Academic Regulation C-7

Thesis

The new Regulation C-7 - Thesis will be posted in August 2023, to take effect on September 1, 2023.

Please refer to Academic Regulation II-7 - Theses  if the submission of your thesis was before September 1, 2023.

Please refer to the text below if the submission of your thesis is after September 1, 2023.

C-7.1 Definitions

In these regulations:

  • “jury” designates the examiners assigned to evaluate a thesis.
  • “thesis supervisor(s)” designates the student’s assigned thesis supervisor or co-supervisors.
  • “thesis advisory committee” designates the individuals, including the thesis supervisor, who guide the student from the beginning of their research work to the final submission of their thesis. All members, excluding the thesis supervisor, may be part of the jury.
  • “thesis” designates an original work produced by a student as part of a current program of studies at the University of Ottawa or at Saint Paul University.

C-7.2. General thesis requirements

C-7.2.1 Master’s thesis

A master’s thesis must demonstrate that the student has the ability to produce scholarly work and is familiar with the main scholarly works in the subject area of the thesis.

C-7.2.2 Doctoral thesis

A doctoral thesis must make a significant contribution to the advancement of knowledge in the field of research and demonstrate the independent capabilities of the doctoral candidate. The doctoral thesis must be the result of original and rigorous investigation and analysis. It must also be of publishable quality.

C-7.3 Thesis formats

Before beginning research on the thesis, the student must check with the program and the thesis supervisor to confirm acceptable thesis formats. Each graduate program is responsible for establishing regulations that govern the specific format, the nature of the publications drawn upon, and the content of various parts of the thesis.

The expectations of quality and ethical standards apply to all theses, irrespective of the format. The general thesis requirements identified in point 7.2 must be met. The thesis work must have been generated while the student was enrolled in a program of study at the University of Ottawa or at the Saint Paul University.

If the program requires an official thesis proposal, the student must submit it for approval before commencing their research. It is the responsibility of each program to establish regulations regarding the content of the thesis proposal, and to decide how and when the proposal must be submitted and formally approved.

The thesis must conform to one of the following formats:

  1. Monograph: A proposal or “thesis” accompanied by related research findings, drawing on existing research, which may be supported or refuted.

    The monograph includes:

    1. a preface that specifies any approvals obtained to conduct the research, clearly identifies the student’s contribution, and distinguishes the latter from those of collaborators, co-authors or other researchers, if any;
    2. an abstract;
    3. a general introduction which presents the subject of the thesis and explains relevant aspects of the subject treated;
    4. the main body of the text, which may be divided into sections;
    5. a conclusion;
    6. a bibliography;
    7. all approvals required to conduct the research and/or write the thesis: e.g., ethical approval, copyright approval, etc.

  2. Thesis by articles: One or more articles written by the student for publication in peer-reviewed journals. It is the responsibility of the program of study to determine the minimum number of articles required. All articles comprising the thesis must be written while the student is enrolled in the program for which the thesis is submitted.

    A thesis by articles must include:

    1. a preface that specifies any approvals obtained to conduct the research, clearly identifies the student’s contribution, and distinguishes the latter from those of collaborators, co-authors or other researchers, if any;
    2. an abstract;
    3. a general introduction that outlines the thesis topic and explains how the articles comprising the main body of the text address the topic;
    4. a general discussion and a conclusion (unless otherwise specified in regulations specific to the program) that synthesizes the points addressed in the articles and provides a general summary and overall analysis;
    5. any other content deemed appropriate by the program (e.g., a comprehensive literature review);
    6. a bibliography;
    7. all approvals required to conduct the research and/or write the thesis: e.g., ethical approval, copyright approval, etc.

  3. Non-traditional thesis: It is the responsibility of each program to determine what non-traditional thesis forms are acceptable.

    Non-traditional theses may include:

    • Arts performance(s);
    • Artifacts;
    • Inventions, prototypes, business plans;
    • Resources available to the public (e.g., novels, story, comic or graphic novels, digital tools, film, documentary, performance, etc.)

In addition to such non-traditional components, the thesis must include a written component. Arrangements for submission of the thesis in these forms must be approved before the project is initiated. The student must ensure that the final written component of the thesis is publishable in uOResearch.

