phd report

Research Voyage

Research Tips and Infromation

How to Present PhD Progress Report to Doctoral Committee Members in 03 Simple Stages

Introduction

Summary of plan of actions before phd progress presentation meeting, presentation tips, summary of plan of actions during phd progress presentation meeting, summary of plan of actions after phd progress presentation meeting, email template to doctoral committee members for extension or modification for the work proposed, mastering the art of oral and visual presentations for phd presentations, what should be included in the one-page summary for phd doctoral committee members, how can i effectively demonstrate a software-based project during the phd progress presentation, what level of detail should i include in the background section of my presentation, how can i ensure that there are no surprises for my supervisor during the doctoral committee meeting, what types of questions can i expect from the committee members regarding my research plan, how should i respond to suggestions and feedback given by the committee members during the meeting, under which circumstances phd progress presentation can be rejected.

The PhD Doctoral committee is constituted by the university in which the candidate has registered for PhD. The committe is there to support and guide the research scholar till his final thesis is submitted. The committe involves the experts in the domain of the candidate from various universities and research labs. The Committee will evaluate your progress and help to make sure that you are on track to get your dissertation within a reasonable time.

At the beginning of your research, their focus will be on making sure you have defined reasonable and achievable objectives. Later, they will help you decide when it is time to write your thesis. Finally, they will be there at your thesis seminar and defence presentations. Their support as mentors will likely continue as you move on in your career.

Doctoral committee meeting happens usually once in 06 months. Here it is expected that the research scholar has to present his PhD progress work of the past six months. The meeting should not be felt like an exam. The outcome should be productive advice to you for your future research.

The Presentation of PhD Progress Report to Doctoral Committee Members happens in three stages namely: i) Before the meeting: i.e. Once you start preparing the report for the meeting to till the meeting begins. ii) During the meeting: i.e. From entering into the meeting hall to till the meeting gets over and iii) After the meeting: i.e. From the time meeting concludes to till the next six months before you really start preparing for your next meeting report.

Before the PhD Progress Presentation Meeting

Along with your supervisor go through all the comments given in the previous PhD progress doctoral committee meeting. Discuss in detail with your supervisor the work carried out for the past six months. If any issues are still pending have justification for not addressing or partially addressing those issues.

Do not hide details regarding the implementation and pending issues with your supervisor. This actually helps the supervisor to defend you and take inputs from the committee members regarding the future course of directions.

A summary of PhD progress and plans should be prepared and submitted to the Doctoral committee at least one week prior to the meeting. Make sure that you have gone through the report with all grammatical corrections and plagiarism checks.

Send out the agenda to your committee members beforehand, but also remind them of the topics you want to cover before you begin the presentation. If you have any manuscripts published or accepted send your committee a copy of the same.

You should prepare a PhD progress presentation (no more than 20 minutes without interruption) that includes a brief background of your research, objectives and the work carried out from the last presentation to till date. Without fail discuss in detail the presentation slides with your supervisor. In your presentation slides list all the previous comments and your response for each committee in the form of a table.

If you are planning to change the title of your work getting consent from the committee members is essential. Have at least 04-05 titles which you and your supervisor feel appropriate beforehand. This will ease the process of changing the title immediately in the meeting and the committee can recommend the same to the university along with regular suggestions.

The best way to ensure that your PhD progress meeting goes smoothly is to meet individually with each committee member to discuss your results well in advance. If you cannot meet with them in person, share your results ( refer my blog on how to write result section ) over email and ask for their feedback. If there are any disagreements, resolve them before the meeting by speaking with your supervisor to ensure that the meeting goes smoothly.

During the PhD Progress Presentation Meeting

Before the start of the PhD progress presentation give copies of the one-page summary to other faculty members who are attending the session. Submit copies of the complete report to the committee members including your supervisor. No need to present details of any published work. Provide a reprint or preprint, preferably ahead of the meeting. If your work is software based then keep the demo ready. If you do not have a working module then show the video demonstration of the model. This will help the committee members to suggest future directions for your work.

During your PhD progress committee meeting, you should focus on the last six months’ work rather than the background. Only spend as much time on the background as is relevant to what you will be talking about.

There should not be any surprise slides/facts to your supervisor during your committee meeting.

At your first PhD progress Doctoral committee meeting, you will present an outline of your plan for your research. You can build a detailed description of what you plan to do ( literature survey to carry out, algorithms or theorems to study, experiments to carry out, software and hardware components to add, systems integration to perform, tests to accomplish ). The plans can be represented with specific milestones and timelines with a Gantt Chart .

Example: The sample Gantt chart below shows a set of activities planned for the next few months for the Research work. This can be extended to any length. This chart helps the committee members to know how well the researcher has planned the research activities.

Ph.D. Research Proposal with Gnatt Chart

At subsequent PhD progress meetings you should present a brief introduction (one or two slides) to remind the committee of your research area – don’t expect them to recall everything from the last meeting, but no need to go into great detail. Aim to put your work in context.

Show your current working objective in the form of a block diagram. This will set the boundary for the presentation and discussion. This will help the committee members to focus on the specified objective. For example in the figure below the candidate is focusing on the “Wheeled mobile Robot” objective in Robot Path Planning.

Make sure you are comfortable moving back and forth among your slides. Do not cross the time limit. Add photographs of any field visits for data collection , or conference presentations in your presentation slides. If you had any interactions with domain experts in your area then add interaction details with a date. If you have visited any organization as a resource person relating to your Ph.D. work with your supervisor then add that details.

Seek advice from your committee members during the meeting. Note down all the suggestions by yourself or ask one of your research colleagues to note the same. This is highly desirable, almost to the point that you should make it mandatory. Give a timeline of your plans. What will you be doing over the next month, and what do you hope to accomplish before your next meeting in the next six months’ time.

Keep additional slides along with your regular slides. Get into additional slides detail if any clarifications are sought on any equations or algorithms etc.

Additional slides can be presented as follows:

i) The equipment details you are planning to purchase or currently using for implementation.

ii) The Algorithms which you have implemented or planning to implement.

iii) The mathematical model you have developed, or

iv) Any slides that you think are important but do not have time to cover at the end of your presentation.

Here are some tips regarding the presentation, including time management, devices, backup, laptop usage, uploading PowerPoint, video, and audio:

Practice your presentation beforehand to ensure it fits within the allocated time.
Use a timer or stopwatch during practice sessions to gauge your pace.
Be mindful of the time during the actual presentation and make necessary adjustments to stay on track.
Ensure your laptop or presentation device is in good working condition.
Carry a backup copy of your presentation on a USB drive or cloud storage.
Test the compatibility of your presentation files with the equipment at the presentation venue in advance.
Close any unnecessary applications or notifications on your laptop to avoid distractions.
Disable sleep mode or screensavers to prevent interruptions during the presentation.
Familiarize yourself with the laptop’s function keys or shortcuts for adjusting display settings, volume, etc.
Save your PowerPoint presentation in a compatible format (e.g., PPT or PPTX).
Verify that all embedded media (images, videos, audio) are properly linked and functional.
If possible, upload your presentation to the venue’s computer system before the session to avoid last-minute technical issues.
Check the audio and video components of your presentation beforehand to ensure they work properly.
If you plan to play a video, ensure it is in a compatible format and smoothly integrated into your presentation.
Test the sound levels to ensure audibility for everyone in the room.

Additional tips (from personal experience):

Rehearse your presentation multiple times to build confidence and familiarity with the material.
Prepare cue cards or key points to refer to if needed, but avoid excessive reliance on them.
Maintain eye contact with the audience to engage them and convey confidence.
Speak clearly and project your voice to ensure everyone can hear you.
Use visual aids and diagrams to enhance understanding and clarify complex concepts.
Incorporate storytelling or real-life examples to make your presentation more engaging.
Practice smooth transitions between slides and maintain a logical flow throughout.
Be prepared to answer questions and engage in discussions following your presentation.

Remember, the more prepared and confident you are, the better you can deliver your presentation effectively.

After the PhD Progress Presentation Meeting

End your PhD progress committee meeting with a summary of what you have discussed, common points that you have reached and an action plan for the next six months. Your action plan needs to have “actionable” items, specifically what milestones you will work towards after the meeting and approximate timelines.

A written summary of the PhD progress committee meeting will be prepared by the supervisor and the committee, and that will be sent to the University. You will receive a copy of this and a copy will be placed in your research file.

Send an email note to each of your committee members through your supervisor to thank them for their time, and summarize the action items or milestones you agreed to. This will give your committee members another chance to give you feedback or suggestions.

During the meeting, you might have accepted to complete some implementation before the next meeting, but you may run out of time or you may not get any ideas regarding implementation. In such situations, have a discussion with your supervisor and the committee members and discuss the challenges faced by you. They may either extend the implementation time or ask you to change the methodology of implementation.

Simply do not wait for suggestions from committee members till the next PhD progress presentation meeting. In order to build trust between you and your committee members, you need to take committee members and your supervisor into confidence before taking any major decisions.

In the meeting, the committee might have suggested publishing your work in a quality conference or journal for better citations. Selecting a reputable journal and avoiding predatory conferences and journals is crucial for maximizing the visibility and impact of your research article.

By publishing in a respected journal, you increase the likelihood of attracting a broader and more qualified readership, thus increasing the chances of your article being cited by other researchers. Choosing the right journal involves considering factors such as the journal’s scope, target audience, impact factor, indexing in reputable databases, peer-review process, and overall reputation in the field.

Additionally, it is important to stay vigilant and avoid predatory conferences and journals that may engage in unethical practices or lack rigorous peer-review processes. These predatory outlets may hinder the credibility and recognition of your work. By carefully selecting a reputable journal, you position your research for greater exposure, credibility, and citation potential.

Visit my articles on ” How to identify and avoid predatory conferences and journals ” and “ Identifying Reputable journals for your research paper “. These articles will help you in getting your articles cited by many authors.

Here is an email template which you can communicate to your doctoral committee members in case you fail to keep the deadline or are unable to work on the ideas you proposed. Please take consent from your supervisor before sending any communication to Doctoral Committee members.

