EVALUATION CALLS AND DEADLINES

§1. Calls and deadlines for students enrolled for the first time. These students must be evaluated in the September-October call of the following academic year. If they do not attend (not presented) or do not pass (negative evaluation), they must attend the next call, which will take place in March-April. If they do not attend (not presented) or do not pass (negative evaluation), they will be excluded from the doctoral program.

§2. For students enrolled in previous years, those who have obtained a positive evaluation in the previous year’s September-October call must be evaluated in the September-October call of the following year. If they do not attend (not presented) or do not pass (negative evaluation), they must be evaluated in the next call in March-April. If they do not attend (not presented) or do not pass (negative evaluation), they will be withdrawn from the doctoral program.

In summary, all students must undergo evaluation one year after obtaining the previous positive evaluation. If they obtained it in September-October, it will be in September-October of the following year, and if they obtained it in March-April, it will be in March-April of the following year. This means that each time a student passes the evaluation in the second call, the date of the next evaluation changes (If a student attended, for example, the first call in September-October 2023 and did not pass the evaluation and does so in March-April 2024, the first evaluation call of the next year will no longer be September-October 2024, but March-April 2025).

§3. Tutors and directors: for everything to work correctly, it is necessary that we all carry out our respective tasks. If tutors and directors do not validate the activities of our students and submit the reports, the student cannot be evaluated and will lose the call.

ANNUAL EVALUATIONS

§4. General rules: the specific characteristics of the evaluation depend on the student’s year and their dedication regime (full-time or part-time), although the following general rules apply:

• Doctoral student request: To attend a call, the evaluation must be requested. The request must be made by the doctoral student through the DAD.
• First-year doctoral students: Evaluations are conducted on completed years, so first-year doctoral students do not have to request the evaluation of their first year until September-October of the following academic year. For example, students who enter the program in October 2022 will not have to request their first evaluation until September-October 2023 (first call). If they do not do so in the first call or do not pass it, they must attend the next one: March-April 2024.
• Tutor, tutor/director, or co-director report: In all evaluations, the tutor, tutor/director, and, if applicable, the co-director must upload a report to the DAD indicating their approval of the doctoral student’s work during the year. There is no form or model for this, but the tutor is expected to inform the tribunal in sufficient detail about the doctoral student’s progress. Without this report, the doctoral student cannot be evaluated.
• Evaluation language: The language used in the documents on which the evaluation is based will be the same as the project submitted for admission to the doctoral program. The use of another language must be previously authorized by the program coordinator.
• DAD opening dates in each call: Students required to undergo evaluation usually receive a notification from the DAD, although this does not exempt them from being aware of their evaluation status.
• Tribunal: In all evaluations, the academic committee acts as the tribunal.
• Evaluation criteria: The academic committee does not judge the doctoral student’s work from a scientific point of view but rather their progress, i.e., whether significant progress has been made.
• Research plan: For each evaluation, the DAD requires the doctoral student to upload an “updated research plan” with the thesis index. It should be noted that in this doctoral program, the doctoral student’s research project must be submitted for admission and is evaluated at the time of admission. For this reason, the project itself is not subject to evaluation. Under the name “research plan,” the doctoral student must upload a single PDF document for each evaluation, which must contain, in addition to the research project and the updated index, a working document for first and second-year students. In the third year, the research plan submitted for evaluation must contain a list of quality contributions (publications) made by the doctoral student. In the fourth and fifth evaluations for part-time students and the sixth and seventh evaluations for part-time students, a brief report of up to 1000 words must be presented, indicating which parts of the thesis are already completed and what remains to be done. If the necessary score to defend the thesis has not been obtained, publications must continue to be provided until the necessary score is reached.
• Training plan: Starting from the 23/24 academic year, students enrolled for the first time in the program must also upload a training plan to the DAD. This plan will contain a forecast of the various training activities to be carried out during the doctoral thesis (courses, seminar presentations, mobility actions, etc.). This document can be improved and detailed throughout their stay in the program and must be endorsed by the Director and the tutor.
• Training activities: Throughout the doctorate, the student must complete at least 200 hours of training. Training activities will not be evaluated and quantified in each annual evaluation but only when applying for the deposit of the doctoral thesis, although doctoral students must upload them to the DAD as soon as they are completed.
• Types of training activities: The doctoral program exclusively includes five types of training activities, to which it assigns a specific number of hours. The types of training activities are as follows:

o   Research stays: By staying at a prestigious research center different from where they are conducting their doctorate, the doctoral student can gain valuable experiences and contacts for their training as a researcher. Research stays must last at least one week and are quantified at 50 hours per week. It is recommended that all full-time doctoral students complete at least one month of research stays (enough to reach 200 hours) throughout the doctorate. Additionally, these stays are mandatory to obtain a joint doctorate or with an international mention.