C-7.4 Thesis topic and registration

C-7.4.1 Thesis topic

The general topic, including the major themes to be covered and the research topic itself, must be determined in consultation with the student’s thesis supervisor(s) and if applicable, the thesis advisory committee.

C-7.4.2 Thesis topic registration deadlines

Master’s students must submit their thesis topic before the end of the second term of enrolment in the program.

Doctoral students must submit their thesis topic before the end of the third term of enrolment in the program.

C-7.5 Research ethics and academic integrity

C-7.5.1 Before the start of certain research projects related to the thesis, the thesis supervisor(s) must ensure that the student is aware of approvals required (by, e.g., the Research Ethics Boards (REB), the Animal Care Committee, the Office of Risk Management, or the Laboratory Safety Committee), and the process by which such approvals are obtained. The preface of a thesis submitted for evaluation must specify which approvals were obtained, and evidence of such approvals must be included in an appendix. If the necessary approvals have not been obtained, the thesis will not be accepted for evaluation or defence.

C-7.5.2 The student must meet the University’s ethical standards for research while enrolled in the program and when preparing, writing, and defending the thesis. These requirements also apply to any oral presentations of research conducted for the thesis, any results of the research, and any publication stemming from the thesis.

C-7.5.3 The student is responsible for the accuracy of the thesis contents, and must ensure that all sources, including Internet sources, are meticulously identified and cited in accordance with the standards applicable to the student’s discipline.

C-7.5.4 Any contribution by collaborators must be described in detail in the preface to the thesis. The student’s contribution must be clearly distinguished from that of any other contributors.

C-7.5.5 Works subject to copyright, such as published articles, cannot be used in a thesis without permission from the copyright holder(s) and, in the case of published articles, permission from all co-authors and the publisher. The student is responsible for obtaining all necessary copyright permissions.

C-7.5.6 When it is suspected that the thesis does not meet the University’s ethical standards for research, the dean (or delegate) of the faculty offering the program must be notified. The dean (or delegate) and the Office of Research Ethics and Integrity will conduct a preliminary inquiry. If pursuant thereto it is believed that an ethical standard may have been breached, the student and thesis supervisor will be informed of the next steps in accordance with applicable University procedures.

C-7.5.7 Impediment to academic integrity

Any person who discovers what they believe may be an impediment to academic integrity, in a draft or final version of the thesis, must notify the dean (or delegate) of the faculty offering the program, in accordance with the University’s Academic Regulation on Academic Integrity and Academic Fraud. If the dean (or delegate) determines that there are reasonable and probable grounds to believe that the allegation of academic integrity is founded, evaluation of the thesis will be suspended, and the office responsible for organizing the evaluation and thesis defence will notify the student, the thesis supervisor(s), and the examiners.

C-7.5.8 If the allegation is deemed to be unfounded, the evaluation of the thesis will resume with the same jury.

C-7.5.9 If the allegation is deemed to be founded, a sanction will be imposed in accordance with the Academic Regulation on Academic Fraud. The examiners, the thesis supervisor(s) and the student will be notified of the outcome, including the sanction if one is imposed. If the evaluation resumes, the jury will remain the same.

C-7.6 Confidential thesis

C-7.6.1 In exceptional circumstances, the student and the thesis supervisor(s) may request the faculty offering the program to consider the thesis, including its evaluation and defence, as confidential. This request must be submitted before the thesis is submitted for evaluation, and must explain, in writing, why and for how long the thesis and its defence should remain confidential. The dean (or delegate) of the faculty will decide whether or not to grant this request.

C-7.6.2 Examiners of a confidential thesis must sign a confidentiality agreement before evaluation of the thesis may begin. Any information divulged during the thesis evaluation and defence, be it oral, written, graphic, photographic, recorded, prototype, sample or in any other format, shall remain confidential for a period of six months to five years, as determined by the dean (or delegate). The defence of a confidential thesis is closed to the public.

C-7.6.3 When the student’s research is covered by a research contract that includes a confidentiality clause, the student and the thesis supervisor(s) must contact the University of Ottawa Innovation Support Services before beginning the research to ensure that the confidentiality clause complies with University guidelines. In that case, the thesis will remain confidential for a period that conforms to the requirements of the contract and University guidelines.

C-7.6.4 A request for an embargo on access to a confidential thesis must be made after the thesis defence, at the time of an online deposition of the final version of the thesis.