Improving both oral presentation and visual presentation skills is crucial for effective communication. To enhance your oral presentation skills, focus on aspects such as clarity, organization, and delivery. Practice speaking clearly, using appropriate tone and volume, and engaging with your audience. Additionally, consider refining your body language, utilizing effective gestures, and maintaining eye contact. For further guidance and resources on honing your oral presentation skills, you may explore reputable platforms and online courses available in this domain.

When it comes to visual presentation skills, it is essential to create visually appealing and impactful slides or visuals. Pay attention to design elements, such as color schemes, fonts, and layout, to ensure coherence and readability. Utilize visuals, such as graphs, charts, and images, to convey information effectively. Incorporate appropriate animations or transitions to enhance the flow and engagement of your presentation. To access valuable tips, techniques, and tools for enhancing your visual presentation skills, you can explore recommended platforms and tutorials available online.

If you are interested in further developing your oral presentation skills, I recommend checking out this comprehensive course on oral presentation skills . It covers essential techniques, strategies, and practical exercises to help you deliver impactful presentations confidently. Likewise, if you want to enhance your visual presentation skills, you may find this resource on v isual presentation design highly beneficial. It provides valuable insights, best practices, and examples to create visually stunning and effective presentations. Feel free to explore these resources to elevate your presentation skills and captivate your audience.

Presenting your PhD progress report to the doctoral committee can be a daunting task, but it is an essential part of your PhD journey. The committee is there to provide guidance and support, ensuring that you are on track to complete your dissertation within a reasonable time. It is crucial to approach the committee meeting with a positive attitude and view it as an opportunity to receive productive advice for your future research.

Remember that the presentation of the progress report to the committee happens in three stages: before, during, and after the meeting. The preparation of the report should be meticulous and thoughtful, and during the meeting, you should be open to constructive feedback and suggestions. After the meeting, you should take note of the committee’s recommendations and use them to shape your future research endeavours.

As you move forward in your career, the support and guidance of the doctoral committee will likely continue to be a valuable resource. By effectively presenting your progress report to the committee, you can make the most of this opportunity and receive the guidance you need to succeed in your PhD program.

Frequently Asked Questions

Research Objective: Clearly state the objective of your research and the problem you are addressing. Methodology: Provide a brief description of the methodology or approach you are using to conduct your research. Key Findings: Highlight the major findings or results you have obtained so far in your research. Progress Update: Summarize the progress you have made during the past six months, highlighting significant achievements or milestones reached. Challenges: Briefly mention any challenges or obstacles you have encountered in your research and how you are addressing them. Future Plans: Outline your planned next steps and future goals for your research, including anticipated timelines or milestones. Relevance and Impact: Discuss the relevance and potential impact of your research in your field or discipline. Support Needed: Specify any specific support, resources, or expertise you require to further advance your research.

To effectively demonstrate a software-based project during the presentation: Have the demo prepared and functional Show a video demonstration if the software is not available or requires specific conditions Focus on showcasing key features and functionalities Provide context and explain the purpose of the software

Include only the necessary level of detail in the background section of your presentation, focusing on what is directly relevant to your research and the specific objectives you will be discussing. Keep it concise and provide enough context to help the doctoral committee members to understand the significance and motivation of your work without delving into unnecessary details.

Maintain open and regular communication with your supervisor throughout the research process. Share progress updates, challenges, and findings with your supervisor in a timely manner. Discuss any potential issues or deviations from the original plan as soon as they arise. Seek feedback and guidance from your supervisor at various stages of your research. Keep your supervisor informed about any changes in methodology, data, or results. Address any concerns or questions from your supervisor before the committee meeting to align expectations.

The types of questions you can expect from committee members regarding your research plan may include: Clarification questions seeking a deeper understanding of your research objectives, methodology, or proposed experiments. Questions about the theoretical framework or literature review supporting your research. Inquiries about the feasibility and potential limitations of your proposed research. Questions related to the significance and impact of your research in the field. Suggestions for alternative approaches or methodologies to consider. Questions about the expected timeline and milestones for your research. Inquiries about potential ethical considerations or data management strategies. Questions exploring the potential implications and practical applications of your research. Requests for additional details or explanations on specific aspects of your research plan. Questions about the expected contributions of your research to the existing body of knowledge in your field.

When responding to suggestions and feedback given by the committee members during the meeting: Listen actively and attentively to understand the suggestions and feedback. Thank the committee members for their input and valuable insights. Remain open-minded and receptive to different perspectives and ideas. Clarify any points of confusion or seek further clarification, if needed. Acknowledge the validity of the suggestions and show a willingness to consider them. Provide thoughtful responses that demonstrate your understanding of the suggestions. Clearly articulate your rationale if you choose not to implement a specific suggestion. Engage in constructive discussions and ask follow-up questions, if appropriate. Demonstrate your ability to integrate feedback into your research plan or adjust your approach. Express gratitude for the committee members’ support and guidance throughout the process.

Lack of Clear Objectives: If your progress presentation fails to clearly define and articulate the objectives of your research, it may be rejected. The committee expects a clear understanding of what you aim to achieve and the significance of your research goals. Inadequate Progress: Insufficient progress made during the specified period can lead to rejection. The committee expects tangible advancements in your research within the given timeframe. If there is a lack of substantial work or limited progress, they may question the feasibility or dedication to your research. Methodological Issues: If there are flaws in your research methodology or data collection techniques, the committee may reject your progress presentation. It is essential to demonstrate a robust and well-designed research approach that aligns with the requirements of your field. Poor Presentation Skills: Your presentation skills play a crucial role in conveying your research effectively. If your presentation lacks clarity, coherence, or fails to engage the audience, it may lead to rejection. Effective communication and the ability to present complex ideas in a concise and understandable manner are vital. Inadequate Literature Review: A comprehensive literature review is expected in a progress presentation. If your review of existing literature is incomplete, lacks depth, or fails to address relevant studies, your presentation may be rejected. It is essential to showcase a thorough understanding of the existing research and its relationship to your work. Failure to Address Committee Feedback: If you neglect to incorporate previous feedback and suggestions from the committee, it may result in rejection. The committee expects you to demonstrate the ability to reflect on and address their recommendations, showing your commitment to improving your research. Remember, the specific parameters for rejection may vary depending on your academic institution and the expectations set by your doctoral committee. It is crucial to consult your supervisor and committee members for clear guidelines and expectations for your progress presentation.

Upcoming Events

Visit the Upcoming International Conferences at Exotic Travel Destinations with Travel Plan
Visit for Research Internships Worldwide

What Is a Thesis?

A thesis is the main output of a PhD as it explains your workflow in reaching the conclusions you have come to in undertaking the research project. As a result, much of the content of your thesis will be based around your chapters of original work.

For your thesis to be successful, it needs to adequately defend your argument and provide a unique or increased insight into your field that was not previously available. As such, you can’t rely on other ideas or results to produce your thesis; it needs to be an original piece of text that belongs to you and you alone.

What Should a Thesis Include?

Although each thesis will be unique, they will all follow the same general format. To demonstrate this, we’ve put together an example structure of a PhD thesis and explained what you should include in each section below.

Acknowledgements

This is a personal section which you may or may not choose to include. The vast majority of students include it, giving both gratitude and recognition to their supervisor, university, sponsor/funder and anyone else who has supported them along the way.

1. Introduction

Provide a brief overview of your reason for carrying out your research project and what you hope to achieve by undertaking it. Following this, explain the structure of your thesis to give the reader context for what he or she is about to read.

2. Literature Review

Set the context of your research by explaining the foundation of what is currently known within your field of research, what recent developments have occurred, and where the gaps in knowledge are. You should conclude the literature review by outlining the overarching aims and objectives of the research project.

3. Main Body

This section focuses on explaining all aspects of your original research and so will form the bulk of your thesis. Typically, this section will contain four chapters covering the below:

your research/data collection methodologies,
your results,
a comprehensive analysis of your results,
a detailed discussion of your findings.

Depending on your project, each of your chapters may independently contain the structure listed above or in some projects, each chapter could be focussed entirely on one aspect (e.g. a standalone results chapter). Ideally, each of these chapters should be formatted such that they could be translated into papers for submission to peer-reviewed journals. Therefore, following your PhD, you should be able to submit papers for peer-review by reusing content you have already produced.

4. Conclusion

The conclusion will be a summary of your key findings with emphasis placed on the new contributions you have made to your field.

When producing your conclusion, it’s imperative that you relate it back to your original research aims, objectives and hypotheses. Make sure you have answered your original question.

Finding a PhD has never been this easy – search for a PhD by keyword, location or academic area of interest.

How Many Words Is a PhD Thesis?

A common question we receive from students is – “how long should my thesis be?“.

Every university has different guidelines on this matter, therefore, consult with your university to get an understanding of their full requirements. Generally speaking, most supervisors will suggest somewhere between 70,000 and 100,000 words . This usually corresponds to somewhere between 250 – 350 pages .

We must stress that this is flexible, and it is important not to focus solely on the length of your thesis, but rather the quality.

How Do I Format My Thesis?

Although the exact formatting requirements will vary depending on the university, the typical formatting policies adopted by most universities are:

What Happens When I Finish My Thesis?

After you have submitted your thesis, you will attend a viva . A viva is an interview-style examination during which you are required to defend your thesis and answer questions on it. The aim of the viva is to convince your examiners that your work is of the level required for a doctoral degree. It is one of the last steps in the PhD process and arguably one of the most daunting!

For more information on the viva process and for tips on how to confidently pass it, please refer to our in-depth PhD Viva Guide .

How Do I Publish My Thesis?

Unfortunately, you can’t publish your thesis in its entirety in a journal. However, universities can make it available for others to read through their library system.

If you want to submit your work in a journal, you will need to develop it into one or more peer-reviewed papers. This will largely involve reformatting, condensing and tailoring it to meet the standards of the journal you are targeting.

Browse PhDs Now

Join thousands of students.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Study at Cambridge

About the university, research at cambridge.

