a further oral examination.

refer: the thesis is satisfactory in substance but defective in presentation; allow resubmission and require a further oral examination.

refer: the thesis requires further research to be done; allow resubmission and require a further oral examination.

award MPhil on the basis of the thesis presented.

award MPhil on the basis of the thesis presented, subject to minor corrections being completed.

reject, but invite the candidate to revise and resubmit the thesis for the degree of MPhil within six months. A candidate will be permitted to resubmit on only one occasion. A fresh examination of the thesis will be required and may include a further oral examination.

no award be made to the candidate and no resubmission be permitted.

The most common outcome is A(ii). Normally minor corrections required under A(ii) must be completed within 4 weeks of the result being communicated to you by the Faculty PGR Degrees Panel. Likewise with the outcome C(ii) the minor corrections required for award of MPhil must be completed within 4 weeks.

PGRs with outcomes B(i)–B(ii) and C(iii) normally have up to six months to resubmit their thesis (in the latter case for MPhil). PGRs with outcomes B(iii) have one year to resubmit their thesis. A resubmission fee is charged.

Viva Format ¶

Following the relaxation of national COVID restrictions on 19th July 2021 vivas can now be held either entirely in-person, remotely via video link, or a hybrid approach can be adopted whereby one or more members of the examination appear via a video link.

As the PGR this is pretty much your choice - although we suggest you discuss it with your supervisory team and make sure the examiners are happy with the choice before the agree to whichever ‘flavour’ or viva is chosen.

Viva Advice ¶

Further advice from Prof Bill Buchanan OBE, PhD, FBCS - Professor at Edinburgh Napier University:

Be ready to defend, up to a point. You are unlikely to ever win with a debate with the External Examiner, as they typically have the experience to know when they are right. The Examiner does want to see you putting up arguments against theirs, and not bend. A strategy is often to debate the case, and try different routes of explanation, but then to take on their advice for any changes that would be required. Draw it out and keep it simple. Drawing diagrams and abstracting is a great way to explain your ideas, so wherever possible try to draw an abstraction to show a key point. Try not to over complex things, as they examiner is often looking for you to article complex ideas in a simple and understandable way. The simplest things are often the most difficult to explain. Many candidates go into a Viva thinking they will get probed on the complex areas of their work, but end up having to justify an extremely simple concept, that they have taken for granted. An examiner can often spot a weakness in some fundamental areas and probe around that, in order to see how the candidate thinks through a problem. So candidates should also try and be well versed on the fundamentals areas, especially when it involves maths. Know your examiners. Every examiner is different, and they have their own style. Some go from page to page, others read generally around significant parts of the work. They will generally have expertise in certain areas, so try and understand their motivations in their research, and some of their specialities, as they are likely to draw on these for questions. Don’t leave it too long for the Viva. The best time for a Viva is straight after you’ve written your thesis, so try and don’t leave it too long for the Viva, as you will forget a few things. Stay calm and enjoy. It is your opportunity to lock horns with an expert in their field, so enjoy it, as you’ll probably never have the chance to do something like this in your career. Be humble. A PhD is a long road, and you learn along that road. The end result should setup you up for the even longer road ahead, but you now have all the tools to be ready for a career in research. None of us truly knows the formula for a successful PhD, but the methods applied by examiners and supervisors have stood the test of time, and do actually result in something that can contribute to the body of science. Remember that you are standing on the shoulders of giants. A key thing is knowing whose shoulders you are standing on, and help the others who could stand on your shoulders. Enjoy your time! And finally, for a bit of advice, have a look at Ralph Merkle’s time. He invented key exchange while an undergraduate, but his professor rejected his ideas because he didn’t articulate them properly, and Ralph then tried to publish a paper on it, but it was rejected because he had no literature in the paper. So, try and write well … and perfect the art of speaking directly to the reader, and also follow the rules of research that have been laid down over the centuries, and you’re halfway there.

Corrections ¶

Once you have had your viva you will typically get corrections. Once you have completed the corrections, they send a PDF copy of the corrected thesis directly to the internal examiner for approval.

Once the examiner is happy the corrections have been completed, they need to fill out the Corrections Sign Off Form on eProg. Once that’s been completed, we can open a Final Submission Window for you to submit in eThesis. Once received and acknowledged, We can then produce an award letter and complete yout studies on Campus Solutions.

http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/DocuInfo.aspx?DocID=15216

http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/display.aspx?DocID=7420

http://studentnet.cs.manchester.ac.uk/resources/latex/MUThesis/

• language Search for " " in the Library Website Search the library website
• menu_book Search for " " in Library Search Search Library Search
• The University of Manchester Library

eThesis submission: Journal format theses

A Journal format thesis allows you to incorporate sections that are in a format suitable for submission for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. If you wish to submit your thesis in journal format, you should discuss this with your supervisor, and declare your intention when you complete the Notice of Submission form. See also the University's Presentation of Theses policy for more information:

• Presentation of Theses Policy: http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/DocuInfo.aspx?DocID=7420

If you are submitting a Journal format eThesis, you should select this format in step 2 of 5 of the eThesis submission form.

• Screenshots of the eThesis submission system: http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/DocuInfo.aspx?DocID=32873

Preparing and submitting your journal format thesis

‘Self-archiving’ is where a researcher makes a piece of scholarly work available via a repository. The University’s Presentation of Theses policy requires that final Doctoral theses are ‘self-archived’ and made Open Access via the University’s systems within 12 months of submission, unless an exception to this policy is required.