C-7.7 Jury

C-7.7.1 Jury composition

C-7.7.1.1 Master’s thesis jury

A master’s thesis will be evaluated by a jury of at least two, and no more than four, examiners. If a defence takes place, it will be completed before the same jury.

C-7.7.1.2 Doctoral thesis jury

A doctoral thesis will be evaluated by, and defended before, a jury of no less than four and no more than seven examiners, of whom at least one will be an external examiner who meets the requirements specified in this regulation.

C-7.7.1.3 Jury for thesis written by a current or future student-employee

When a student is currently, or is expected to be hired as, a regular, full-time employee (whether as a support staff or faculty member) of the University of Ottawa, Saint Paul University, an academic unit at Carleton University participating in a joint graduate program, or any other affiliated institution, a potential conflict of interest exists. In such cases, the program director must notify the dean (or delegate) of the faculty that offers the program of the student’s employment status.

The dean (or delegate) is responsible for determining whether a conflict of interest exists. If so, the jury shall comprise two external examiners for a master’s thesis, and four external examiners for a doctoral thesis, who meet the criteria specified in this regulation.

C-7.7.2 Selection of examiners and selection criteria

One month before the thesis is submitted for evaluation, the thesis supervisor, in consultation with the student, shall propose examiners to form the thesis jury, and ensure that potential examiners meet all University requirements. Examiners of the thesis are recommended by the program director, after ensuring that the proposed examiners have agreed to evaluate the thesis. The examiners are then appointed by the dean (or delegate) of the student’s faculty.

C-7.7.3 Internal examiners

C-7.7.3.1 In general, all internal examiners must be authorized to supervise theses at the University of Ottawa. However, a program director may propose an internal examiner who is not authorized to supervise a thesis. The examiner’s qualifications must be equivalent to those required of thesis supervisors. The proposed examiner must agree to provide a written evaluation report, if applicable, and attend the oral defence, if applicable.

C-7.7.3.2 In the case of joint programs with Carleton University, the internal members of the jury may include faculty members of Carleton University. For master’s theses in these programs, including an internal examiner from Carleton University is optional but preferred. For all doctoral theses in such programs, the jury must include a minimum of one internal examiner from Carleton University.

C-7.7.4 External examiners

C-7.7.4.1 External examiners must be from outside the University; more specifically, they may not be regular or adjunct professors from the University of Ottawa, Saint Paul University, joint Ottawa-Carleton institutes, or other affiliated institutions. In general, an external examiner may not fulfill this role more than once a year for the entire University.

C-7.7.4.2 The program director must take the necessary measures to avoid recommending an external examiner whose relationship with the student or with the thesis supervisor(s) could be seen as jeopardizing the impartiality of the thesis evaluation. Proposed external examiners must be at arm’s length from the student and the thesis supervisor(s), and be able to examine the thesis independently, without any conflict of interest or reasonable apprehension of bias.

For example, a conflict of interest exists if the reviewer:

  • has a personal or family link with the student or the student’s thesis supervisor;
  • has a professional work-related link with the student or the student’s thesis supervisor;
  • is affiliated with an organization or university that has a formal relationship with the student or the student’s thesis supervisor;
  • has previously supervised the thesis or research of the supervisor, or is a former graduate student of the thesis supervisor;
  • is, or was within the past six years, a member of the same university, organization, department, or research unit as the thesis supervisor or student;
  • has served as an external examiner in a thesis defence by another student from the same thesis supervisor in the past two years;
  • has collaborated on a research grant or co-authored a publication with the student;
  • has collaborated on a research grant or co-authored a publication with the thesis supervisor(s) within the past six years;
  • is an industry or government representative who has participated directly in collaborative activities with the thesis supervisor(s) or the student within the past six years.

The dean (or delegate) of the faculty offering the program reserves the right to reject external examiners for reasons linked to possible or perceived conflicts of interest, or where these examiners are deemed not to be qualified or to have the professional experience required to evaluate the thesis.

C-7.8 Thesis submission for evaluation

C-7.8.1 Before the student submits the thesis for written evaluation, the thesis supervisor must confirm that they have examined the thesis and that it is suitable for submission to the jury for evaluation. If a thesis advisory committee (TAC) is in place, the thesis supervisor approves on behalf of the TAC.