Undergraduate courses
Events and open days
Fees and finance
Postgraduate courses
How to apply
Postgraduate events
Fees and funding
International students
Continuing education
Executive and professional education
Courses in education
How the University and Colleges work
Term dates and calendars
Visiting the University
Annual reports
Equality and diversity
A global university
Public engagement
Give to Cambridge
For Cambridge students
For our researchers
Business and enterprise
Colleges & departments
Email & phone search
Museums & collections
Current students
PhD students
Progression
Department of Computer Science and Technology

People overview
Research staff
Professional services staff
Affiliated lecturers
Overview of Professional Services Staff
Seminars overview
Weekly timetable
Wednesday seminars
Wednesday seminar recordings ➥
Wheeler lectures
Computer Laboratory 75th anniversary ➥
women@CL 10th anniversary ➥
Job vacancies ➥
Library resources ➥
How to get here
William Gates Building layout
Contact information
Department calendar ➥
Accelerate Programme for Scientific Discovery overview
Data Trusts Initiative overview
Pilot Funding FAQs
Research Funding FAQs
Cambridge Ring overview
Ring Events
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame Awards
Hall of Fame - Nominations
The Supporters' Club overview
Industrial Collaboration
Annual Recruitment Fair overview
Graduate Opportunities
Summer internships
Technical Talks
Supporter Events and Competitions
How to join
Collaborate with Us
Cambridge Centre for Carbon Credits (4C)
Equality and Diversity overview
Athena SWAN
E&D Committee
Support and Development
Targeted funding
LGBTQ+@CL overview
Links and resources
Queer Library
women@CL overview
About Us overview
Friends of women@CL overview
Twentieth Anniversary of Women@CL
Tech Events
Students' experiences
Contact overview
Mailing lists
Scholarships
Initiatives
Dignity Policy
Outreach overview
Women in Computer Science Programme
Google DeepMind Research Ready programme overview
Accommodation and Pay
Application
Eligibility
Raspberry Pi Tutorials ➥
Wiseman prize
Research overview
Application areas
Research themes
Algorithms and Complexity
Computer Architecture overview
Creating a new Computer Architecture Research Centre
Graphics, Vision and Imaging Science
Human-Centred Computing
Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence
Mobile Systems, Robotics and Automation
Natural Language Processing
Programming Languages, Semantics and Verification
Systems and Networking
Research groups overview
Energy and Environment Group overview
Declaration
Publications
Past seminars
Learning and Human Intelligence Group overview
Technical Reports
Admissions information
Undergraduate admissions overview
Open days and events
Undergraduate course overview overview
Making your application
Admissions FAQs
Super curricular activities
MPhil in Advanced Computer Science overview
Applications
Course structure
Funding competitions
Prerequisites
PhD in Computer Science overview
Application forms
Research Proposal
Funding competitions and grants
Part-time PhD Degree
Premium Research Studentship
Current students overview
Part IB overview
Part IB group projects overview
Important dates
Design briefs
Moodle course ➥
Learning objectives and assessment
Technical considerations
After the project
Part II overview
Part II projects overview
Project suggestions
Project Checker groups
Project proposal
Advice on running the project
Progress report and presentation
The dissertation
Supervisor briefing notes
Project Checker briefing notes
Past overseer groups ➥
Part II Supervision sign-up
Part II Modules
Part II Supervisions overview
Continuing to Part III overview
Continuing to Part III: 2023 guidance
Part III of the Computer Science Tripos
Overview overview
Information for current Masters students overview
Special topics
Part III and ACS projects overview
Submission of project reports
ACS projects overview
Guidance for ACS projects
Part III projects overview
Guidance for Part III projects
Preparation
Registration
Induction - Masters students
PhD resources overview
Deadlines for PhD applications
Protocol for Graduate Advisers for PhD students
Guidelines for PhD supervisors
Induction information overview
Important Dates
Who is here to help
Exemption from University Composition Fees
Being a research student
Researcher Development
Research skills programme
First Year Report: the PhD Proposal
Second Year Report: Dissertation Schedule
Third Year Report: Progress Statement
Fourth Year: writing up and completion overview
PhD thesis formatting
Writing up and word count
Submitting your dissertation
Papers and conferences
Leave to work away, holidays, and intermission
List of PhD students ➥
PAT, recycling, and Building Services
Freshers overview
Cambridge University Freshers' Events
Undergraduate teaching information and important dates
Course material 2022/23 ➥
Course material 2023/24 ➥
Exams overview
Examination dates
Examination results ➥
Examiners' reports ➥
Part III Assessment
MPhil Assessment
Past exam papers ➥
Examinations Guidance 2022-23
Marking Scheme and Classing Convention
Guidance on Plagiarism and Academic Misconduct
Purchase of calculators
Examinations Data Retention Policy
Guidance on deadlines and extensions
Mark Check procedure and Examination Review
Lecture timetables overview
Understanding the concise timetable
Supervisions overview
Part II supervisions overview ➥
Part II supervision sign-up ➥
Supervising in Computer Science
Supervisor support
Directors of Studies list
Academic exchanges
Advice for visiting students taking Part IB CST
Summer internship: Optimisation of DNN Accelerators using Bayesian Optimisation
UROP internships
Resources for students overview
Student SSH server
Online services
Managed Cluster Service (MCS)
Microsoft Software for personal use
Installing Linux
Part III and MPhil Machines
Transferable skills
Course feedback and where to find help overview
Providing lecture feedback
Fast feedback hotline
Staff-Student Consultative Forum
Breaking the silence ➥
Student Administration Offices
Intranet overview
New starters and visitors
Forms and templates
Building information
Health and safety
Teaching information
Research admin
Fourth Year: writing up and completion
PhD resources

All candidates for the PhD Degree are admitted on a probationary basis. A student's status with the Student Registry is that he or she will be registered for the CPGS in Computer Science . At the end of the first academic year, a formal assessment of progress is made. In the Department of Computer Science and Technology, this takes the form of a single document of no more than 10,000 words in length, exclusive of tables, bibliography and appendices.

The document is principally a PhD Proposal . That is, a document that demonstrates a clear path from the candidate's current position to a complete PhD thesis at the end of the third year. The document has two purposes: (i) to help the candidate to reflect on and plan their research project and (ii) to allow the Computer Laboratory to assess the student's progress and planned research.

In the document, the candidate should do the following:

Identify a potential problem or topic to address for the PhD.
identifying the seminal prior research in the topic area
the most closely related prior work, and
their strengths and weaknesses.

The goal is to show the limitations (or lack) of previous work. One method that could be employed to do this is to provide both a taxonomy of prior work and a gap analysis table: a table whose rows are the closest related work, the columns are the desired attributes of the solution, and each table entry is a Yes or a No. This would then clearly show that no prior work meets all the desired attributes.

This section of the document might be expected to form the basis of part of the candidate's final PhD thesis.

Candidates should have already done some preliminary research. This may be early attempts at proofs, a detailed analysis of existing methods, a critique of existing systems, assembly and testing of investigative apparatus, conduct of a pilot experiment, etc. This section of the document may form the basis of a chapter of the final PhD thesis. It is common for the candidate to have produced an academic paper (even if this is a minor paper for a workshop, for example), where they are the main author. The paper does not need to have been published, but the assessors should be able to see that it is of potentially publishable quality. Such a paper can be submitted as an appendix to the document; in this case the material in the paper should not be reproduced in the document, but should be summarised briefly in a self-contained way.

This should indicate, at a high level, the research that might be undertaken in the second and third years of the PhD. It needs to show that there is a viable route to a thesis in two years' time. In particular, it must state the specific research question or questions that are being addressed. If there are more than one question being addressed, it needs to be made clear how they are interconnected and how answering them would result in a coherent thesis story. They need to also be accompanied with a brief discussion of why they are important and interesting questions that are worthy of a Cambridge PhD, and why they are new (the gap analysis table could be used for this). Next, the candidate needs to describe the proposed method of attacking the questions, for example, by listing the major steps to completion through the next two years.

Some candidates find it useful to structure this as a cohesive one-page summary of the proposed thesis, with a tentative title, a paragraph setting the context, and three or four paragraphs describing chunks of the proposed research, each of which could be the basis for an academic paper and each of which could be expected to be a chapter of the final thesis. The chapters should make a cohesive overarching narrative of the thesis, rather than be stand-alone pieces of work.

A paragraph identifying criteria for success is recommended where the candidate explains how they will convince the research community that their approach is successful.

Potential risks are recommended to be identified: what could derail this methodology (technically) and if this happens what is plan B?

Timeplan: provide a detailed timetable, with explicit milestones for each term in the next two years against which the candidate will measure their progress. This would ideally include technical tasks that are planned to be accomplished during each time chunk.

It is essential that the supervisor(s) agrees that the document may be submitted. The document will be read by two other members of staff (assessors), who will interview the student about the content of the document in a viva. It should therefore give sufficient information that the assessors can satisfy themselves that all is well. It is expected that the interview will take place before the end of the first year.

Submission deadlines (electronic)

For students admitted in Michaelmas Term, by June 30, 23:59
For students admitted in Lent Term, October 30, 23:59
For students admitted in Easter Term, by January 30, 23:59

All submissions should be made electronically via the filer.

Electronic version (in PDF format) should be provided via the PhD report and thesis upload page . This deposits uploaded files on the departmental filer at /auto/anfs/www-uploads/phd = \\filer.cl.cam.ac.uk\webserver\www-uploads\phd.

Students intending to take up research placements during the vacations which begin on, before, or shortly after the submission deadlines must submit their report one month before departure to enable the examination process to be completed before the internship begins . No other extensions will be permitted unless otherwise authorized by the Secretary of the Degree Committee.

Oral examination

The student will be invited to discuss the documents with two assessors appointed by the student's principal supervisor. Neither of the assessors should be the student's principal supervisor though one may be the student's second advisor. Occasionally, the principal supervisor may be invited to clarify elements of the PhD Proposal and to attend the viva as an observer.

Where the initial PhD Proposal document is unsatisfactory, the assessors must ask for a revised submission and arrange a further discussion. Where the PhD Proposal is acceptable, it may still help the student to record suggested modifications in a final version of the Proposal. A copy of the revised document must be submitted to the Secretary of the Degree Committee.

The PhD Proposal document is internal to the Laboratory. However, since it is the basis for formal progress reports including registration for the PhD Degree and those made to funding bodies, assessors should endeavour to arrange a meeting where the documents should be assessed and discussed by the end of the student's first year at the latest. The Secretary of the Degree Committee should be informed of the result by the assessors and by the supervisor on the Postgraduate Feedback and Reporting System as soon as possible thereafter.

The report will be considered by the Degree Committee which will make its recommendations on the registration of the student to the Board of Graduate Studies.