The structure of a journal format thesis – being comprised of a number of research papers submitted to or published in academic journals – means that you as the author need to take extra care when preparing your thesis for submission, and selecting your preferred access level for your final thesis. For each publisher you’re working with, or plan to work with, you will need to establish what each allows and requires in terms of self-archiving of work, i.e.:

• If my publisher allows me to share my work via a repository, what version of my work can I share?
• When can I share my work via a repository?
• When will my papers be published?

This information will allow you to determine:

• The version of each paper to include in your eThesis file
• The access level option to select for your final thesis

Selecting an access level for your final thesis which reflects the strictest self-archiving policy of the publishers you’re working with will ensure that you’re not infringing any of your publishers’ self-archiving policies or breaking your copyright agreements.

Decision tree: Can I share my Journal format thesis Open Access? 

This interactive guide, accessed via Typeform , aims to help you understand the checks you need to make regarding the self-archiving policies of the publishers you’re working with, and to use this information to inform:

• The version of each article you include in your eThesis file
• The access level you select for your final eThesis

We recommend that you identify the strictest publisher policy that you need to deal with, and use this policy when completing this decision tree.

• Typeform - eThesis submission: journal format theses https://scholarlycomms1.typeform.com/to/bZAErZ

Journal format theses: downloadable guide

If you’d like more detailed information on considerations related to submission of your Journal format thesis, you can also download the eThesis submission: journal format thesis guide . This includes information on publisher self-archiving policies, and how these will inform the versions of papers you include in your thesis submission, and the access level you select for your final thesis.

• eThesis submission: journal format thesis guide 

You can also contact the eThesis Support Service  for more information and support.

• Library services
• Researcher services
• Prepare your eThesis
• Access to your final thesis
• Journal format theses
• Submitting your eThesis
• Sharing your thesis research data

Science and Engineering Doctoral Academy

If you are studying for a PhD or MPhil you will have to undertake a viva voce (oral) examination following the submission of your thesis.

This viva will be undertaken by the nominated internal and external examiner. Your supervisor may also be present at the viva if required, but will not be able to participate in the examination.

If your thesis is to be examined under restriction all those present at the viva will be asked to sign a confidentiality agreement.

Full details regarding conduct of the viva are available in the Examination of Doctoral Degrees Policy .

You will receive notification of the viva date, time and venue at least 10 days before the viva is to take place.

The Doctoral Academy asks that examiners complete the reading and examination of a thesis in eight weeks. If you are concerned that you have not heard about the arrangements for your viva then you can contact the exams team  and we will investigate this for you.

Theses: Manchester Theses

• Manchester Theses
• Worldwide theses

Manchester Print Collection

You can find theses submitted by University of Manchester postgraduate research students from the late 19th Century to the present day using the Library Search. Or try the Advanced Search for more options (select 'Theses' from the drop-down list for ‘Material type’).

You can access further information here

Manchester electronic theses

Electronic copies of all Open Access Manchester Postgraduate Research theses (from 2010 onwards) are available free to view and download using Library Search . The Library Search record for the thesis you wish to view will take you to the University's Research Explorer,  where you will be able to view a PDF version of the thesis.

You can search for eTheses using the following instructions:

• Using the advanced search option in Library Search, enter your search terms;
• Choose ‘theses’ in the ‘material type’ drop-down box;
• Both print and electronic theses will be displayed; if you only want to view eTheses at this stage, you can refine your results by clicking on the show only ‘full text online’ option on the left hand side.

The University’s research outputs, including Open Access eTheses, are available via the institutional repository, Pure and can be accessed via the Research Explorer: https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/

To find out more about Pure, please visit the Pure support website:  https://www.staffnet.manchester.ac.uk/pure/

Older doctoral theses of The University of Manchester are made available electronically from the British Library's  Electronic Theses Online Service (EThOS) , many of which are also available online via Library Search .

EThOS charge a £60 fee to customers for digitising any theses that are not currently available on their database.

Submitting your theses

Postgraduate research students at Manchester are required to submit an electronic version of their examination and final corrected thesis. This applies to students studying towards the qualifications:

• Doctor of: Philosophy (PhD)
• Engineering (EngD)
• Enterprise (EntD)
• Business Administration (DBA)
• Medicine (MD)
• Master of: Philosophy (MPhil)
• Research (MRes, certain Schools only). 

Please see the Library’s eThesis Support pages for more information on the eThesis submission process.

Printing and binding your thesis

The Library no longer provides binding services. Binding services are provided by  Hollingworth & Moss Ltd , for whom we are agents.

The University of Manchester is an introduction agent for Hollingworth and Moss Ltd and has no authority or ability to negotiate or vary the services or terms of the services offered on this website or enter into any contract on behalf of Hollingworth and Moss Ltd. The University receives a commission for any purchases made from Hollingworth and Moss Ltd via this website.

General theses enquiries

Enquiries relating to the Library’s thesis collection should be sent via the Library’s General Enquiries page.