The student must ensure:

  • that they are enrolled in the term of study during which the thesis is officially submitted for evaluation;
  • that they have completed all other program requirements;
  • that the thesis meets the standards set by the University and the program.

C-7.8.2 A thesis will not be considered officially submitted for evaluation until all of the following documents have been submitted to the office responsible for organizing the evaluation and defence: a) the thesis in electronic format, b) the “List of Examiners for the Evaluation of the Thesis” form and c) confirmation from the thesis supervisor that the thesis is suitable for submission to the jury.

C-7.8.3 Once the thesis has been submitted for evaluation, the student and the thesis supervisor(s) may not communicate with the examiners regarding the thesis evaluation until the thesis has been defended.

C-7.9 Thesis evaluation steps and grading

C-7.9.1 Evaluation steps for master’s thesis

There are no general requirements for the oral defence of a master’s thesis. Thus, the evaluation of the master’s thesis commonly consists of two steps: a) the written evaluation, b) the final submission of the thesis. For master’s programs that require an oral defence, the evaluation consists of three steps: a) the written evaluation, b) the oral defence and, c) the final submission of the thesis.

The program will determine the evaluation process that is adopted.

C-7.9.2 Evaluation steps for doctoral thesis

The evaluation of a doctoral thesis has three steps: a) the written evaluation, b) the oral defence and, c) the final submission.

C-7.9.3 Grading

Three grades are possible: S (satisfactory), NS (not satisfactory) and EIN (failure/incomplete).

A failing grade, namely NS or EIN, may be assigned to any of the evaluation steps. If two grades of NS or EIN are assigned during the evaluation process, the student will be withdrawn from the program. The student will not be withdrawn from the program if a single NS or EIN grade is assigned during thesis evaluation.

C-7.10 Written evaluation of the thesis

C-7.10.1 Integrity of the written evaluation

Examiners must evaluate the thesis independently and, during the evaluation process, must not contact other examiners, the thesis supervisor, or the student to discuss the thesis evaluation before they submit their report to the office organizing the evaluation and defence. The dean (or delegate) of the faculty may replace one or more examiners if the dean believes that the integrity of the written evaluation process has been compromised.

C-7.10.2 Written evaluation for master’s thesis without oral defence

The jury, of which there are at least two internal examiners, must complete and submit the thesis evaluation form within the prescribed deadlines. The examiners’ reports must contain sufficient detail to enable the student to make the desired modifications.

Each examiner must grade the thesis independently, by selecting one of the following three verdicts indicated in the evaluation form:

Verdict 1. The thesis meets the requirements for the degree, but minor corrections may be required. The thesis supervisor(s) or other individuals named by the jury will ensure that all corrections required by the jury are made.

Verdict 2. The thesis meets the requirements for the degree, but major corrections/ revisions are required. The examiners, in consultation with the thesis supervisor(s) must decide whether these revisions and corrections must be verified by the thesis supervisor(s) alone, or by the thesis supervisor(s) and one or more examiners.

Verdict 3. The thesis does not meet the requirements for the degree. The thesis must be amended and the evaluation process must be repeated before the same jury. Verdict 3 is equivalent to a failure, and will appear on the student’s transcript as a grade of NS (not satisfactory).

The examiners will also indicate if they wish to recommend the thesis for a prize.

Once the evaluation reports have been received, the dean (or delegate), will establish a common verdict. If the examiners have not reached a unanimous verdict, a meeting will be held between the dean (or delegate) and the examiners to discuss points of disagreement. Following this discussion, the dean (or delegate) will determine the verdict. If a verdict 1 or verdict 2 is issued, the dean (or delegate) will decide whether the required revisions will be verified by the thesis supervisor and one or several examiners.

The verdict, including the examiners’ reports, is sent to the student, the thesis supervisor, and the other examiners.

Revisions to the original version of the thesis must be clearly indicated. Changes to the thesis required by examiners must be made before final submission of the thesis.

C-7.10.2.1 Deadlines for submitting the final thesis following the written evaluation of master’s thesis without oral defence

The countdown toward the submission deadlines begins on the day the verdict is communicated to the student and the thesis supervisor.

C-7.10.2.1.1 Verdict 1 or verdict 2 following the written evaluation of master’s thesis without oral defence

The student must make the required revisions and corrections and submit the final version of the thesis within 120 calendar days of receiving the verdict.