In those cases where the student's progress is wholly inadequate, the supervisor should give them a written warning by 15 September (or the appropriate corresponding date - 15 December or 15 March) that they are in danger of termination, with copy to the Secretary of the Degree Committee.

The word limit is a maximum; it is not a target. Successful PhD Proposal documents can be significantly shorter than the limit. Writing within the word limit is important. It is part of the discipline of producing reports. When submitting reports (and the final PhD thesis), students will be required to sign a Statement of Word Length to confirm that the work does not exceed the limit of length prescribed (above) for the CPGS examination.

Originality

Attention is drawn to the University's guidance concerning plagiarism. The University states that "Plagiarism is defined as submitting as one's own work that which derives in part or in its entirety from the work of others without due acknowledgement. It is both poor scholarship and a breach of academic integrity." The Faculty's guidance concerning plagiarism and good academic practice can be found at https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/teaching/exams/plagiarism.html .

Reports may be soft-bound in comb-binding or stapled.

Secretary of the Degree Committee September 2013, updated September 2021, updated March 2022

Department of Computer Science and Technology University of Cambridge William Gates Building 15 JJ Thomson Avenue Cambridge CB3 0FD

Information provided by [email protected]

Social media

Contact the University
Accessibility
Freedom of information
Privacy policy and cookies
Statement on Modern Slavery
Terms and conditions
University A-Z
Undergraduate
Postgraduate
Research news
About research at Cambridge
Spotlight on...

Schools & departments

Writing your PhD First-Year Report

This course is intended for PhD students in their first year who are currently working on their First Year Report.

Course Content and Unit Aims

Content and Structure

To compare the specific content requirements for your report with those of students from other schools and to identify common elements
To examine to what extent these common elements are reflected in the Contents pages of sample student reports from previous years
To start drafting the Contents page for your own report

The Introduction

To explore what functional elements report introductions typically include and how they are typically organised
To observe what elements are present in sample report Introductions and discuss reasons for the possible variations from the model
To introduce useful language features that could be used in different parts of your Introduction
To start drafting part or all of your Introduction

Literature Review

To look at different ways of structuring a literature review
To explore the different options available to you when referring to sources
To introduce useful phrases and language structures that can be used when referring to sources
To start drafting parts of your Literature Review

Criticality and Outlining Objectives

To look at different ways of stating your aims and objectives
To show how you can elaborate this section by summarising and justifying your chosen methods or approach
Where appropriate, to start drafting part or all of an Objectives section
To show you ways of expressing criticality in your writing

Future plans: proposed research design

To look at different ways of presenting a research design
To be made aware of different research design paradigms
To introduce useful language that can be used to describe future research design
To draft part of a research design

Individual Tutorials

To allow students the opportunity to ask for clarification on issues arising from the course materials.
To give students and tutor the opportunity for further discussion of tutor feedback.
To provide suggestions for further English language / academic literacy development.

Course Days/times

In-person – Wednesdays 10:00 - 12:00
Online – Mondays 10:00 - 11:00

The in-person course will be offered at both the Holyrood Campus and at Kings Buildings.

Teaching Methods and Learning Outcomes

Research students at the University of Edinburgh are required to submit a document - a report or proposal - towards the end of their first year to show that their research is proceeding satisfactorily. This course is designed to help you compose such a document.

The course materials include descriptions of the typical structure of the main sections of first-year reports, together with summaries of the typical language features frequently used in specific parts of the texts. We have also included excerpts from authentic first-year reports from a variety of disciplines for you to analyse. The course consists of brief introductory lectures and tasks related to different sections of the report/proposal.

Your tutor will provide you with feedback (focusing on overall clarity, style, and organisation) on the extended writing tasks, and meet you for a class once per week, either on-line or in-person, depending which option you have chosen. You can expect to spend around 3 hours per week altogether to fully benefit from this course , including the written assignment and (for the online course) pre-reading of the course materials.

In the final week (week 6) of the course, you will have the opportunity for a one-to-one online tutorial with your tutor to discuss any remaining questions you may have.

By the end of the course students should have a better understanding of:

ways of structuring the content of the report
ways of organising the different sections of the report
appropriate language for the different sections of the report and how to use that language accurately
any specific language areas that will need further work.

Eligibility

This article was published on 2023-11-23

National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics

All previous cycle years

The SED is an annual census of research doctorate recipients from U.S. academic institutions that collects information on educational history, demographic characteristics, graduate funding source and educational debts, and postgraduation plans.

Survey Info

tag for use when URL is provided --> Methodology
tag for use when URL is provided --> Data
tag for use when URL is provided --> Analysis

The Survey of Earned Doctorates is an annual census conducted since 1957 of all individuals receiving a research doctorate from an accredited U.S. institution in a given academic year. The SED is sponsored by the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES) within the National Science Foundation (NSF) and by three other federal agencies: the National Institutes of Health, Department of Education, and National Endowment for the Humanities. The SED collects information on the doctoral recipient’s educational history, demographic characteristics, and postgraduation plans. Results are used to assess characteristics of the doctoral population and trends in doctoral education and degrees.

Areas of Interest

STEM Education
Innovation and Global Competitiveness

Survey Administration

The 2022 survey was conducted by RTI International under contract to NCSES.

Survey Details

Featured survey analysis.

Doctorate Recipients from U.S. Universities: 2022

SED Overview

Data highlights, the number of research doctorates conferred by u.s. institutions, which began a sharp 15-month decline in spring 2020 due to the covid-19 pandemic, rebounded in 2022 with the highest number of research doctorates awarded in any academic year to date.

Over the past 20 years, most of the growth in the number of doctorates earned by both men and women has been in science and engineering (S&E) fields

Methodology

Survey description, technical notes, technical tables, questionnaires, view archived questionnaires, featured analysis.

Research Doctorate Conferrals Rebound, Leading to Record Number of U.S. Doctorate Recipients in 2022

Related content, related collections, survey contact.

For additional information about this survey or the methodology, contact

Get e-mail updates from NCSES

NCSES is an official statistical agency. Subscribe below to receive our latest news and announcements.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

DETAILED Ph D REPORT

Related Papers

nqobile buthelezi

Mamta Mohapatra

David Ravid

Sathish kumar

International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)

IJRASET Publication

All industrial civilizations share the fundamental trait of widespread wage employment. Workers/employees and employers/management are two separate categories of people who are looking for wage employment, respectively. Known variously as labour-management relations, labour relations, industrial relations, or employer-employee relations, these two groups' relationships are structured. With the exception of the first, these definitions indicate that the relations are at minimum inclusive on the part of the employees. In regards to all problems that concern its members, the labour union negotiates with employers and management. Consequently, the two groups' relationships are structured.

wftucentral.org

Femi Aborisade

jose vattakuzhy

Of late, ‘Draft Labour Code on Industrial Relation Bill 2015’ received from Ministry of Labour to be placed before monsoon session of the parliament, after tripartite discussions with stake holders and approval from the cabinet. For creating a new industrial relation’s law the proposed Code on industrial relation is one of the initiatives of the government to subsume 44 labour laws into five broad codes, dealing with industrial relation, wages, social security, industrial safety and welfare. Simultaneously recent developments in the labour movements across the country , like strikes of workers which occurs without support of political based unions, the participation of large number of workers, including unorganised workers in the last national wide strike on 2nd September and the transformation of labour landscape in India due to the globlisation , all these factors along with Government’s moves are seem to be indicators for the backdrop to intensify the deliberations on labour activism in India.

Journal of Industrial Relations

Howard Guille

PhD Progress Reports | Feinberg Graduate School

Skip to main content
Skip to navigation
Skip to search
Disclaimer open in a new window
Share on Facebook
Share on Tweet
Share with Email
Share with WhatsApp
Increase font size
Decrease font size
Sharpen color
Invert color

Weizmann Institute of Science, Open in a new window

Login required menu

STUDENTS & POSTDOCS
FACULTY MEMBERS
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF
MSc Programs
PhD Outline
PhD Study Requirements

PhD Progress Reports

PhD Defense Procedures
Courses and Exams
Academic Calendar
Assistance and fellowships
Top stories
Events & Announcements
Career development
Available positions

What is defined as a progress report?

Research proposal, interim report, special report.

Final Report

Deadline for your Progress Reports

It is mandatory that you submit all reports on time, according to your set deadlines. For your convenience, you may view the deadlines for your reports at any time through the online service. Requests for extensions for up to one month must be sent by email, a month before the deadline, to your FGS Faculty Coordinator.

Requests for extensions for more than one month must be sent by email, a month before the deadline, by your advisor directly to the Chair of the Board of Studies

Research Proposal : Month 12 (Direct Track: Pre-condition to start)
Interim Report: Month 30 (Direct Track: Month 18)
Final Report: Month 48 (Direct Track: Month 36)

Current information concerning the deadline for the submission of your progress reports is available online.

If necessary, you may file a fully detailed request with the Board of Studies to postpone submission of any of your Progress Reports.

Submitting Your Progress Reports

Each one of your progress reports must be submitted as a PDF file via the online uploading service .

Defending Your Progress Reports

The Chair of your Board of Studies will appoint an examining committee of at least two scientists.

Their task will be to review your reports and to meet with you following the submission of each report in order to examine your progress and general knowledge of the field as well as your ability to pursue your research. Your advisor(s) should not be present at these examinations.

As soon as you coordinate a date for the examination of your progress report (i.e., a meeting with your appointed examiners), you should record the date through the online service .

At the end of the process the recommendations of your examiners and of the Chair of the Board of Studies are submitted to the FGS Dean for consideration and approval.

As a PhD candidate, you will be expected to select a specific doctoral research topic (in consultation with your supervisor), prepare a proposal, and submit it to the Feinberg Graduate School. This should all take place within the probationary period, not exceeding one year from the start of your studies.

Technical Details

Your research proposal must be written in English (unless pursuing science teaching studies).
The length may not exceed ten pages, not including pictures, graphs and bibliography.
The font should be Times New Roman size 12, and line spacing should be 1.5.

Structuring the Proposal

Your research proposal should include the following sections:

Title page: Use one of two possible formats, one for the regular PhD track and one for the direct PhD track. For your convenience, provided herewith are WORD templates of the two title page formats: Regular PhD Track and Direct Track .
Abstract (half a page).
The subject of your proposed research
Aims and bjective
Experimental approach and methodology
Preliminary results

Your Interim Report should contain a summary of the results you have achieved to date, as well as your plans for future work. It should be submitted within 30 months from the start of your studies, or at a date determined by the Dean.