o   Conferences: Attending national or international conferences provides the doctoral student with the opportunity to learn about the current state of a particular issue and present their own research progress to the scientific community. They are quantified in hours at a rate of 8 hours per day of the conference, double if a communication or presentation is made. It is recommended that all doctoral students attend at least one conference in each year and present at least one communication or presentation during their doctorate.

o   Seminars of the doctoral program in legal and social sciences: Given the multidisciplinary nature of the doctoral program, the doctoral seminars have very varied content. Doctoral students can attend those they wish, not just those that coincide with their line of research. The quantification in hours depends on each seminar and varies between two hours for an individual presentation and eight or ten hours for sessions with multiple speakers. This is always reflected in the attendance certificate. The doctoral program seminars are announced through the Virtual Campus.

o   Seminars or courses organized by the Doctoral School or the UMA Library: These seminars or courses can have very varied content. Their quantification depends on the nature of each one and is reflected in the diploma or attendance certificate.

Attendance at Doctoral Thesis Defense Events: Attendance at doctoral thesis defense events is also considered a formative activity for all doctoral students. Each attendance is quantified as two hours of formative activity. Only attendances at doctoral thesis defense events of this doctoral program will be taken into account.

• Grades: The grade can be positive or negative, the latter accompanied by a brief report from the tribunal. If the student has not attended, it will be recorded as not attended, which has the same practical effect as a negative grade. Grades are communicated through the DAD. Additionally, when publications are uploaded, the committee will publish a note with the score awarded to the submitted publication so that each student knows at all times what they need to request the defense of the doctoral thesis.
• Exhaustion of calls: Two negative grades or two non-attendances or one non-attendance and one negative grade in the same year result in the inability to continue in the program due to exhaustion of calls.

§5. Evaluation of the First Year:

• Working document: The evaluation of the first year is based on the progress made in the research project, reflected in a working document (a chapter or fragments of the future doctoral thesis) of at least 35,000 words for full-time students and at least 20,000 for part-time students. The working document must be accompanied by the original research project, the training plan, and an updated thesis index. It is important to remember that the research project, the index, the training plan, and the working document must be combined into a single text and uploaded to the DAD. Students have been admitted to the doctoral program to develop a specific research project, so the academic committee will not grant a positive evaluation if the doctoral student has changed the topic of their research project unless there are very justified reasons. This does not prevent the original research project from being subject to reductions or expansions. When requesting the evaluation, the “research plan” must be included in the DAD, which must contain the working document, as well as a detailed and updated index of the doctoral thesis, a list of the sources actually consulted. The bibliography will not be counted for calculating the minimum number of words required for the working document.
• Tutor, tutor/director, and co-director report: The tutor, tutor/director, and, if applicable, the co-director must upload a report to the DAD indicating their approval of the doctoral student’s work during the first year.

§6. Evaluation of the Second Year:

• Working document: The evaluation of the second year is based on the “research plan” which must include, in addition to the updated index of the doctoral thesis, a working document of at least 70,000 words (full-time students) or at least 45,000 words (part-time students) in which the doctoral student must reflect substantial progress in their research project (for example, a chapter or fragments of the future doctoral thesis). This working document must be uploaded to the DAD application for evaluation.
• When requesting the evaluation, the “research plan” must be included in the DAD, which must contain: the working document submitted for evaluation, in PDF format, as well as the updated index of the doctoral thesis.
• Tutor, tutor/director, and co-director report: The tutor, tutor/director, and, if applicable, the co-director must upload a report to the DAD indicating their approval of the doctoral student’s work during the second year.