For enquiries relating to eThesis submission, please contact the eThesis Support Service:

eThesis Support Service

University of Manchester Library

Tel: +44 (0)161 275 8728 (internal: x58728)

Email: [email protected]

Web: https://www.manchester.ac.uk/eThesis

• << Previous: Home
• Next: UK Theses >>
• Last Updated: Oct 7, 2022 3:07 PM
• URL: https://subjects.library.manchester.ac.uk/theses

Alternatively, use our A–Z index

How to write a research proposal

If you wish to study for a Manchester PhD, you may need to submit a research proposal with your application. This is crucial in the assessment of your application and it warrants plenty of your time and energy.

Your research proposal should:

• demonstrate evidence of intellectual purpose and originality;
• show that you are capable of communicating your ideas clearly, concisely and coherently;
• define the topic you are interested in and show good awareness of the research context.

Typical proposals range between 1,000 and 1,500 words; however, we advise you to consult with your School for specific guidance on word count.

Structuring your research proposal

Please check with the relevant School for the specific conventions and expectations of your research proposal. The following are general considerations that we deem important:

• Create a clear working title for your research project.
• Introduce your proposal, identifying the subject for research in terms of theoretical issues and relevant empirical applications, and highlighting why you wish to pursue this project.
• Review  the relevant literature and theories relating to your proposed research area, showing that you clearly understand the key arguments that have been developed and the ideas and findings of key researchers working on the topic. This should demonstrate your familiarity with the subject area, and your ability to communicate clearly and concisely.
• Summarise the central aims and questions that will guide your research.
• Outline  the research methods you will use, explaining how you will conduct your research. What form will the resources take? Where are they located? Will there be any problems of access?
• Indicate your project strategy and timetable. What are the main project stages? What would the annual completion expectations be? What are the perceived challenges, and how will these be overcome?
• Explain why your proposed  project is important. How will your research make an original contribution?
• Include a bibliography highlighting the key references that will support your research topic.

Before submitting your research proposal

Contact an academic member of our staff to discuss your research proposal and key objectives before you submit your formal application. This will enable you to fine-tune your proposal and check that we can identify a suitable supervisory team for you.

Find out more about choosing a suitable supervisor .

Refining your proposal

When you submit your research proposal for application purposes, you will not be committing yourself to the precise detail or methodology. Once we accept you onto a PhD programme, you can refine your original proposal following discussions with your supervisory team.

Find Student theses

Filters for student theses.

• 1 - 50 out of 12,301 results
• Award date (ascending)

Search results

Surrogate machine learning model development for the uk nuclear industry.

Supervisor: Brown, G. (Supervisor) & Mu, T. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Phd

Fulfilling the Psychological Needs of Open-Source Software Developers: Challenges and Strategies for Effective Human Resource Management

Supervisor: Mcbride, A. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Doctor of Business Administration

Micromechanics of CFRP Composite Kinking Investigated through X Ray Computed Tomography

Supervisor: Potluri, P. (Supervisor) & Withers, P. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Master of Philosophy

Timing Pulsars with the Thousand Pulsar Array on MeerKAT

Supervisor: Leahy, J. P. (Supervisor) & Keith, M. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Master of Science by Research

Visualizing Quantum Turbulence in Superfluid 4He in the T=0 Limit

Supervisor: Golov, A. (Supervisor) & Walmsley, P. (Supervisor)

Statistical Time Series Prediction with Deep Learning Methodology

Supervisor: Yuan, J. (Supervisor) & Boshnakov, G. (Supervisor)

The pathophysiology of vaginally inserted polypropylene midurethral mesh tape complications, based on the microbiome and biofilms

Supervisor: Mcbain, A. (Supervisor) & Reid, F. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Doctor of Medicine

Organisational Support for ICT4D Practitioner Performance: A New Pathway for Enhancing ICT4D Project Outcomes

Supervisor: Cunningham, N. (Supervisor), Heeks, R. (Supervisor) & Renken, J. (Supervisor)

Renovascular Disease: improving outcomes in atherosclerotic disease and new initiatives in fibromuscular dysplasia.

Supervisor: Kalra, P. (Supervisor) & Chrysochou, C. (Supervisor)

Dancing the Spiritual Self in Ecstatic Dance

Supervisor: Cox, R. (Supervisor) & Bithell, C. (Supervisor)

Between revelation and concealment: Crafting Gulag truths in Tbilisi, Georgia

Supervisor: Jansen, S. (Supervisor)

TEXTUAL MENTAL ILLNESS DETECTION FROM SOCIAL MEDIA USING DEEP LEARNING

Supervisor: Ananiadou, S. (Supervisor) & Tsujii, J. (Supervisor)

Commissioning and Data-Handling for the L-BASS Instrument

Supervisor: Leahy, J. P. (Supervisor) & Dickinson, C. (Supervisor)

Role of First Amino Acid on the Self-Assembly and Gelation Pathways of Beta-Sheet Forming Octa Peptides

Supervisor: Miller, A. (Supervisor) & Saiani, A. (Supervisor)

Continuous Use of Mobile Payment in China and the USA: Three Sequential Studies with a Mixed-methods Approach

Supervisor: Chen, Y. (Supervisor)

Capacity in glaucoma care: The role of optometry and innovations in service delivery

Supervisor: Dickinson, C. (Supervisor) & Harper, R. (Supervisor)

Estimating driver state from facial features

Supervisor: Cootes, T. (Supervisor) & Galata, A. (Supervisor)

Effect of Hyaluronan on Pancreatic cancer cell hallmark responses: Focus on cell migration

Supervisor: Humphries, M. J. (Supervisor) & Bruce, J. (Supervisor)

The Functional Characterisation of Risk Loci Associated to Musculoskeletal Diseases

Supervisor: Eyre, S. (Supervisor) & Orozco, G. (Supervisor)

Behavioural consequences of maternal stressors in a rat model for schizophrenia

Supervisor: Glazier, J. (Supervisor), Hager, R. (Supervisor) & Neill, J. (Supervisor)

The Everyday Feminist Politics of (in)Security: A Curious Inquiry into Staff-Student Sexual Violence in UK Universities.