The Interim Report must be written in English (except for students of Science Teaching).
The length may not exceed 15 pages, not including pictures, graphs, and bibliography.
The font should be Times New Roman size 12 and line spacing should be 1.5.

Structuring Your Interim Report

It is obligatory to include a title page and an abstract. For your convenience, provided herewith is a WORD template of the title page for the Interim Report .

Your Research proposal and Interim Report examiners, as well as the Board of Studies, may require that you submit a Special Report on your progress. This request may be made of you at any time. When such a decision is made, you will be notified of the deadline for submission of a Special Report.

Submitting a Special Report 

The Special Report must be written in English (except for students of Science Teaching).
The required length is usually between one and ten pages, not including pictures, graphs, and bibliography.

Submitting the Special Report 

It is obligatory to include a title page and an abstract. For your convenience, provided herewith is a WORD template of the title page for a Special Report .

Final Report

Your Final Report should summarize the main results of your research, and serve as a basis for writing your thesis. Review of your Final Report by the examiners who have accompanied your work throughout your doctoral studies is required ─ not only for the submission of your thesis, but also in order to provide you with helpful comments in terms of style and organization.

The Final Report must be written in English (except for students of Science Teaching).
The length may not exceed 30 pages, not including pictures, graphs, and bibliography.
Setting a Date for the Examination

Structuring the Report

The Final Report you submit should follow this structure, and include the following:

Title page. For your convenience, provided herewith is a WORD templates of the title page of the Final Report
Brief summary of the main goals of your research (about one page).
Concise report on your main findings and central conclusions (one page).
Short introduction to your entire study.
Summary of the Experimental or Theoretical section, presented in accordance with the chapters that will constitute your thesis. The description of experiments should be brief and accompanied by tables, illustrations, etc.
The description of results in this report may NOT be replaced by a printed version of papers you have published. However, copies of papers you have published may be attached to your Final Report as appendices.
Short discussion of your ENTIRE study deliberating on your work as a whole.
List of all publications that you have authored during your PhD studies.

* Comments concerning the list of publications:

Each paper is a primary research paper – not a review, review-style book chapter, or meeting abstract – and was published in a peer-reviewed journal, or as a peer-reviewed abstract in a scientific conference as is customary in mathematics and computer science fields.
Each paper must be at the published, in press or accepted stage. In other words, you or your advisor is in possession of a formal, final acceptance letter or email from the journal. The following stages do NOT fulfill these threshold requirements: In preparation, submitted, or in revision.
You are either the sole first author or one of two equally contributing first authors. Papers in which you are one of three or more equally contributing first authors will not be considered for this purpose.
In case of scientific disciplines where a different order of author listing is customary, such as alphabetical order, your advisor and examiners will determine if indeed the paper abides by the spirit of the above-mentioned requirements.

Declaration of specific contributions - for Life Science

Starting 1/05/2023, All PhD progress reports, Research proposals Interim, Final and Thesis submitted to the FGS must include a section in the form of a table, after the Abstract, titled ‘Declaration of specific contributions:’.

In this table the student has to declare who collected the experimental data presented and who analyzed it for each table and figure.

If this information varies at the level of individual panels, it further needs to be provided on the panel level. The students are encouraged to include this specific information also at the bottom of each table/figure legend.

In the case that ALL the data were both produced and analyzed solely by the student, the aforesaid table can be replaced by a brief statement. Note that reports will not be approved without including the information mentioned above or if it is only partial.

An example table

1) Declaration - The student shall declare that the thesis summarizes his/her independent research. If part of the research was performed in collaboration with another investigator(s) and/or students, the collaboration should be explained.

This includes specifying which parts of the thesis describe results from this collaboration, the work done by the collaborators (and not by the student), and the role of the student in the collaboration.

2) List of all publications that you have authored during your PhD studies.

Comments concerning the list of publications :

The " main publications section " should include only those where you are the sole first author or one of up to three equally contributing first authors.
In addition, you can also have an optional " additional publications " section, which can include any other papers meeting the criteria listed above on which you are listed as one of the authors, as well as review manuscripts, published preprints and review-style book chapters.
In case of scientific disciplines where a different order of author listing is customary, such as alphabetical order, your advisor and examiners will determine if indeed the paper abides by the spirit of the above-mentioned requirements.
'Iron Swords' Updates
FGS regulations
Grievances and reporting
Weizmann Email

Faculty Coordinators

Life sciences, science teaching.

800-PHD-LAB (743-522)

PhD Report Writing Service

High-quality report writing services from original phd.

When you are a PhD student, you need to balance out your academic and social life while trying to carry out all of your other duties and obligations. You are bombarded with academic assignments, each of which requiring much time to accomplish. Reports are especially time-consuming pieces of academic writing, as they require a lot of preparation, knowledge, and individual investigation. This is where our report writing service can come in handy. We offer the best quality in the industry as our reports are written only by PhD-educated academics and our customer service team will provide you with assistance through every step of the process.

Why select our custom report writing service?

As professional PhD academics, the supervisors we use are not motivated by money. They have already built up successful careers in such fields as economics, marketing, business, and management, so money is not a priority for them. What drives them is their intention to assist PhD students in their academic journey and contribute to their knowledge and understanding. We are dedicated to the highest quality standards so all our reports are written from scratch to make them plagiarism free. By ordering a customer report service from us, you get a report that is fully in keeping with your requirements and instructions. We also provide a 1 month free amendments period for all our works.

Get report writing help today

If you are interested in our custom report writing service, you can place an order on our website using our order form . All you need to do is to tell us the basics of your report, including its word count, referencing system, and the deadline you need your order back by. When all the details are provided and agreed, we will pass your order to a qualified PhD-educated supervisor who has expertise in your field. Once the supervisor gets started, we will keep you informed throughout the process and you will be able to ask your supervisor any question.

Get Expert Report Writing Help Today

The main purpose of any PhD report is to conduct an investigation into a particular research issue and clearly communicate its outcomes to a certain audience. PhD-level reports have a much more complex and elaborated structure as compared to essays. However, in some disciplines, the difference between reports and essays can be blurred. This phenomenon is especially apparent at the doctorate level due to the complexity as well as the scale and scope of academic papers. Nonetheless, there are still some characteristics that distinguish reports from essays. We have prepared a set of tips that will help you write a high-quality PhD-level report.

Research aim and structure

To keep your doctorate report focused, you should know exactly what it is about. Examine all the details about the report and decide what particular information and data it should contain. Take your time structuring your PhD-level report by making sure all the required aspects and content points are covered in its structure. Remember that changing the structure at later stages would bring significant changes to the report, limiting your chances to successfully deliver it on time.

Information search

You should access the most recent sources of information and data, such as books, empirical articles, databases, official statistics, and industry reports in your field. Remember that the information and data you obtain must be reliable and credible to make sure your findings can be trusted.

Data analysis

Analysing data in PhD reports requires much more knowledge and experience than performing data analysis at Bachelors or even Masters’ level. Make sure you analyse the collected data as thoroughly and precisely as possible. You can use a range of graphical and statistical instruments for this purpose. At the same time, don’t overstate your findings as it may negatively affect your final grade. Be objective, critical, and to the point in presenting and discussing the analysis outcomes.

Provide recommendations

Producing and discussing the analysis findings is not enough to deliver a high-quality PhD-level report. You also need to provide your audience with practical recommendations as how to tackle the research problem based on your analysis outcomes. Make sure your recommendations are detailed enough so the reader could easily understand what actions to take and how they would affect the report stakeholders.

Editing and Proofreading

To ensure your report meets the standards of PhD writing, you need to carefully proofread and edit it. Editing is a crucial aspect of completing a PhD-level report as it allows for identifying and eliminating all potential threats to its quality. Remember that surpassing the proofreading and editing phase will cost you marks, especially at the PhD level. Hence, give close attention to editing your work before making a final submission.

These tips for writing a PhD-level report have been proven effective by many students and academics. By following these guidelines, you can deliver a high-quality report of a PhD level and make sure it provides the audience with highly relevant recommendations. However, if you are looking for assistance in this task, we can help you. We are a group of professional PhD-educated supervisors and we can provide you with any kind of assistance and advice on your task.

We offer a range of services, including PhD custom writing . By using our services, you will be provided with helpful guidance from a professional academic who holds a PhD degree and has considerable experience in your subject. While each order includes all of our guarantees , we promise that your paper will be delivered on time and will be free from any plagiarism.

Stanford alum, business school dean Jonathan Levin named Stanford president

Jonathan Levin has been appointed the 13th president of Stanford University. (Image credit: Aubrie Pick)

Jonathan Levin, a distinguished economist and Stanford alumnus who has led the Stanford Graduate School of Business as dean for the last eight years, has been appointed the next president of Stanford University, the Board of Trustees announced today.

Jerry Yang, BS, MS ’90, chair of the Board of Trustees, thanked the 20-member Presidential Search Committee (PSC) for their work, and said Levin was the unanimous choice of the search committee and of the trustees. The PSC conducted a comprehensive search for Stanford’s next president. Levin will become president effective Aug. 1, 2024.

“Jon brings a rare combination of qualities: a deep understanding and love of Stanford, an impressive track record of academic and leadership success, the analytical prowess to tackle complex strategic issues, and a collaborative and optimistic working style,” Yang said. “He is consistently described by those who know him as principled, humble, authentic, thoughtful, and inspiring. We are excited about Stanford’s future under Jon’s leadership.”

Levin, 51, has been a member of the Stanford faculty since 2000. The winner in 2011 of the John Bates Clark Medal, an award recognizing the most outstanding American economist under the age of 40, Levin today is the Philip H. Knight Professor and dean of the Stanford Graduate School of Business. He also serves as a member of President Biden’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.

“I am grateful and humbled to be asked to lead Stanford – a university that has meant so much to me for more than three decades,” Levin said. “When I was an undergraduate, Stanford opened my mind, nurtured my love for math and literature, and inspired me to pursue an academic career. In the years since, it has given me opportunities to pursue ideas in collaboration with brilliant colleagues, teach exceptional students, and bring people together to achieve ambitious collective goals around the university.”