If the revised thesis is submitted and approved within 30 calendar days, the student will not be required to re-enrol. If the revised thesis is not submitted and approved by the 31st calendar day after receiving the verdict, the student will be enrolled for one term and will be required to pay tuition and other associated fees.

If the student does not submit the final revised thesis within 120 calendar days of receiving the verdict, a grade of EIN (incomplete) for the thesis will appear on the student’s transcript and will count as a failure.

However, in the case of a Verdict 2, the student may request an extension of the 120-day period from their faculty. This request must be submitted at least 20 calendar days before the end of the 120-day period. If the student fails to submit the thesis by the extended deadline, or if the student fails to enrol, a second failing grade for the thesis (NS) will appear on the student’s transcript, and the student will be withdrawn from the program.

C-7.10.2.1.2 Verdict 3 following the written evaluation for master’s thesis without oral defence

In the case of a Verdict 3, the student must submit a revised thesis for written evaluation within three consecutive terms of receiving the verdict. The student must be enrolled during these terms, and must make satisfactory progress during each term as per Academic Regulation C-4: Academic Standing for Graduate Studies. If the student fails to submit the revised thesis by the deadline, or if the student fails to enrol, a second failing grade (NS) for the thesis will appear on the student’s transcript and the student will be withdrawn from the program.

In a second evaluation of the written thesis, the possible verdicts that apply are the same as those that apply to a second defence in accordance with article 7.12 of this regulation.

C-7.10.3 Written evaluation of master’s thesis prior to oral defence

Two scenarios are possible. The thesis supervisor will indicate, in conformity with the guidelines specific to the program, the scenario that applies to the student.

Scenario 1: If a thesis advisory committee (TAC) was in place and the members read and evaluated the thesis during the student’s writing process, only the internal examiner not included in the TAC is required to submit a detailed written evaluation prior to the defence.

Scenario 2: If only the thesis supervisor supervised the student during the writing of the thesis, at least two internal examiners must submit a detailed written evaluation report prior to the defence.

C-7.10.4 Written evaluation of doctoral thesis prior to the oral defence

Two scenarios are possible. The thesis supervisor will indicate, in conformity with the guidelines specific to the program, the scenario that applies to the student.

Scenario 1: If a thesis advisory committee (TAC) was in place, and its members read and evaluated the thesis during the student’s writing process, only the internal examiner not included in the TAC and the external examiner are required to submit a detailed written evaluation prior to the defence.

Scenario 2: If only the thesis supervisor supervised the student during the writing of the thesis, all examiners are required to submit a detailed written evaluation prior to the defence.

C-7.10.5 Written evaluation reports prior to defence and decision to proceed to the defence

Examiners may write their reports in the official language of their choice.

The written evaluation report must be detailed and must clearly indicate whether the student may proceed to the defence. If so, the reports must contain sufficient detail to enable the student to prepare for the defence. Reports are forwarded to the student, the thesis supervisor, and other examiners, including the chair of the jury, prior to the thesis defence.

If one or several examiners consider that the thesis is not suitable to proceed to the defence, and that revisions to the thesis are necessary, a meeting will be held with the dean (or delegate) to determine if the defence should be rescheduled. If revisions to the thesis are required, the reports must be sufficiently detailed to allow the student to make the desired changes.

If the dean determines that the defence must be postponed, an initial grade of NS will be recorded on the student’s transcript.

Students who are required to revise their thesis must re-enrol. The thesis will be submitted to the same jury within a maximum of three consecutive terms. If the thesis is not submitted within the established timeframe, a second NS grade will be recorded on the student's transcript, and the student will be withdrawn from the program.

Revisions to the original version of the thesis must be clearly indicated. All examiners will evaluate the revised thesis and submit a written evaluation report. If the examiners determine that the thesis is suitable to proceed to the defence, the verdicts of a second defence will apply to the revised thesis in accordance with article 7.12.3 of this regulation. If at this second written evaluation, the examiners determine that the revised thesis is still unsatisfactory, the student will be withdrawn from the program.

C-7.11 Thesis defence

C-7.11.1 Participation in the defence

C-7.11.1.1 The dean (or delegate) of the student’s faculty will name the chair of the jury, who must be authorized to supervise theses. The thesis defence may not be chaired by the thesis supervisor or one of the examiners.