Supervisor: Masters, C. (Supervisor) & Mcleod, L. (Supervisor)

Efficient Approximation of Parametric Parabolic Partial Differential Equations

Supervisor: Silvester, D. (Supervisor) & Powell, C. (Supervisor)

Panic and Anxiety in Non-Epileptic Attack Disorder: Diagnostic and Mechanistic Implications

Supervisor: Brown, R. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Doctor of Clinical Psychology

Comorphisms, Duality, and L-infinity Comorphisms

Supervisor: Voronov, T. (Supervisor)

Impact of feed addition on UPR-related gene expression in CHO

Supervisor: Dickson, A. (Supervisor)

Lived experiences of postmenopausal Omani women with osteoporosis: a hermeneutic phenomenological study

Supervisor: O'Neill, T. (Supervisor), Brooks, J. (Supervisor) & Stanmore, E. (Supervisor)

GEOGRAPHICAL DISPARITIES IN ACCESS TO SYSTEMIC ANTI CANCER THERAPIES FOR ADVANCED BREAST CANCER ACROSS GREATER MANCHESTER

Supervisor: Taylor, S. (Supervisor), Howell, S. (Supervisor), Yorke, J. (Supervisor) & Marsden, A. (Supervisor)

Understanding the deformation differences between AZ31 and ZEK100 wrought magnesium alloys through Digital Image Correlation study

Supervisor: Robson, J. (Supervisor) & Quinta da Fonseca, J. (Supervisor)

ADVANCES IN HAEMATOPOIETIC STEM CELL THERAPY INCLUDING CORD BLOOD AND STEM CELL GENE THERAPY

Supervisor: Bigger, B. (Supervisor) & Wynn, R. (Supervisor)

Investigating Language Processing of Social and Indirect Communication During Reading in An Autistic and Non-Autistic Population.

Supervisor: Gowen, E. (Supervisor), Stewart, A. (Supervisor) & Mcbride, J. (Supervisor)

The power of language in mental health settings: A Foucauldian Discourse Analysis of clinician-service user interaction and implications for psychological practice

Supervisor: Shuttleworth, J. (Supervisor) & Burman, E. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Doctor of Counselling Psychology

Designing Tacitly: A Study of Concept Design in the Milieu of Interior and Architecture Design Practices

Supervisor: Szacka, L. (Supervisor) & Lewis, A. (Supervisor)

Promoting tissue repair with natural cell-signalling peptides

Supervisor: Sherratt, M. (Supervisor), Gilmore, A. (Supervisor) & Ozols, M. (Supervisor)

Differential Geometry Inspired Machine Learning Solutions

Supervisor: Zeng, X. (Supervisor) & Mu, T. (Supervisor)

Mixed effects modelling of tumour growth in response to radiation and immunogenic combinations

Supervisor: Mistry, H. (Supervisor), Aarons, L. (Supervisor) & Ogungbenro, K. (Supervisor)

Development of an ex-vivo skin model to investigate the pigmentary changes induced by the topical application of particulate matter

Supervisor: Watson, R. (Supervisor) & Langton, A. (Supervisor)

Models for the electronic properties of twistronic few-layer graphenes

Supervisor: Fal'ko, V. (Supervisor)

Leader-member exchange (LMX) differentiation: Defining, measuring, and empirically testing the perceived degree and bases of LMX variation

Supervisor: Hughes, D. J. (Supervisor) & Martin, R. (Supervisor)

Isotopic Purity Enhancement of In-Plane Thermal Conductivity of Hexagonal Boron Nitride

Supervisor: Novoselov, K. (Supervisor) & Kretinin, A. (Supervisor)

The humanitarian imagination: L. T. Hobhouse and the dialectic of liberal utopia

Supervisor: Jones, H. S. (Supervisor) & Taithe, B. (Supervisor)

Approaching Terrorism on Screen: Contemporary Film and Television in France and Belgium

Supervisor: McGonagle, J. (Supervisor) & Waldron, D. (Supervisor)

Development of a Tool to Predict Dosimetric Consequences of Anatomical Changes During Radiotherapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Supervisor: Handley, J. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Unknown

EXPLORE: Fitting Model Spectra Energy Distributions to Multi-Band Photometric Data

Supervisor: Zijlstra, A. (Supervisor) & Mcdonald, I. (Supervisor)

Programming of cardiac mitochondrial function by developmental hypoxia

Supervisor: Oceandy, D. (Supervisor) & Galli, G. (Supervisor)

The Role of Nuclear Hormone Receptor (NHR) Cofactors in Breast Carcinogenesis

Supervisor: Demonacos, C. (Supervisor) & Latif, A. (Supervisor)

Elucidating the Conformational and Binding Properties of Compact Disordered Proteins

Supervisor: Almond, A. (Supervisor), Waltho, J. (Supervisor) & Cliff, M. (Supervisor)