“As I look to Stanford’s future, I’m excited to strengthen our commitment to academic excellence and freedom; to foster the principles of openness, curiosity, and mutual respect; and to lead our faculty and students as they advance knowledge and seek to contribute in meaningful ways to the world.”

Levin will succeed Richard Saller, who has served as Stanford’s president on an interim basis since September 2023.

“I want to thank President Richard Saller for his exemplary leadership this year,” Levin said. “He, along with Provost Martinez, have demonstrated deeply principled academic values and uncommon thoughtfulness as they have navigated a unique set of challenges. I look forward to working with them in the months ahead, and continuing that work with Provost Martinez and leaders across the university to envision an even better Stanford.”

Presidential search process

The PSC, composed of diverse stakeholders across the university, conducted an extensive and rigorous seven-month search for the university’s 13th president. Read more about the search process .

Leaders of the search highlighted Levin’s impressive academic credentials, strong track record as dean of the Graduate School of Business, and extensive knowledge of Stanford and its culture. They also noted that he has the personal qualities that members of the community emphasized were important in Stanford’s next president, including integrity, humility, aspiration, and emotional and intellectual intelligence.

“Jon is a leader who drives change in a way that engages faculty, students, and other stakeholders,” said Bonnie Maldonado, MD ’81, co-chair of the Presidential Search Committee and senior associate dean for faculty development and diversity in the Stanford School of Medicine. “Moreover, Jon’s academic background, analytical skills, and experience have provided him with the skillset and ability to oversee this incredibly complex institution.”

“Jon exhibits a perspective that blends optimism, intellect, ideas, and experience,” said Lily Sarafan, BS ’03, MS ’03, co-chair of the Presidential Search Committee and trustee. “Jon has a deep understanding of Stanford and its role in the world, including the need to expand the university’s educational reach, support emerging areas of research, and renew trust and goodwill both internally and externally.”

“We interviewed an impressive slate of candidates, individuals with excellent credentials and experience,” Sarafan continued. “From that outstanding group, Jon emerged as the person best suited to lead Stanford into the future.”

Academic career and public service

Levin attended Stanford as an undergraduate, completing a BA in English and a BS in mathematics in 1994. He then completed an MPhil in economics from Oxford University and a PhD in economics from MIT.

Image credit: Aubrie Pick

He joined the economics faculty at Stanford in 2000 and later was awarded an endowed chair, becoming the Holbrook Working Professor of Price Theory in the School of Humanities and Sciences.

He served as chair of the Stanford economics department from 2011 to 2014. As chair, Levin established a vision and strategy to elevate the department and helped recruit two future Nobel laureates and four Clark medalists to Stanford.

Levin is widely recognized for his scholarship in industrial organization and market design. His research has spanned topics ranging from incentive contracts to game theory to e-commerce, consumer lending, and health care competition. He helped design the first Advanced Market Commitment that accelerated the global adoption of pneumococcal vaccine. He also helped design the Federal Communication Commission’s $20 billion incentive auction to convert broadcast television spectrum to broadband wireless licenses. He has advised technology companies building online marketplaces and advertising systems.

Levin has also been active in public service. In 2021, Levin was invited by President Biden to serve on the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. In this role, he has studied problems ranging from the modeling and predicting of extreme weather to the prospects of AI for scientific discovery, and from cyber-physical resilience to the future of the social sciences.

Levin became dean of the Graduate School of Business in 2016. Under his leadership, the school made important advances in multiple strategic areas.

First, it made significant investments in its research and teaching mission, including the creation of the GSB Research Hub to provide shared resources for empirical and experimental work, and the Teaching and Learning Hub to support curriculum development, educational technology, and experiential learning. The school significantly increased faculty research funding, redesigned student fellowships to be need-based, and expanded its distinctive academic-practitioner teaching model, among other efforts.

Second, the school expanded its educational reach. It has extended its footprint in executive and online education, including significant growth of the flagship online LEAD program for mid- to senior-level professionals. The school has made significant strides with Stanford Seed, which educates entrepreneurial leaders in the developing world; the King Center on Global Development, established in 2017 in partnership with the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research; and by initiating Stanford Global Economic Forums in Beijing and Singapore. This year, the GSB introduced the new Stanford Pathfinder classes for undergraduates across the university.

Third, during Levin’s tenure as dean, the school launched a major new initiative around Business, Government, and Society. The initiative addresses how business intersects with societal issues, such as sustainability, the effects of technology, the strength of democratic institutions, and global politics. It has led to new classes, research grants, workshops for students, a faculty-led effort on artificial intelligence, and new partnerships between the GSB and Stanford’s other schools and institutes.

A commitment to different perspectives has also been a core tenet of the school. The GSB degree programs increased their outreach efforts and significantly increased the representation of women and historically under-represented groups. Today, the GSB student population is the most diverse in the school’s history. Specific programs have also been created, including the Building Opportunities for Leadership Diversity (BOLD) Fellows Fund for students of backgrounds with financial hardship, and the Stanford Latino Entrepreneurship Initiative, which has educated more than 1,000 entrepreneurial business leaders.

“Stanford is a place of unbridled optimism, of exploration and innovation,” said Jennifer Aaker, PhD ’95, a member of the Presidential Search Committee and the General Atlantic Professor at the GSB. “It’s a place where anything is possible – where you can excel in academics and athletics, pursue entrepreneurship with integrity, combine intellectual rigor with irreverence. Jon loves Stanford, and he understands this central truth about the university: that it is a place of possibility. He is the right person to not only envision where Stanford should go, but to take us there. He’s also pro-fun.”

With Levin’s appointment as president, a search will be undertaken by the provost for his successor as dean of the Graduate School of Business.

Depth of knowledge, breadth of experience

Levin’s career as a student, faculty member, and academic leader touches many disciplines across the university. He was both an undergraduate, and faculty member, in Stanford’s School of Humanities & Sciences. During his 16 years in Stanford’s Department of Economics, he worked closely with undergraduates, and advised nearly 50 PhD dissertations. He chaired the university committee on undergraduate admissions and financial aid, served on the university budget group, and in both 1994 and 2012 participated in major university reviews of undergraduate education. As dean of the business school, he adds a deep knowledge of professional education and student life, along with overseeing a highly interdisciplinary faculty, search committee members said.

Image credit: Saul Bromberger

“Jon embodies the character and values I aspire to emulate as a future Stanford graduate,” said Senkai Hsia, the undergraduate member of the Presidential Search Committee. “As an undergraduate alum himself, Jon gets the irreverent spirit of exploration and exuberance that makes Stanford special. He is admired by students at the Graduate School of Business, and I know he will love engaging with students across the university. Jon will boldly lead Stanford into a bright future.”

Levin’s awards and honors include membership as a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences; Fulbright Scholar; Sloan Research Fellow; recipient of a Guggenheim Fellowship; winner of the John Bates Clark Medal, recognizing the outstanding American economist under the age of 40; and recipient at Stanford of the Dean’s Award for Distinguished Teaching and the Department of Economics Teaching Prize.

Levin is married to Amy Levin, a physician. They have three children.

A list of previous Stanford presidents is available here .

Stanford University is a place of discovery, creativity, innovation, and world-class medical care. Dedicated to its founding mission of benefitting society through research and education, Stanford strives to create a sustainable future for all, catalyze discoveries about ourselves and our world, accelerate the societal impact of its research, and educate students as global citizens. Its main campus holds seven schools along with interdisciplinary research and policy institutes, athletics, and the arts. More than 7,000 undergraduate and 9,000 graduate students pursue studies at Stanford each year. Learn more at stanford.edu.

Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation

The Dickens Project

About the Dickens Project
Dickens Project Consortium
Consortium Member Institutions
Consortium Member Publications
Dickens Universe
Santa Cruz Pickwick Club
Friends Faculty Fellows
Dickens-to-Go
Dickens Day of Writing
MLA Sessions
NEH Summer Seminars
Scholarships and Grants
High School Students
Undergraduate Students
Graduate Students
Road Scholars
Teaching Aids
Dickens FAQ
Dickens Chronology
Bibliographies
OMF Scholarly Pages
Dickens Project Library
Dickens in a Minute
Dickens Studies Annual
Other Online Resources
Dickens-Related Organizations
Friends of the Dickens Project
Board of Directors
Ways to Give
Legacy Circle

Home / News & Events / News / Dickens Universe Graduate Winter Conference Report

Dickens Universe Graduate Winter Conference Report

March 28, 2024

By Aaron Bartlett, Ph.D. Candidate in English, University of Maryland

The Dickens Universe Graduate Winter Conference was a resounding success at the beginning of March. Graduate students from across the Dickens Universe Consortium assembled at the University of Maryland, College Park, to share research on Charles Dickens and nineteenth-century literature.

Dr. Sukanya Bannerjee of UC Berkeley was the keynote speaker, sharing her work on loyalty in the nineteenth century and examining how A Tale of Two Cities manifests important ideas about loyalty that have been overlooked in scholarship. Graduate students continued the interest in A Tale of Two Cities, following its treatment at the 2023 Dickens Universe, with Emily Anderson (Rutgers) discussing the interchangeability of characters in Tale and Mayrose Beatty (also of Rutgers) considering Sydney Carton as a “retributive force” in the novel.

There was also broad interest in Dickens’s work as a whole. Krista Barrett and Soyoo Park, both of Louisiana State University, covered David Copperfield . Barrett considered Mr. Dick as an instance of disability complicating nineteenth-century norms about the ideal nuclear family; she argued that Mr. Dick’s cognitive disability makes it “possible and natural” for him to choose a family at Miss Betsey’s cottage. With Mr. Dick, Dickens makes room for alternative forms of family relations within middle-class Victorian standards. Park treated Miss Rosa Dartle as a character who diverges from Victorian domestic ideals.