C-7.11.1.2 A minimum of 48 hours prior to the defence, the chair will receive a file containing all examiner evaluation reports and any other documents pertaining to the defence.

C-7.11.1.1.3 All examiners and the student must attend the defence, either in person or remotely.

C-7.11.1.1.4 The thesis supervisor(s) participate in the defence, but do not vote. A thesis defence may take place in the absence of the thesis supervisor(s) provided that the student has consented to this absence in writing. In the absence of the thesis supervisor(s), another representative from the student’s graduate program, as assigned by the program director, will act as the thesis supervisor during the defence.

C-7.11.1.1.5 Thesis defences are open to the public, except in the case of a confidential thesis.

C-7.11.1.1.6 Any filming or recording of the thesis defence is prohibited.

C-7.11.2 Procedure during the thesis defence

C-7.11.2.1 At the beginning of the defence, the chair of the jury asks all those present, except the examiners and the thesis supervisor(s), to leave the room in order to a) discuss any problems stemming from the examiners’ evaluation reports, b) explain the procedure to be followed, and c) determine the order in which each examiner will ask questions to the student, and the time granted to each examiner.

C-7.11.2.2 The chair of the jury then asks the student to present the thesis topic.

C-7.11.2.3 The members of the jury then pose their questions to the student (in the order previously established).

C-7.11.2.4 The thesis supervisor(s) may not intervene while the examiners are questioning the student; the supervisor(s) will be permitted to comment or ask questions at the end of the question period.

C-7.11.2.5 At the end of the thesis defence, the chair asks all those present, except the examiners and the thesis supervisor(s), to leave the room. The examiners deliberate and decide on a verdict in accordance with this regulation. The thesis supervisor(s) participates in these discussions, but does not vote.

C-7.11.2.6 The chair then records the verdict on the appropriate form and, if necessary, states the nature and scope of any corrections or revisions necessary in the space reserved for comments (or separately). The chair also specifies who will be responsible for verifying that the revisions and corrections are satisfactory.

C-7.11.2.7 Once the verdict has been decided, and in the absence of the thesis supervisor(s), the chair will ask the examiners if the thesis is recommended for an award.

C-7.11.2.8 The chair of the jury invites the student and the thesis supervisor(s), and any other people present, to return to the room, and immediately informs the student of the verdict.

C-7.11.3 Thesis defence verdicts

C-7.11.3.1 Unanimous verdict

If possible, the examiners will render one of the following three unanimous verdicts:

Verdict 1. The thesis meets the requirements for the degree, but minor corrections may be required. The thesis supervisor(s) or other individuals named by the jury will ensure that all corrections required by the jury are made.

Verdict 2. The thesis meets the requirements for the degree, but major corrections/revisions are required. The jury, in consultation with the thesis supervisor(s), must decide whether these revisions and corrections must be verified by the thesis supervisor(s) alone, or by the thesis supervisor(s) and one or more examiners.

Verdict 3. The thesis does not meet the requirements for the degree. The thesis must be amended and the evaluation process and defence must be repeated before the same jury. Verdict 3 is equivalent to a failure and will appear on the student’s transcript as a grade of NS (not satisfactory).

C-7.11.3.2 Split verdict

If the examiners cannot come to a unanimous decision, the following procedure shall be followed:

  1. the chair of the jury will note each examiner’s verdict or, if requested by an examiner, a secret vote will be held;
  2. if two or more examiners render Verdict 3, the chair will record Verdict 3 as the final decision;
  3. in any other case, the chair will record Verdict 2 as the final decision, and the jury, in consultation with the thesis supervisor(s), will decide what changes must be made to the thesis and who will be responsible for approving these changes.

C-7.11.3.3 Deadline to submit major revisions and corrections following the defence

C-7.11.3.3.1 Following a verdict 1 or a verdict 2 during the defence

C-7.11.3.3.2 The student must make the required revisions and corrections and submit the final version of the thesis within 120 calendar days of the date of the thesis defence.

If the revised thesis is submitted and approved within 30 calendar days, the student will not be required to re-enrol. If the revised thesis is not submitted and approved by the 31st calendar day after the defence date, the student must enrol for one term, and will be required to pay tuition and other associated fees.

