From appraisal to acceptance

In order for the main doctoral procedure, i.e. the examination procedure, to be opened, the reviewers must first be appointed by the doctoral committee in consultation with the dean's office. As a rule, the supervisor is automatically the first reviewer and proposes a second reviewer to the doctoral committee. Possible candidates are:

• Active professors from the Faculty of the University of Kassel.
• Active professors from another Faculty of the University of Kassel.
• Active professors from another university or research institution.
• Postdoctoral scholars who are engaged in full-time research and/or teaching at a university or research institution.
• Scientists with a doctorate who are engaged in full-time research and/or teaching at a university or research institution.
• Retired professors, if they have not been retired for more than three years when the main proceedings are opened.
• Honorary professors.
• Senior professors, if no more than three years have passed since the end of the senior professorship.

The reviewers must be able to comprehensively assess the dissertation in its subject matter on the basis of their scientific competence.

As a rule, the doctoral committee appoints two reviewers. However, if required by the research subject, the PhD Committee may appoint up to two additional reviewers.

An additional reviewer is appointed by the doctoral committee if

• at least two reviews differ in their grades by two or more individual grades, or
• one of the reviews evaluates the dissertation with the grade "failed".

As soon as the Doctoral Committee of the relevant Faculty has appointed the reviewers, they will each receive a copy of the submitted dissertation for review via the Doctoral Office.

As soon as the doctoral office has received the reviews and recommends acceptance, the doctoral office initiates the display of the dissertation in the relevant Faculty.

Within the display period

• members of the Faculty or other Faculties may appeal against the grading of the dissertation. For this purpose, an expert opinion is prepared which must contain a grade.
• The doctoral candidate can comment on the expert opinion in writing. The doctoral candidate decides here whether the statement is to be forwarded exclusively to the reviewers or whether it is to be made available to the public at the university. In the case of a public display at the university, a new display procedure must be initiated.

After the expiration of the display period, the responsible doctoral committee is asked to decide on the acceptance or rejection of the dissertation. Any further expert opinions submitted must be taken into account and are included in the grading. The decision of the doctoral committee will be communicated to the doctoral candidate in writing. Together with the decision, the doctoral candidate will receive a copy of each expert opinion for confidential use.

The expert opinions

• are to be prepared independently of each other;
• propose to the doctoral committee the acceptance or rejection of the dissertation;
• contain an assessment result that is comprehensibly justified;
• are to be written in German or English.

If conditions are imposed on the printing of the dissertation, these must be specified in a supplement to the report. The conditions must be concrete and comprehensible. These may be instructions for corrections, streamlining or minor revisions.

The reviews should be received by the doctoral office no later than ten weeks after delivery of the dissertation to the reviewers.

No. However, doctoral candidates can withdraw the application for the opening of the main proceedings (= submission of the dissertation) once upon request, if no expert opinion has been submitted yet and two weeks have not passed since the opening of the main proceedings.