§7. Evaluation of the Third Year:

• Quality contributions (publications): The evaluation of the third year is based on the “quality contributions” published by the doctoral student during any of their doctoral years.
• When requesting the evaluation, the “updated research plan and training plan” is uploaded to the DAD, along with the reference to the publications, understood as “quality contributions” published by the doctoral student and supporting their doctoral thesis. The quality criteria of the publication must be provided. For example, it is a journal indexed in CARHUS PLUS in category A. A copy of each publication must also be uploaded to the DAD. Quality contributions, like all evidence uploaded to the DAD, must have the approval of the tutor, tutor/director, and, if applicable, co-director. Full-time students must have at least 0.5 points and part-time students at least 0.25 points according to the criteria approved by the Academic Committee of the program, which can be found at the end of the document. In any case, both full-time and part-time doctoral students must have 1 point before depositing the doctoral thesis and requesting its defense.
• IMPORTANT: Short publications will not be accepted.
• Certificates of acceptance of publications: Exceptionally, if a “quality contribution” has not yet been published by the deadline for requesting the evaluation, the doctoral student may submit, along with the text, an official certificate issued by the journal in which it has been accepted. Although an accepted and unpublished contribution can be presented for this evaluation, it must be effectively published to support the doctoral thesis at the time of its deposit.
• Tutor, tutor/director, and co-director report: The tutor, tutor/director, and, if applicable, the co-director must upload a report to the DAD indicating their approval of the doctoral student’s work during the third year.
• Student extension request: Students who foresee that they will not be able to deposit the doctoral thesis before the deadline set in the DAD must request the extension before the thesis reading deadline expires. If they do so after the three-year period set in the DAD has elapsed, they will be expelled from the program.

§8. Evaluation of the Fourth and Fifth Year for Part-Time Students:

• Quality contributions (publications): The evaluation of the fourth and fifth year for part-time students is based on the “quality contributions” published by the doctoral student during any of their doctoral years.
• When requesting the evaluation, the “research plan” must be included in the DAD, which must contain a reference to the publications of those who have not reached one point in the previous evaluation. These students must upload to the DAD, either in the fourth or fifth year, the “quality contributions” necessary to reach it. A paper copy of the contributions must also be deposited in the Faculty of Law Secretariat within the same deadline established for the call. Quality contributions, like all evidence uploaded to the DAD, must have the approval of the tutor.
• Certificates of acceptance of publications: Exceptionally, if a “quality contribution” has not yet been published by the deadline for requesting the evaluation, the doctoral student may submit, along with the text, an official certificate issued by the journal in which it has been accepted. Although an accepted and unpublished contribution can be presented for this evaluation, it must be effectively published to support the doctoral thesis at the time of its deposit.
• Tutor, tutor/director, and co-director report: The tutor, tutor/director, and, if applicable, the co-director must upload a report to the DAD indicating their approval of the doctoral student’s work during the second year.
• Student extension request: Part-time students who foresee that they will not be able to deposit the doctoral thesis within the deadline set by the DAD must request the extension before the thesis deposit deadline is reached; otherwise, they will be expelled from the program.
• §9. Evaluations, if applicable, of the fourth and fifth year (full-time doctoral students) or the sixth and seventh year (part-time doctoral students) for students who have been granted an extension: Students in this situation must also request their annual evaluation. They must upload to the DAD a report of up to 1000 words explaining briefly the aspects of the thesis that are already completed and what remains to be done. Every year, doctoral students must upload at least one formative activity to the DAD.

QUALITY CRITERIA FOR PUBLICATIONS THAT MUST SUPPORT DOCTORAL THESES (THE “QUALITY CONTRIBUTIONS”)

§10. Requirement for Publications Supporting the Thesis:

According to the Doctoral Studies Regulations of UMA, the defense of doctoral theses can only be authorized if they are “supported” by prior publications of the doctoral candidate that meet certain requirements and reach minimum quality standards. For the definition of general quality criteria for publications, the Regulations refer to the guidelines used by the National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation (ANECA) and the National Commission for the Evaluation of Research Activity (CNEAI) to evaluate doctoral programs with a mention of excellence. It establishes that only publications that achieve at least half a point (0.5) on this scale can support the thesis, and the defense of theses supported by a set of publications that reach at least one point (1.0) can only be authorized. The academic and quality commission will define the corresponding scores that allow assigning each contribution a value of 0, 0.5, 0.75, or 1 point.