C-7.11.3.3.3 If the student does not submit the final revised thesis within 120 calendar days of the date of the thesis defence, a grade of EIN (incomplete) will be entered in the student’s transcript, and will count as a failure.

C-7.11.3.3.4 The student may request an extension of the 120-calendar day period from their faculty. This request must be submitted at least twenty 20 calendar days before the end of the 120-day period. If the student fails to submit the thesis by the extended deadline, or if the student fails to enrol, a second failing grade for the thesis (NS) will appear on the student’s transcript and the student will be withdrawn from the program.

C-7.11.3.4 Following a Verdict 3 during the defence

In the case of a Verdict 3, the student must submit a revised thesis for evaluation within three consecutive terms of the original thesis defence. The student must be enrolled during these terms and must make satisfactory progress during each term. If the student fails to submit the amended thesis by the deadline, or if the student fails to enrol, a second failing grade (NS) for the thesis will appear on the student’s transcript and the student’s file will be closed.

C-7.12 Second thesis defence or defence of an amended thesis

C-7.12.1 The same jury will evaluate the amended thesis and hear its defence. The procedure to organize the re-evaluation and second defence is the same as the procedure that applies to the first defence.

C-7.12.2 The possible verdicts that apply to a defence following the evaluation of the amended thesis are the same as those that apply to a second defence.

C-7.12.3 The possible verdicts for a second defence, or a defence following the evaluation of an amended thesis, are:

Verdict 1. The thesis meets all the requirements of the degree, but minor corrections may be required. The thesis supervisor(s) will ensure that all corrections required by the jury are made.

Verdict 2. The thesis meets the requirements for the degree, but major corrections/ revisions are required. The jury, in consultation with the thesis supervisor(s), must decide whether these revisions and corrections must be verified by the thesis supervisor(s) alone, or by the thesis supervisor(s) and one or more examiners.

Verdict 3. The thesis does not meet the requirements for the degree. Verdict 3 following a second thesis defence, or a defence of the thesis after revision of the thesis, is considered a failure (graded NS). The student is automatically withdrawn from the program and the file is closed.

C-7.12.4 The student must make the required revisions and corrections and submit the final version of the thesis within 120 calendar days of the date of the thesis defence.

If the revised thesis is submitted and approved within (30) calendar days or less, the student will not be required to re-enrol. If the revised thesis is not submitted and approved by the 31st calendar day after the defence date, the student will be enrolled for one term and will be required to pay tuition and other associated fees.

In the case of verdicts 1 or 2 after a second thesis defence, or after evaluation of an amended thesis, if the student does not submit the final version of the thesis within 120 calendar days, a second thesis failure will be assigned. This will result in mandatory withdrawal of the student from the program, and the student’s file will be closed.

C-7.12.5 If the student chooses not to proceed to a second thesis defence or a defence of the amended thesis, the student’s transcript will record a second failing grade (NS) and the student’s file will be closed.

C-7.13 Final submission of the thesis

C-7.13.1 Once the student has successfully defended the thesis and made any required corrections, the student must submit the approved final version of the thesis electronically to uOResearch, the University of Ottawa’s institutional repository.  Once the thesis has been submitted to uOResearch, it becomes freely available online, although the student retains the copyright.

C-7.13.2 No student may be recommended for graduation until an acceptable final version of the thesis has been approved by the student’s faculty and electronically submitted to uOResearch.

C-7.14 Embargo on thesis publication

C-7.14.1 The University of Ottawa promotes the public and free distribution of research, including successfully defended theses.

C-7.14.2 A student may request an embargo on public access to a thesis in certain circumstances, such as where publication of the thesis carries a significant risk of harm to individuals, when a patent is pending, or when a delay is required for publication of the thesis work.  The embargo request must be completed, submitted, and approved by the faculty before the student submits the final electronic version of the thesis to uOResearch. An embargo on public access to the thesis may not be requested after the thesis has been submitted and approved online.

7.14.3 In the case of confidential theses, in accordance with this regulation, the student must request an embargo on access to the thesis for the period of time specified in the confidentiality agreement.

7.14.4 An embargo is for a precise and limited period of one year, two years, or five years. Any request for a five-year embargo must be clearly substantiated and will only be approved in exceptional circumstances.

7.15 Appeals

The jury’s decisions are final. The dean (or delegate) of the faculty offering the program will hear appeals only on procedural grounds.