A study of bioglass air abrasion of Mg alloys for biodegradable bone implants

Supervisor: Thomas, A. (Supervisor) & Chen, X. (Supervisor)

Understanding the Morphology and Properties of 2D Material Reinforced Nanocomposites

Supervisor: Young, R. (Supervisor), Li, Z. (Supervisor) & Burnett, T. (Supervisor)

BETWEEN RELIGION AND EXTRACTIVISM: MISSIONARY THEOPOLITICS IN THE NORTHERN ECUADORIAN AMAZON

Supervisor: Wade, P. (Supervisor) & Harvey, P. (Supervisor)

Health behaviours and childhood obesity among refugee families with young children

Supervisor: Peters, S. (Supervisor), Goldthorpe, J. (Supervisor) & Epton, T. (Supervisor)

• Undergraduate open days
• Order a prospectus
• Subject areas
• Why study at Manchester Met?
• Chat to our current students
• How to apply
• Schools and colleges
• Parents and guardians
• Mature students
• Online learning
• Admissions policies and procedures
• Virtual tour
• Postgraduate open days
• Join us in January 2024
• Find a postgraduate course
• Professional development
• Research study
• Information for employers
• Funding and the levy
• Employer case studies
• Apprenticeship information for students
• Student case studies
• Apprenticeship Research Unit
• How to apply for accommodation
• Living in halls
• Your contract
• Rent a private property
• Course enquiries Ask us a question
• Find your country
• Before you apply
• When you have an offer
• Apply for your visa
• Exchange to Manchester Metropolitan
• Study abroad
• Becoming a partner
• Innovation Work with world-leading academics
• Leadership and growth Get training and support from specialists
• Talent, recruitment and development Connect with our students. Develop your people
• Conferences and events Hire our spaces, technology and facilities
• Championing creative excellence
• Driving economic growth
• Leading sustainability
• Tackling inequalities
• Transforming health
• Case studies
• Research Excellence Framework
• Engaging the public with our research
• Equality, Diversity and Inclusion
• Our commitment to researchers
• Why study a doctoral degree
• Choose Manchester Met
• PhDs and Doctoral Degrees
• Research degree subjects
• Postgraduate research fees
• Scholarships
• Doctoral College
• News and events
• Academic partnerships
• Ethics and Governance
• Responsible metrics
• Internationalisation
• Board of Governors
• Vice-Chancellor
• University Executive Group
• Faculty of Arts and Humanities
• Faculty of Business and Law
• Faculty of Health and Education
• Faculty of Science and Engineering
• Institute for Children's Futures
• Institute of Sport
• Professional Services
• Honorary graduates
• Environment
• Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
• Close Search mmu.ac.uk Search
• Undergraduate
• Postgraduate
• Apprenticeships
• Become a degree apprentice
• Accommodation
• Course enquiries
• International
• Study at Manchester Met
• International partnerships
• Business and employers
• Leadership and growth
• Talent, recruitment and development
• Conferences and events
• Our research
• Research Integrity
• Our strategy
• Economic growth
• Current students
• Research study home
• Masters by Research
• Postgraduate research opportunities
• Professional doctorates
• Doctoral loans
• Doctoral training partnerships
• Doctoral scholarships

Research regulations and guidance

• Doctoral Services
• Academic leadership
• Training and development
• Fund your research degree

Links to help you find key documents explaining how we regulate and govern our research.

This page is a collection of guidance, useful links and resources for research students as well as staff involved in the supervision or examination of research.

Postgraduate research regulations have been updated and are listed below. Please see the guidance and procedure documents section for further information.

Regulations for Professional Doctorate Research Degrees Regulations for Postgraduate Research Degrees - Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Regulations for Postgraduate Research Degrees - PhD by Published Works Regulations for Postgraduate Research Degrees - Master of Philosophy (MPhil) Regulations for Postgraduate Research Degrees - Master’s by Research Regulations for Higher Doctorate Degrees

Guidance and procedure documents

Annual Progress Reviews Guidance

Proofreading Guidance Research Degree Handbook Guidance on Concessions Guidance on Postgraduate Research Supervision Guidance on the Examination of Postgraduate Research Degrees Guidance on Thesis Submission for Postgraduate Research Degrees Postgraduate Research Student Withdrawal Policy Procedure for the Consideration of Exceptional Factors  and Exceptional Factors form RDEF Procedure to Support Postgraduate Research Progress  

If you have any questions about the regulations or guidance documents, please contact [email protected] .

Other useful documents and links

Oral Examination by Video Conference Policy Regulations for the Payment of University Fees Intellectual Property Policy Guidelines on Good Research Practice Procedure for the Investigation of Misconduct in Research

Pregnancy and Maternity Guidelines for Students

Assessment arrangements for disabled students Appeals and complaints Ethics and research governance   PGR Systems List Visiting Research Students Policy Academic Awards Admissions Procedure (to follow)‌ Occasional worker claim form

Previous year postgraduate research regulations and guidance (2019-20)

Guidance on Milestones for Postgraduate Research Degrees  - updated January 2022

Research Degrees Handbook‌ Regulations for Postgraduate Research Degrees‌‌‌ Institutional Code of Practice for Postgraduate Research Degrees Guidelines on the Examination of Postgraduate Research Degrees Code of Practice on Extensions and Suspensions  

Ask us a question about our research regulations and guidance.

