This section contains information on:

Proposal
Training and supervision plan
Progress reviews
Structuring the project
The dissertation
Submission, examination, and defense
Suspension and early termination

Proposal

Your application starts with a proposal. The proposal should be in English, and should address an academic reader who is not a specialist of the subject matter. The applicant should draft their proposal in consultation with their prospective supervisors. If the latter are based in the LIAS, the proposal should include the information listed below, using this form: 

1. Your family name and given name
2. The title of your Master’s thesis (or equivalent), the institution where you obtained the Master’s degree (or equivalent), and your graduation date
3. The working title of your proposed PhD project
4. A summary of your project, in maximally 250 words
5. A detailed description of your project, in maximally 2500 words
   • Introduction
   • Research question(s)
   • Relevance and significance
   • Methodology
   • Challenges, pitfalls, and limitations
6. Ethical issues
7. Working titles of the dissertation’s chapters
8. A work plan
9. Funding needs and funding sources
10. A list of works cited
11. A brief CV appended to the proposal proper

For employee positions in team projects such as those funded by the NWO and the ERC, please check if the call for applications provides guidance on what is expected in the application. In case of any discrepancies with the proposal elements listed above, please contact the LIAS office and the person responsible for the team project in question.

Training and supervision plan

Within three months from the project’s start date, the candidate and their supervisors jointly draw up a training and supervision plan that is signed by the candidate, the supervisors, and the Academic Director and uploaded in LUCRIS/CONVERIS. This offers a reference point for progress reviews throughout the project. 

This is a way to outline and/or adjust a road map for your project. In other words, it’s not just red tape but also a useful instrument foir reviewing where you stand. And in the process of asking questions, the form summarizes some important points about the program.

You will find the form at the top of this page.

Progress reviews

All candidates should have annual progress reviews. For candidates with employee status, this review is the same thing as their formal work review or GROW meeting. It is the supervisors’ responsibility to initiate the reviews, and to send the LIAS secretariat a brief note on key points discussed in each review for uploading in LUCRIS/Converis. 

The first review takes place after nine months in year 1 and entails an explicit go / no-go decision, according to criteria that are set in the candidate’s training and supervision plan. In addition to the candidate’s supervisors, it involves a third member of staff who is normally based in LIAS and acts as independent, outside reviewer who joins the conversation. The time they can be expected to put in for this is limited. The supervisors can ask them to skim-read the research proposal submitted at the time of application, and/or a fleshed-out version of this proposal (sometimes referred to as a prospectus), or other deliverables that have been set for the review; for instance, a draft chapter or an outline of the dissertation.

If the candidate or the supervisors are no longer confident that the project will succeed, the candidate’s enrolment may be terminated. If the candidate and the supervisors feel the project is on track but the outside reviewer disagrees, the matter is referred to the Director of Doctoral Studies and the LIAS Academic Director. If all feel that the project is on track, this means that the candidate should normally be able to complete the project successfully and in timely fashion. Subsequent reviews need not involve an outside reviewer, unless the candidate or the supervisors feel this is necessary.

The decision to terminate enrolment is not taken lightly; and to begin with, at the pre-application stage, the prospective supervisors’ decision to support the project is not taken lightly. Supporting an application is an unequivocal expression of confidence in the applicant and the project and presumes a commitment to undertaking joint responsibility for its success. It entails an obligation on the part of the supervisors to discharge their responsibilities from the start, reciprocal to a similar obligation on the part of the candidate. These are principled matters, but there are important practical considerations as well. For instance: embarking on PhD research can mean (international) relocation and considerable financial investment, and candidates should feel solidly supported when faced with these challenges.

If the candidate feels that termination of the project is unjust, they can lodge an appeal with the Committee for Appeals and Objections.

Structuring the project

In light of the diversity of scholarship undertaken in LIAS, there are no hard and fast rules for structuring projects. For example: for some, the actual research – meaning, the investigation that will lie at the heart of the project’s original contribution to scholarship — happens during fieldwork, usually requiring physical travel. For others, the actual research happens at a desk or on-screen: literary analysis and interpretation, for instance, or research on subject matter that is in cyberspace. In other words, distinctions such as those between fieldwork and library work are far from absolute. This also holds for the distinction between ‘the actual research’ and the writing process. The goals that are set for the go / no-go moment in year 1 are at the discretion of the supervisors, after due consultation with the candidate. The following outline, then, is merely an example.