The requirements for contributions presented to support a thesis are:

a) They must have been published, or accepted for publication, display, or reproduction, after the date of enrollment of the doctoral candidate in the program.

b) They must include the University of Málaga, through the affiliation of the thesis supervisor and/or the doctoral candidate.

c) The doctoral candidate must be listed as the first or second author. Only in truly exceptional cases, the corresponding academic and quality commission may authorize, in view of the justifications presented and with the approval of the Postgraduate Commission, that the doctoral candidate appears in a position after the second. This will not apply in disciplines where alphabetical order in authorship or order by institutions is customary, in which case the doctoral candidate will justify their contribution and the relationship of the contribution to the thesis.

 §11. Specific quality criteria approved by the Academic Committee of the doctoral program: The Regulations also indicate that the Academic Committees will specify these criteria for each doctoral program, approving a series of specific guidelines. The specific guidelines for the doctoral program in Legal and Social Sciences, reproduced below, were approved in October 2015 and updated on September 28, 2017. 

§12. ANECA guidelines: Only articles in scientific journals or books that comply with the ANECA guidelines to which the UMA Doctoral Regulations refer for the field of Social Sciences or Legal Sciences will be considered. 

§13. Articles in scientific journals: Only articles published in international dissemination foreign journals or articles published in Spanish journals indexed in prestigious databases such as JCR, SCOPUS, CIRC, CARHUS, or similar will be valued. The maximum scores will be as follows:

• Foreign journals, or Spanish journals referenced in JCR or SCOPUS or included in databases such as CIRC or CARHUS or similar with categories (A) or (B), up to 1 point.
• Spanish journals included in databases such as CIRC or CARHUS or similar with category © or (D) or that meet at least 30 LATINDEX criteria, up to 0.5 points.
•  §14. Books: For the scoring of books or book chapters, preferably, publishers indexed in the Scholarly Publishers Indicators in Humanities and Social Sciences (SPI) database, accessible at SPI, or similar indices will be considered. The maximum scores will be as follows:
• Monographs, up to 1 point.
• Book chapters, up to 0.5 points.
• §15. The maximum scores provided for articles, book chapters, and books in the previous sections will only be obtained if the doctoral student is the sole author of the published work unless it is a publication in JCR journals and the doctoral student signs in the first or second place.

DEPOSIT OF THE DOCTORAL THESIS 

§15. Request for deposit of the doctoral thesis: As soon as the doctoral thesis is completed and has the approval of the tutor, the doctoral student may request the deposit of their doctoral thesis. 

§16. Processing: The deposit request will be processed through the DAD. 

§17. Requirements to accept the deposit request: The academic committee of the program will accept the deposit request that meets the following requirements:

• Deadline: The deposit must be requested before the deadline for the deposit stated in the doctoral student’s DAD, and it is necessary for the doctoral student to have a valid evaluation. If a student has a positive evaluation in the September-October 2023 call, once September 2024 begins, the evaluation will no longer be valid, and the student will have to wait to deposit until they have a new positive evaluation. To avoid these problems, the doctoral student can also anticipate their evaluation. If the deposit is expected in September or October, the doctoral student could request a voluntary evaluation in the March-April 2024 call.
• Passing the annual evaluations: To authorize the deposit of the doctoral thesis, the doctoral student must have passed the three (for full-time students) or five (for part-time students) annual evaluations. Exceptionally, the tutor can request an exemption from this requirement from the program’s Academic Committee, although in no case will the deposit of the doctoral thesis be authorized if the doctoral student has not passed at least one evaluation.
• Quantification of the completion of formative activities: Along with the deposit request, a proposal for the quantification of the hours of formative activities completed, detailing all those carried out, must be uploaded to the DAD. To authorize the deposit of the doctoral thesis, the doctoral student must have completed a minimum of 200 hours of formative activities. If the number of formative activities is less, the doctoral student, with the approval of their tutor, may, at the time of requesting the deposit, request the program’s academic committee to validate the remaining hours with any courses or seminars completed during their doctoral years, related to the program’s research lines.
• Publication of quality contributions: To authorize the deposit of the doctoral thesis, the doctoral student must have effectively published “quality contributions” that support the doctoral thesis and that, in total, reach at least one point.

§18. Proposal of external evaluators and tribunal: The Academic Committee of the doctoral program may confirm the proposal of the tribunal or external evaluators or modify it with a reasoned statement. In this case, it will inform the tutor to obtain their agreement before requesting the approval of the UMA Postgraduate Committee.