Coronavirus (COVID-19): Latest Updates | Visitation Policies Visitation Policies Visitation Policies Visitation Policies Visitation Policies | COVID-19 Testing | Vaccine Information Vaccine Information Vaccine Information

2023/2024 PhD Recipients Thesis Titles

2022-2023 PhD Thesis Titles    2021-2022 PhD Thesis Titles    2020-2021 PhD Thesis Titles   

2018-2019 PhD Thesis Titles    2017-2018 PhD Thesis Titles    2019-2020 PhD Thesis Titles   

2018-2019 PhD Thesis Titles    2017-2018 PhD Thesis Titles    2016-2017 PhD Thesis Titles  

2015-2016 PhD Thesis Titles    2013-2014 PhD Thesis Titles    2012-2013 PhD Thesis Titles   

2011-2012 PhD Thesis Titles  

Candidates for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Solomon abiola, b.s. princeton university, m.s. carnegie mellon university; translational biomedical science.

Thesis: The Rise of Temperature and Fall of Fever: A 21st-Century Translational Science Approach to Infectious Disease Forecast using Machine Learning Transformers, mHealth Application Node and Wearable Device Edge

Advisor: Dr. Benjamin Miller  

Sara Ali, B.S. Rochester Institute Of Technology, M.S. University of Rochester; Biophysics

Thesis: A Bioinformatics Pipeline for Identifying Structurally Conserved ncRNAs: From Prediction to Validation

Advisor: Dr. David Mathews  

Naemah Alkhars, B.S. Kuwait University, M.S. University of Rochester; Translational Biomedical Science

Thesis: Three-dimensional Maternal influence on Children at High Risk of Severe Early Childhood

Advisor: Dr. Jin Xiao  

Katherine Andersh, B.S. University Of Arizona, M.S. University of Rochester; Neuroscience

Thesis: The role of proinflammatory cytokines in glaucomatous neurodegeneration

Advisor: Dr. Richard Libby  

Uday Baliga, B.S. Colorado State University, M.S. University of Rochester; Pathology

Thesis: Gene Delivery:  Multigenic approaches

Advisor: Dr. David Dean  

Sara Blick-Nitko, B.S. Rochester Institute of Technology, M.S. University of Rochester; Pathology

Thesis: Platelet Ido1 in Plasmodium yoelii Uncomplicated Malaria Infection

Advisor: Dr. Craig Morrell  

Zachary Brehm, B.M. SUNY College Potsdam, M.S. SUNY College Potsdam; Statistics

Thesis: Statistical Methods for the Analysis of Complex Tissue Bulk RNA-seq Data

Advisor: Dr. Matthew McCall  

Tina Bui-Bullock, B.S. The University Of Texas At Austin, M.S. University of Rochester; Microbiology and Immunology

Thesis: Elucidating Host Factors That Modulate Staphylococcus aureus Osteomyelitis Severity in Obesity-Related Type 2 Diabetes

Advisor: Dr. Steven Gill  

Kimberly Burgos Villar, B.A. Daemen College, M.S. University of Rochester; Pathology

Thesis: Expression and Function of SPRR1A, a Novel Marker of the Ischemic Cardiac Border Zone

Advisor: Dr. Eric Small  

Wesley Chiang, B.S. University Of California-Irvine, M.S. University of Rochester; Biophysics

Thesis: Nano for Neuro: Developing Hybrid Quantum Dot Nano-Bio Assemblies to Probe Neuroinflammatory Activation

Advisor: Dr. Todd Krauss  

Jessica Ciesla, B.S. SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, M.S. University of Rochester; Biochemistry

Thesis: Mechanisms Through Which Metabolism and the Human Cytomegalovirus UL26 Protein Contribute to Anti-Viral Signaling

Advisor: Dr. Joshua Munger  

Martin Cole, B.E. The Open University, M.S. University of Rochester; Statistics

Thesis: Scratching the Surface: Surface-Based Cortical Registration and Analysis of Connectivity Functions

Advisor: Dr. Xing Qiu  

Luke Duttweiler, B.A. Houghton College, M.A. SUNY Brockport, M.A. University of Rochester; Statistics

Thesis: Spectral Bayesian Network Theory: Graph Theoretic Solutions to Problems in Bayesian Networks

Advisor: Dr. Sally Thurston and Dr. Anthony Almudevar  

Esraa Furati, M.B.B.S. University of Dammam, M.S. University of Rochester; Pharmacology

Thesis: Insights into the Roles of Aging and Chemokine Signaling During Neuromuscular Regeneration

Advisor: Dr. Joe Chakkalakal

Erin Gibbons, B.S. University Of Connecticut, M.S. University of Rochester; Microbiology and Immunology

Thesis: Investigation of mTORC1-mediated genes Neutrophil Elastase and Glycoprotein-NMB  Demonstrates Tumor Promotion and GPNMB as a Serum Biomarker for  Lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM)

Advisor: Dr. Stephen Hammes  

Christie Gilbert Klaczko, B.S. SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry; Translational Biomedical Science

Thesis: Oral Cross-kingdom Bacterial-fungal Interactions in a Cross-sectional Pregnant Population Living in Low Socioeconomic Status in Rochester, New York

Jimin Han, B.S. Duquesne University, M.S. University of Rochester; Pathology

Thesis: Investigating the role of CLN3 in retinal pigment epithelium dysfunction in CLN3-Batten