Park, along with Jessica Monaco (Stanford), Margaret Bowlin (University of Iowa), and Amber Walters-Molina (University of Tennessee, Knoxville) was part of a resonant panel that looked at instances where woman characters in Victorian novels demonstrate resistance to gender norms in subtle ways that have been previously overlooked. Monaco discussed Bleak House , arguing that Esther Summerson should be read as a gothic heroine akin to the protagonists of the gothic romances of Ann Radcliffe and Regina Maria Roche in the 1790s. Esther, Monaco argued, is a “smart, brave, active participant in …unraveling” the mystery around her family history, a mystery that could have come right out of a gothic novel. Bowlin considered the idea of the “Fallen Woman” in Elizabeth Gaskell’s Ruth , reading the novel alongside Unitarian theology (Gaskell’s husband was a Unitarian minister), and she argues that we should read Ruth’s death as atoning for the sins of others, rather than for her own. Walters-Molina looked at the sensational Lady Audley’s Secret , and the way the scheming Lady Audley becomes a modern master of the railways in order to sneak across the countryside and perform her dark deeds.

Other grads examined wider topics in nineteenth-century literature. Eliza-Alexander Wilcox, also of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, called attention to Lord Byron’s overlooked closet drama The Deformed Transformed and its complicated portrayal of disability, gender, and bodily transformation. Aaron Bartlett (University of Maryland) looked at William Morris’s The Earthly Paradise in comparison to modern AI technology, finding that Morris develops an idea of the poetic voice as “simulated.” Rowan Morar of Rice University examined drug use in Wilkie Collins’s The Moonstone , highlighting the ideas Victorians had about drugs as being very different from our own. Nina Cook, also of Rice University, presented her research on direct address in the work of Charlotte Brontë—moments where the narrator instructs the reader to imagine something, thus inviting the reader into a conversation with the book.

The conference was a stimulating affair, and Dickens Universe faculty were on hand to offer rich feedback and advice to our community of early career scholars.

News Archive by Year
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Report an accessibility barrier
Land Acknowledgment
Accreditation

Last modified: April 2, 2024 128.114.113.82

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

Knowledge Base
Academic writing
How to write a lab report

How To Write A Lab Report | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

Published on May 20, 2021 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on July 23, 2023.

A lab report conveys the aim, methods, results, and conclusions of a scientific experiment. The main purpose of a lab report is to demonstrate your understanding of the scientific method by performing and evaluating a hands-on lab experiment. This type of assignment is usually shorter than a research paper .

Lab reports are commonly used in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. This article focuses on how to structure and write a lab report.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Structuring a lab report, introduction, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about lab reports.

The sections of a lab report can vary between scientific fields and course requirements, but they usually contain the purpose, methods, and findings of a lab experiment .

Each section of a lab report has its own purpose.

Title: expresses the topic of your study
Abstract : summarizes your research aims, methods, results, and conclusions
Introduction: establishes the context needed to understand the topic
Method: describes the materials and procedures used in the experiment
Results: reports all descriptive and inferential statistical analyses
Discussion: interprets and evaluates results and identifies limitations
Conclusion: sums up the main findings of your experiment
References: list of all sources cited using a specific style (e.g. APA )
Appendices : contains lengthy materials, procedures, tables or figures

Although most lab reports contain these sections, some sections can be omitted or combined with others. For example, some lab reports contain a brief section on research aims instead of an introduction, and a separate conclusion is not always required.

If you’re not sure, it’s best to check your lab report requirements with your instructor.

Check for common mistakes

Use the best grammar checker available to check for common mistakes in your text.

Fix mistakes for free

Your title provides the first impression of your lab report – effective titles communicate the topic and/or the findings of your study in specific terms.

Create a title that directly conveys the main focus or purpose of your study. It doesn’t need to be creative or thought-provoking, but it should be informative.

The effects of varying nitrogen levels on tomato plant height.
Testing the universality of the McGurk effect.
Comparing the viscosity of common liquids found in kitchens.

An abstract condenses a lab report into a brief overview of about 150–300 words. It should provide readers with a compact version of the research aims, the methods and materials used, the main results, and the final conclusion.

Think of it as a way of giving readers a preview of your full lab report. Write the abstract last, in the past tense, after you’ve drafted all the other sections of your report, so you’ll be able to succinctly summarize each section.

To write a lab report abstract, use these guiding questions:

What is the wider context of your study?
What research question were you trying to answer?
How did you perform the experiment?
What did your results show?
How did you interpret your results?
What is the importance of your findings?

Nitrogen is a necessary nutrient for high quality plants. Tomatoes, one of the most consumed fruits worldwide, rely on nitrogen for healthy leaves and stems to grow fruit. This experiment tested whether nitrogen levels affected tomato plant height in a controlled setting. It was expected that higher levels of nitrogen fertilizer would yield taller tomato plants.

Levels of nitrogen fertilizer were varied between three groups of tomato plants. The control group did not receive any nitrogen fertilizer, while one experimental group received low levels of nitrogen fertilizer, and a second experimental group received high levels of nitrogen fertilizer. All plants were grown from seeds, and heights were measured 50 days into the experiment.

The effects of nitrogen levels on plant height were tested between groups using an ANOVA. The plants with the highest level of nitrogen fertilizer were the tallest, while the plants with low levels of nitrogen exceeded the control group plants in height. In line with expectations and previous findings, the effects of nitrogen levels on plant height were statistically significant. This study strengthens the importance of nitrogen for tomato plants.

Your lab report introduction should set the scene for your experiment. One way to write your introduction is with a funnel (an inverted triangle) structure:

Start with the broad, general research topic
Narrow your topic down your specific study focus
End with a clear research question

Begin by providing background information on your research topic and explaining why it’s important in a broad real-world or theoretical context. Describe relevant previous research on your topic and note how your study may confirm it or expand it, or fill a gap in the research field.

This lab experiment builds on previous research from Haque, Paul, and Sarker (2011), who demonstrated that tomato plant yield increased at higher levels of nitrogen. However, the present research focuses on plant height as a growth indicator and uses a lab-controlled setting instead.

Next, go into detail on the theoretical basis for your study and describe any directly relevant laws or equations that you’ll be using. State your main research aims and expectations by outlining your hypotheses .

Based on the importance of nitrogen for tomato plants, the primary hypothesis was that the plants with the high levels of nitrogen would grow the tallest. The secondary hypothesis was that plants with low levels of nitrogen would grow taller than plants with no nitrogen.

Your introduction doesn’t need to be long, but you may need to organize it into a few paragraphs or with subheadings such as “Research Context” or “Research Aims.”

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

Academic style
Vague sentences
Style consistency

See an example

A lab report Method section details the steps you took to gather and analyze data. Give enough detail so that others can follow or evaluate your procedures. Write this section in the past tense. If you need to include any long lists of procedural steps or materials, place them in the Appendices section but refer to them in the text here.

You should describe your experimental design, your subjects, materials, and specific procedures used for data collection and analysis.

Experimental design

Briefly note whether your experiment is a within-subjects or between-subjects design, and describe how your sample units were assigned to conditions if relevant.

A between-subjects design with three groups of tomato plants was used. The control group did not receive any nitrogen fertilizer. The first experimental group received a low level of nitrogen fertilizer, while the second experimental group received a high level of nitrogen fertilizer.

Describe human subjects in terms of demographic characteristics, and animal or plant subjects in terms of genetic background. Note the total number of subjects as well as the number of subjects per condition or per group. You should also state how you recruited subjects for your study.

List the equipment or materials you used to gather data and state the model names for any specialized equipment.

List of materials

35 Tomato seeds

15 plant pots (15 cm tall)

Light lamps (50,000 lux)

Nitrogen fertilizer

Measuring tape

Describe your experimental settings and conditions in detail. You can provide labelled diagrams or images of the exact set-up necessary for experimental equipment. State how extraneous variables were controlled through restriction or by fixing them at a certain level (e.g., keeping the lab at room temperature).

Light levels were fixed throughout the experiment, and the plants were exposed to 12 hours of light a day. Temperature was restricted to between 23 and 25℃. The pH and carbon levels of the soil were also held constant throughout the experiment as these variables could influence plant height. The plants were grown in rooms free of insects or other pests, and they were spaced out adequately.

Your experimental procedure should describe the exact steps you took to gather data in chronological order. You’ll need to provide enough information so that someone else can replicate your procedure, but you should also be concise. Place detailed information in the appendices where appropriate.

In a lab experiment, you’ll often closely follow a lab manual to gather data. Some instructors will allow you to simply reference the manual and state whether you changed any steps based on practical considerations. Other instructors may want you to rewrite the lab manual procedures as complete sentences in coherent paragraphs, while noting any changes to the steps that you applied in practice.

If you’re performing extensive data analysis, be sure to state your planned analysis methods as well. This includes the types of tests you’ll perform and any programs or software you’ll use for calculations (if relevant).

First, tomato seeds were sown in wooden flats containing soil about 2 cm below the surface. Each seed was kept 3-5 cm apart. The flats were covered to keep the soil moist until germination. The seedlings were removed and transplanted to pots 8 days later, with a maximum of 2 plants to a pot. Each pot was watered once a day to keep the soil moist.

The nitrogen fertilizer treatment was applied to the plant pots 12 days after transplantation. The control group received no treatment, while the first experimental group received a low concentration, and the second experimental group received a high concentration. There were 5 pots in each group, and each plant pot was labelled to indicate the group the plants belonged to.

50 days after the start of the experiment, plant height was measured for all plants. A measuring tape was used to record the length of the plant from ground level to the top of the tallest leaf.

In your results section, you should report the results of any statistical analysis procedures that you undertook. You should clearly state how the results of statistical tests support or refute your initial hypotheses.

The main results to report include:

any descriptive statistics
statistical test results
the significance of the test results
estimates of standard error or confidence intervals

The mean heights of the plants in the control group, low nitrogen group, and high nitrogen groups were 20.3, 25.1, and 29.6 cm respectively. A one-way ANOVA was applied to calculate the effect of nitrogen fertilizer level on plant height. The results demonstrated statistically significant ( p = .03) height differences between groups.

Next, post-hoc tests were performed to assess the primary and secondary hypotheses. In support of the primary hypothesis, the high nitrogen group plants were significantly taller than the low nitrogen group and the control group plants. Similarly, the results supported the secondary hypothesis: the low nitrogen plants were taller than the control group plants.

These results can be reported in the text or in tables and figures. Use text for highlighting a few key results, but present large sets of numbers in tables, or show relationships between variables with graphs.

You should also include sample calculations in the Results section for complex experiments. For each sample calculation, provide a brief description of what it does and use clear symbols. Present your raw data in the Appendices section and refer to it to highlight any outliers or trends.