Year 1

• By month 3: draw up Training and Supervision Plan.
• By month 9: flesh out the proposal submitted at the time of application to produce a prospectus of 5.000–10.000 words. This should be built around a comprehensive literature review (regardless of whether this will be part of the introduction or a chapter in its own right). It should position the project in the field, show how it will contribute, and set the stage for the actual research. The prospectus can be a living document that is adjusted as the project moves along.
• By month 9: outline the introductory chapter. This, too, can be a living document. The actual narrative can be written at a later stage.
• By month 9: draft a core chapter.
• Coursework: LIAS skills training and research talks (as audience and/or speaker); mandatory Faculty-level course on scientific integrity; one or more PhD Seminars; auditing of specialist courses in bachelor or master programs; National Research School offerings; etc.

Year 2

• Fieldwork as applicable
• Coursework: as in year 1
• Draft more core chapters
• Teaching: structural or guest lectures

Year 3

• Fieldwork as applicable
• Coursework: occasional, as the need/opportunity arises
• Draft remaining core chapters
• Teaching: structural or guest lectures
• Conference presentation
• Submit journal article based on one of the dissertation’s chapters

Year 4

• Complete and revise full manuscript
• Coursework: occasional, as the need/opportunity arises
• Prepare for the period after graduation; see under Beyond the PhD
• Submit and prepare for oral defense

The dissertation

The items listed above, under Proposal, should provide a good sense of what to look for in dissertations by others, and help candidates to produce their own; but theory is one thing, and practice is another. Some general points to bear in mind:

• There is much professional literature on academic writing and publishing (here are a couple of pointers), and candidates can learn from their supervisors and their peers, from reading the traditions in their field, and from doing coursework. At the same time, they will develop their own voice.
• Some key notions are
  • focus and structure, and a clear delineation of the project’s scope
  • clarity, validity, and cogency of argument
  • regard for matters of style, including economy of words
  • regard for conventions (e.g. citation styles, etc).
• The Doctorate Board sets the maximum length of the thesis at 100.000 words, and LIAS takes this to include notes and the bibliography, but not appendices. If the supervisors feel the project so requires, they may request an exemption from the Dean.
• The dissertation need not be one’s life’s work. Any research project is theoretically infinite, but at some point the dissertation simply needs to be finished. In somewhat binary terms, it is fine if the dissertation is an expert report on expertly conducted research that is submitted to the gatekeepers of the profession, as distinct from the book it may subsequently be turned into in order to contribute to scholarly discourse in the public domain, usually after substantial revision. Then again, these are highly individual matters; and some experts hold that dissertations should be written as books from the start.
• PhD candidates at Leiden University may write their dissertation in Dutch or English. To write it in another language, the candidate needs permission from the Doctorate Board. Requests for permission should be addressed to the Dean of Humanities.

Submission, examination, and defense

The candidate submits the dissertation to the supervisors. Once the supervisors have approved the manuscript, the promotor asks the Dean to establish an examination committee. The committee is chaired by the Dean and has minimally three other members, minimally two of whom are based outside the Faculty of Humanities, with due regard for gender balance. The supervisors cannot be members of the committee. Within six weeks, the committee determines whether the dissertation is suitable for public defense. Once the candidate is admitted to the defense, they contact the Yeoman Beadle’s office for a date, normally within the next two months. The defense entails a 45‑minute, public oral examination by the committee, for which the committee may be enlarged with additional members. For full detail, see under PhD regulations and protocol.

Suspension and early termination

In exceptional circumstances, the Academic Director may ask that the Graduate School office suspend the candidate’s enrolment until such time as the project may be continued with a fair chance of success.

Early termination of the project may occur following a no-go decision in year one or an assessment of insufficient progress during subsequent progress reviews; or at any other time, if, after due consultation with the Graduate Studies Advisor and the LIAS Academic Director, the candidate or the supervisors are no longer confident that the project will succeed.

As noted above, if the candidate feels that termination of the project is unjust, they can lodge an appeal with the Committee for Appeals and Objections.