Advisor: Dr. Ruchira Singh  

Jarreau Harrison, B.S. CUNY Medgar Evers College, M.S. University of Rochester; Pharmacology

Thesis: HSPB8 Attenuates Pathological Tau Accumulation

Advisor: Dr. Gail Johnson  

Alicia Healey, B.S. Simmons College, M.S. University of Rochester; Microbiology and Immunology

Thesis:Aryl hydrocarbon receptor activation modulates monocytic cell responses during respiratory viral infection

Advisor: Dr. B. Paige Lawrence  

Omar Hedaya, B.S. Kuwait University, M.S. University of Rochester; Biochemistry

Thesis: uORF-mediated Translational Regulation of GATA4 in the Heart

Advisor: Dr. Peng Yao  

Emma House, B.S. Wayne State University, M.S. University of Rochester; Pathology

Thesis: Investigating the Role of CD4+ T Cells in Flavorings-Related Lung Disease

Advisor: Dr. Matthew D. McGraw  

Yechu Hua, B.A. Shanghai Jiao Tong University; Health Services Research and Policy

Thesis: Did Greater Price Transparency of Hospital Care Lower Health Care Costs?

Advisor: Dr. Yue Li  

Feng Jiang, B.S. Wuhan University, M.S. University of Rochester; Biochemistry

Thesis: The Molecular Mechanism and Biological Impact of Cis-acting Elements and Trans-acting Factors in mRNA Translation Regulation

Amber Kautz, B.S. Cornell University, M.S. Boston University; Epidemiology

Thesis: Maternal Non-Adherence to the Dietary Fat Recommendations During Pregnancy and Neonatal Adiposity and Infant Weight Gain: The Role of Inflammation

Advisor: Dr. Diana Fernandez  

Gabrielle Kosoy, B.S. SUNY College At Geneseo, M.S. University of Rochester; Biophysics

Thesis: Understanding vaccine antibody response: high throughput measurements of equilibrium affinity constants for influenza, cross-reactivity of SARS antibodies, and asthmatic response

Thomas Lamb Jr., B.S. St Josephs College, M.S. University of Rochester; Toxicology

Thesis: Chemical Characterization and Lung Toxicity of Humectants and Flavored E-cigarettes

Advisor: Dr. Irfan Rahman  

Linh Le, B.S. Truman State University, M.S. Truman State University, M.S. University of Rochester; Neuroscience

Thesis: The effects of microglial adrenergic signaling and microglial renewal on Alzheimer’s disease pathology

Advisor: Dr. Ania Majewska  

Jiatong Liu, B.S. Huazhong University of Science and Technology, M.S. University of Rochester; Pathology

Thesis: The Role of Senescent Cells in Aging Fracture Healing

Advisor: Dr. Lianping Xing  

Daniel Lopez, B.A. University Of California-Los Angeles, M.A. Stanford University. MPH Cuny Hunter College; Epidemiology

Thesis: The Neurobiological Correlates of Problematic Gaming Behaviors in Adolescents

Advisor: Dr. Edwin van Wijngaarden  

Ferralita Madere, B.S. Xavier University Of Louisiana, M.S. University of Rochester; Microbiology

Thesis: Elucidating Complex Transkingdom Interactions in the Female Reproductive Tract Microbiome in Health and Disease

Advisor: Dr. Cynthia Monaco  

Courtney Markman, B.S. Rochester Institute Of Technology, M.S. University of Rochester; Pathology

Thesis: The role(s) of JAG1 during Embryonic Cochlear Development

Advisor: Dr. Amy Kiernan  

Andrew Martin, B.S. North Adams State College, M.S. University of Rochester; Microbiology

Thesis: Mechanism and Consequence of IFN--mediated Loss of Tissue Resident Macrophages on Host Immunity to Toxoplasma gondii

Advisor: Dr. Felix Yarovinsky  

Alyssa Merrill, B.S. Nazareth College Of Rochester, M.S. University of Rochester; Toxicology

Thesis: Pregnancy-dependent Cardiometabolic Effects of Anti-estrogenic Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals

Advisor: Dr.Marissa Sobolewski and Dr. Deborah Cory-Slechta  

Briaunna Minor, B.S. Xavier University Of Louisiana, M.S. University of Rochester; Microbiology

Thesis: Implications for Targeting Tumor Associated Neutrophils to Attenuate Estrogen Mediated Lymphangioleiomyomatosis Progression

Mostafa Mohamed, M.S. Alexandria University, M.D. Alexandria University; Epidemiology

Thesis: Association Between Chemotherapy Dosing, Treatment Tolerability, and Survival Among Older Adults with Advanced Cancer

Advisor: Dr. David Rich  

Adrián Moisés Molina Vargas, B.S. University of Alcala, M.S. University of Rochester; Genetics

Thesis: Developing Design Strategies for Efficient and Specific CRISPR Cas13 RNA-Targeting Applications

Advisor: Dr. Mitchell O'Connell  

Teraisa Mullaney, B.S. Rochester Institute Of Technology, M.S Rochester Institute Of Technology, M.S. University of Rochester; Health Services Research and Policy

Thesis: Understanding the Role of Navigation Capital in Health Services and Social Determinants of Health: A Health Capability Explanation

Advisor: Dr. Peter Veazie  

Daxiang Na, B.S. Peking University, M.S. Peking University, M.S. Brandeis University, M.S. University of Rochester; Genetics