The Discussion section will help demonstrate your understanding of the experimental process and your critical thinking skills.

In this section, you can:

Interpret your results
Compare your findings with your expectations
Identify any sources of experimental error
Explain any unexpected results
Suggest possible improvements for further studies

Interpreting your results involves clarifying how your results help you answer your main research question. Report whether your results support your hypotheses.

Did you measure what you sought out to measure?
Were your analysis procedures appropriate for this type of data?

Compare your findings with other research and explain any key differences in findings.

Are your results in line with those from previous studies or your classmates’ results? Why or why not?

An effective Discussion section will also highlight the strengths and limitations of a study.

Did you have high internal validity or reliability?
How did you establish these aspects of your study?

When describing limitations, use specific examples. For example, if random error contributed substantially to the measurements in your study, state the particular sources of error (e.g., imprecise apparatus) and explain ways to improve them.

The results support the hypothesis that nitrogen levels affect plant height, with increasing levels producing taller plants. These statistically significant results are taken together with previous research to support the importance of nitrogen as a nutrient for tomato plant growth.

However, unlike previous studies, this study focused on plant height as an indicator of plant growth in the present experiment. Importantly, plant height may not always reflect plant health or fruit yield, so measuring other indicators would have strengthened the study findings.

Another limitation of the study is the plant height measurement technique, as the measuring tape was not suitable for plants with extreme curvature. Future studies may focus on measuring plant height in different ways.

The main strengths of this study were the controls for extraneous variables, such as pH and carbon levels of the soil. All other factors that could affect plant height were tightly controlled to isolate the effects of nitrogen levels, resulting in high internal validity for this study.

Your conclusion should be the final section of your lab report. Here, you’ll summarize the findings of your experiment, with a brief overview of the strengths and limitations, and implications of your study for further research.

Some lab reports may omit a Conclusion section because it overlaps with the Discussion section, but you should check with your instructor before doing so.

If you want to know more about AI for academic writing, AI tools, or fallacies make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

Ad hominem fallacy
Post hoc fallacy
Appeal to authority fallacy
False cause fallacy
Sunk cost fallacy
Deep learning
Generative AI
Machine learning
Reinforcement learning
Supervised vs. unsupervised learning

(AI) Tools

Grammar Checker
Paraphrasing Tool
Text Summarizer
AI Detector
Plagiarism Checker
Citation Generator

A lab report conveys the aim, methods, results, and conclusions of a scientific experiment . Lab reports are commonly assigned in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields.

The purpose of a lab report is to demonstrate your understanding of the scientific method with a hands-on lab experiment. Course instructors will often provide you with an experimental design and procedure. Your task is to write up how you actually performed the experiment and evaluate the outcome.

In contrast, a research paper requires you to independently develop an original argument. It involves more in-depth research and interpretation of sources and data.

A lab report is usually shorter than a research paper.

The sections of a lab report can vary between scientific fields and course requirements, but it usually contains the following:

Abstract: summarizes your research aims, methods, results, and conclusions
References: list of all sources cited using a specific style (e.g. APA)
Appendices: contains lengthy materials, procedures, tables or figures

The results chapter or section simply and objectively reports what you found, without speculating on why you found these results. The discussion interprets the meaning of the results, puts them in context, and explains why they matter.

In qualitative research , results and discussion are sometimes combined. But in quantitative research , it’s considered important to separate the objective results from your interpretation of them.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Bhandari, P. (2023, July 23). How To Write A Lab Report | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved April 2, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-writing/lab-report/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Other students also liked, guide to experimental design | overview, steps, & examples, how to write an apa methods section, how to write an apa results section, what is your plagiarism score.

We use cookies to provide you with the best experience and to help improve our website. View Privacy Statement

A person in a green dress standing on a stage.

BGSU alumna credits mentorship during The Hatch with her continued success in fashion industry

Estimated Reading Time:

Fatima Camara continues to build her international fashion brand using knowledge from her BGSU experience

#1 University in Ohio for Student Experience

Innovative engineering degrees, #1 public university in the midwest students would choose again for the fourth consecutive year.

By Laren Kowalczyk ‘07

More than seven years into building an international fashion brand, Fatima Camara ‘17 remains grateful for the advice from her mentor at Bowling Green State University about not compromising brand value.

The advice came from distinguished BGSU business alumnus Paul J. Hooker ‘75 while Camara was participating in The Hatch , a semester-long program in the Schmidthorst College of Business that takes students’ business ideas from concept to reality.

“He told me, ‘Don’t ever start a brand by selling low-cost items because when you’re ready to elevate your brand and provide better quality, you’ll compromise customer loyalty,'” Camara said.

“Paul’s advice has always stuck with me. I’m very grateful to BGSU and the whole Hatch team for helping me develop and refine my idea. The mentorship I received was invaluable.”

Dozens of BGSU students like Camara have pitched their business ideas to alumni investors during The Hatch in a format similar to the television show “Shark Tank.” The event, a part of Entrepreneurship Week (E-Week) at BGSU , challenges students to develop unique ways to solve problems for the public good.

More than $800,000 has been invested into student businesses since The Hatch began in 2013.

“The Hatch is a self-guided gauntlet of experiential learning,” said Ryan Holley, assistant teaching professor in the Schmidthorst College of Business, who works with Hatch participants to refine their business ideas and presentation skills. “Students are taking their ideas from conception to launch. The Hatch is an amazing opportunity for students to explore the tangibility of possibility.”

A person wearing an intricate blue dress.

Camara’s 10,000 Threads brand provides custom, high-end clothing that celebrates West African culture. The pieces are made by local tailors in Guinea, West Africa, where Camara was born, and in two production facilities in Senegal and Nigeria.

Camara, who earned a bachelor’s degree in fashion merchandising and product development from BGSU , said she often felt pressured to reduce prices or sell less expensive items while building her brand.

Instead, she relied on the advice from Hooker and remained committed to her initial vision.

“That advice has been essential to my success as a business owner,” Camara said. “Even when I faced challenges, I pushed forward to build a list of clientele who are willing and able to pay for high-priced items. I value the quality of my clothing and the designs I create, and I want my customers to do the same.”

After living and working in Atlanta for several years following her graduation from BGSU, Camara returned to her native Guinea in 2021 to focus entirely on her business.

Since then, Camara has expanded her production capabilities, trained for five months to learn an intricate sewing technique and begun designing her first custom wedding gown to expand her business into new markets. New this year, Camara is donating a school uniform to a child in Africa for every item sold.

“I couldn’t focus on my clothing line as much as I wanted while working full-time,” she said. “I’m so happy I had enough faith in myself to devote all my time to 10,000 Threads.”

School of Nursing-Graduate Programs Committee (GPC), 04/05/2024

School of Nursing-Graduate Programs Committee (GPC) Microsoft Teams meeting Join on your computer, mobile app or room device Click here to join the meeting Meeting ID: 239 493 085 272 Passcode: aSUfao Download Teams | Join on the web Or call in (audio only) +1 414-253-8850,,18489641# United States, Milwaukee Phone Conference ID: 184 896 41# Find a local number | Reset PIN Learn More | Help | Meeting options | Legal ________________________________________________________________________________, 08:45 am Purpose of Meeting: To oversee the development and quality of the Graduate programs in the School of Nursing at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Contact: Susan Wolff, [email protected] , (414) 229-5698.

Eyeth Day celebration April 6 By Kathy Quirk April 4, 2024
Planetarium hosting eclipse event, teaching 4,300 MPS students this spring By Kathy Quirk April 4, 2024
$1.3 million gift moves UWM closer to new research vessel By Kari Pink April 2, 2024
Milwaukee Bucks come to UWM to encourage students to vote By John Schumacher April 2, 2024
Celebrate UWM on 414 Day By Kari Pink April 1, 2024
Documentary produced by UWM alum wins Academy Award By John Schumacher March 12, 2024
Victory puts UWM one game from NCAA Tournament By Howie Magner March 12, 2024
UWM’s successful season falls just short of NCAA Tournament By John Schumacher March 13, 2024

phd report

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS

How to Present PhD Progress Report to Doctoral Committee Members in 03 Simple Stages

Introduction

Before the PhD Progress Presentation Meeting

During the PhD Progress Presentation Meeting

After the PhD Progress Presentation Meeting

Frequently Asked Questions

Upcoming Events

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Recent Posts

What Is a Thesis?

What Should a Thesis Include?

Acknowledgements

1. Introduction

2. Literature Review

3. Main Body

4. Conclusion

How Many Words Is a PhD Thesis?

How Do I Format My Thesis?

What Happens When I Finish My Thesis?

How Do I Publish My Thesis?

Browse PhDs Now

Study at Cambridge

Submission deadlines (electronic)

Oral examination

Originality

Social media

Writing your PhD First-Year Report

Course Content and Unit Aims

Course Days/times

Teaching Methods and Learning Outcomes

Eligibility

National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics

Survey Info

Areas of Interest

Survey Administration

Survey Details

Doctorate Recipients from U.S. Universities: 2022

SED Overview

Over the past 20 years, most of the growth in the number of doctorates earned by both men and women has been in science and engineering (S&E) fields

Methodology

Research Doctorate Conferrals Rebound, Leading to Record Number of U.S. Doctorate Recipients in 2022

Get e-mail updates from NCSES

DETAILED Ph D REPORT

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

PhD Progress Reports | Feinberg Graduate School

Login required menu

PhD Progress Reports

What is defined as a progress report?

Deadline for your Progress Reports

Submitting Your Progress Reports

Defending Your Progress Reports

Structuring the Proposal

Structuring Your Interim Report

Submitting the Special Report

Final Report

Structuring the Report

Declaration of specific contributions - for Life Science

Faculty Coordinators

PhD Report Writing Service

Why select our custom report writing service?

Get report writing help today

Get Expert Report Writing Help Today

Research aim and structure

Information search

Data analysis

Provide recommendations

Editing and Proofreading

Stanford alum, business school dean Jonathan Levin named Stanford president

Presidential search process

Academic career and public service

Depth of knowledge, breadth of experience

Dickens Universe Graduate Winter Conference Report

Have a language expert improve your writing

How To Write A Lab Report | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Table of contents

Check for common mistakes

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Experimental design

Submitting the Special Report 