Thesis: An Investigation of the Relationship between Auditory Dysfunctions and Alzheimer’s Disease Using Amyloidosis Mouse Models

Advisor: Dr. Patricia White  

Thomas O'Connor, B.S. SUNY University at Buffalo, M.S. University of Rochester; Genetics

Thesis: Adaptive and Protective Responses of Skeletal Muscle to Endurance Exercise in the Context of Aging, Juvenile Radiotherapy, and Tubular Aggregate Myopathy

Advisor: Dr. Robert Dirksen and Dr. James Palis  

Raven Osborn, B.A. University Of Missouri-Columbia; Translational Biomedical Science

Thesis: Single-cell gene regulatory network analysis reveals cell population-specific responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection in lung epithelial cells

Advisor: Dr. Juilee Thakar and Dr. Stephen Dewhurst  

Emily Przysinda, B.A. Skidmore College, M.S. University of Rochester; Neurobiology and Anatomy

Thesis: Social processing and underlying language deficits in schizophrenia during naturalistic video viewing

Advisor: Dr. Edmund Lalor  

Emily Quarato, B.S. University Of Alabama At Birmingham, M.S. University of Rochester; Program

Thesis: High levels of mesenchymal stromal cell efferocytosis induces senescence and causes bone loss

Advisor: Dr. Laura Calvi  

Zahíra Quiñones Tavárez, B.S. Pontificial Catholic University Mother and Teacher, M.P.H. University of Rochester; Translational Biomedical Science

Thesis: Linking Exposure to Flavors in Electronic Cigarettes and Coughing

Advisor: Dr. Deborah Ossip  

Matthew Raymonda, B.S. University Of North Carolina At Wilmington, M.S. University of Rochester; Biochemistry

Thesis: Identifying Metabolic Vulnerabilities Associated with Viral Infections

Savanah Russ, B.A. SUNY Geneseo, M.P.H Yale University; Epidemiology

Thesis: Association Between Community-Level Socioeconomic Status and Spatiotemporal Variation in COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake

Advisor: Dr. Yu Liu  

Cooper Sailer, B.S. University at Buffalo, M.A. University at Buffalo, M.S. University of Rochester; Pathology

Thesis: Characterization of CAR-T cell phenotypes to augment response against solid tumors

Advisor: Dr. Minsoo Kim  

Jishyra Serrano, B.S. Universidad Adventista De Las Antillas; Translational Biomedical Science

Thesis: Prenatal Maternal Stress and Inflammation: Association to Childhood Temperament

Advisor: Dr. Thomas O'Connor  

Yuhang Shi, B.A. Henan Agricultural University, M.S. University of Rochester; Microbiology

Thesis: Interactions Between Viruses and the Innate Antiviral Factors SERINC5, BST2 and BCA2

Advisor: Dr. Ruth Serra-Moreno  

Anjali Sinha, B.E. PES Institute of Technology, M.S. University at Buffalo, M.S. University of Rochester; Neuroscience

Thesis: Role of mAChR signaling and M-current in EVS mediated responses of mammalian vestibular afferents

Advisor: Dr. J. Chris Holt  

Celia Soto, B.S. SUNY Geneseo, M.S. University of Rochester; Pathology

Thesis: Elevated Lactate in Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) Bone Marrow Microenvironment Dysfunction

Advisor: Dr. Benjamin Frisch  

Michael Sportiello, B.S. University Of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, M.S. University of Rochester; Microbiology

Thesis: Investigating CD8 T cell tissue resident memory phenotype, function, metabolic activity, and differentiation

Advisor: Dr. David Topham  

Kumari Yoshita Srivastava, B.S. National Institute of Science Education And Research, M.S. National Institute of Science Education And Research, M.S. University of Rochester; Biophysics

Thesis: Structure and Function Analysis of Bacterial Riboswitches that Control Translation

Advisor: Dr. Joseph Wedekind  

Kathryn Toffolo, B.S. SUNY College at Buffalo, M.S. University of Rochester; Neuroscience

Thesis: Semantic Language Processing: Insight into Underlying Circuitry and Development using Neurophysiological and Neuroimaging Methods

Advisor: Dr. John J. Foxe  

Megan Ulbrich, B.S. University Of Pittsburgh, M.S. University of Rochester; Microbiology and Immunology

Thesis: The Activity of Vibrio cholerae Effector VopX Targets Host Cell Pathways that Reorganize the Actin Cytoskeleton

Advisor: Dr. Michelle Dziejman  

Erik Vonkaenel, B.S. Slippery Rock University Of Pennsylvania, M.A. University of Rochester; Statistics

Thesis: Methods for Microglia Image Analysis

Amanda Wahl, B.S. Saint John Fisher College, M.S. University of Rochester; Pharmacology

Thesis: Redefining the function of salivary duct cell populations utilizing a structural, functional, and computational approach

Advisor: Dr. David Yule  

Yunna Xie, B.S. Sichuan University, M.S. Universität Heidelberg; Health Services Research & Policy

Thesis: Is Physician Expertise Working as a Barrier to the Implementation of New Clinical Interventions? A Neural Network Approach

Shen Zhou, B.S. Shanghai University, M.S. Brandeis University, M.S. University of Rochester; Genetics

Thesis: The Study of c-Cbl in Clear Cell Sarcoma

Advisor: Dr. Mark Noble

Back to the top