1. PhD Annual Reporting 2014 Annual reporting from PhD candidates and supervisors Faculty PhD programmes: Electric Power Engineering Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering Cybernetics Information Technology Mathematical Sciences Telematics Faculty of Information Technology, Mathematics and Electrical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Technology

2. The PhD Community Total number of PhD candidates: 354 The response rate for Ph.D. candidates: 86% and for supervisors: 95% A total of 42 candidates were enrolled in 2007 or earlier, this represents 1 out of 8 of the total PhD community by the start of July 2014. IDIIMFELKRAFTITKITEMIET 736554603567

3. at a glance: PhD Community at IME Total number of PhD candidates: 354

4. Phd Community at Departments IDIIMFELKRAFTITKITEMIET 736554603567

5. PhD Recruitment by Country, 2008-2013 http://geocommons.com/maps/376159

6. Phd Community at IDI

7. Phd Community at IMF

8. Phd Community at ELKRAFT

9. Phd Community at ITK

10. Phd Community at ITEM

11. Phd Community at IET

12. Annual Reporting by PhD candidates 2010-2014

13. Annual Reporting by PhD Supervisors 2010-2014

14. Results: Guidance / Starting the studies The PhD Introduction seminar – to be arranged every semsester - focuses on: – the institution and the candidate expectations and obligations; – publication in the early research phase, including to be integrated and take part in a professional network, but also for social gatherings; – research and ethical integrity. 81% of the current candidates (i.e. admitted since January 2008, actual numbers is 222 out of 273) have participated in the seminar. The faculty encourage all PhD candidates and supervisor(s) to have a guidance meeting related to the research plan that includes expectations, responsibility and likely form for guidance. Approximately 43% of the graduate candidates have supervision weekly. Approximately 35% of the graduate candidates have supervision monthly.

15. Academic discussions PhD Supervisors 11 PhD candidate (4%) responded that the supervision do not work satisfactorily. 35 Supervisors (10%) responded that the supervision with the candidate do not work satisfactory. 47% of the candidates have revised their research plan within the last 12 months. PHITPHELKTPHETPHMAPHTKPHTELE 59%39%42%41%47%50%

16. Academic assessment: Guidance Faculty / PhD programs | PhD candidates | Supervisors | IME PHELKT PHIT PHMA PHTK PHTELE PHET “In the guidance received in the past year, to what extent have you been discussing...” in percentage (3)–(5) (5) very thorough (3)-(5) Direction and content of the research work 8939848988909391 87368384 939175 Promotion of early and frequent (if relevant) publication and participation in conferences 7827807169848382 7325796573916661 Introduction to international research partners 5719534657685564 6318715968786042 Discussions of choice of method and approach 8026797779838279 7224918474917573 Reviewing industrial and social implications of the research work 511254362969 55 8636124706053 Exercising research with professional and ethical integrity 6017755343767360 6527606952966050 The results, Figure 11, are based on identical questions for PhD candidates and supervisors and expressed by the following scale: (1) Not discussed/Not touched – (2) – (3) – (4) - (5) Very thorough.

17. PhD candidates evaluation of the academic training by department

18. IDI: PhD candidates evaluation of the academic training

19. IMF: PhD candidates evaluation of the academic training

20. ELKRAFT: PhD candidates evaluation of the academic training

21. ITK: PhD candidates evaluation of the academic training

22. ITEM: PhD candidates evaluation of the academic training

23. IET: PhD candidates evaluation of the academic training

24. PhD – Academic Assessment

25. IDI: PhD – Academic Assessment by Department

26. IMF: PhD – Academic Assessment by Department

27. ELKRAFT: PhD – Academic Assessment by Department

28. ITK: PhD – Academic Assessment by Department

29. ITEM: PhD – Academic Assessment by Department

30. IET: PhD – Academic Assessment by Department

31. PhD’s activity in their academic environment: - participating in the internal academic environment Candidates: 57 candidates (20%) have a low or no activity Supervisors: 50 candidates (17%) have no or low activity. No or low activityPHITPHELKTPHETPHMAPHTKPHTELE PhD candidates32%14%15%21%17%14%

32. PhD’s activity in their academic environment: - participation in colloquia and discussion fora Candidates: 126 candidates (45%) have a low or no activity (Norm every second week). Supervisors: 78 candidates (27%) have a low or no activity No or low activityPHITPHELKTPHETPHMAPHTKPHTELE PhD candidates60%29%44%43%41%39%

33. PhD’s activity in their academic environment: - rounds for questions and critical discussions Candidates: 107 candidates (38%) have a low or no activity (Norm: each semester) – as presenting their work, – rounds for questions and critical discussions. Supervisors: 72 candidates (25%) have no or low activity. No or low activityPHITPHELKTPHETPHMAPHTKPHTELE PhD candidates47%31%33%47%27%39%

34. PhD candidates evaluation of the academic training

35. Internationalisation 29% of the PhDs have during their study stayed at a university abroad. 55% of the current (01.07.2014) PhD community are foreign candidates. 44% of the supervisors find it not relevant for their candidate to stay at a university abroad. Publications

36. Concluding remarks Give the candidate get a good start! – Admission and Research plan within 6 months – Integration to the academic environment Focus on “Activity in their academic environment” – Improvements needed? Action may be introduced in order to deal with the: – relative low figures for «Introduction to international research partners», cf. Figure 11. The difference between the statement by PhD candidate and statement by the supervisor may as well be looked into, – and that 45% evaluate themselves to have a low or no activity when it comes to participation in colloquia and discussion forums, c.f. section 2.3.1. (27% have been identified by the supervisors to be on the lower scale of this activity).

37. PhD education; follow up issues Integregration and involvement – Introduction to international research partners (Obs. differs between supervisor and candidate) Conference participation is ok Stay abroad could be improved, better planning. – Increase interdepartment activities Colloquia Presentation and discussion of candidates work Our research in a “societal” context? – Contact with "users" of research results? – Industrial and social implications – Increased awareness of ethical issues – [Cf. Requirments for ITN (Innovative Training networks)] Academic training; no urgent issues

38. Follow up from the PhD programmes PHIT – Welcome package, i.e. guidance and training, and integrated to the information “package” by IME. – Improved arrangements for supervising PhD students with a lack of progress, If possible focus on proactive measures, not just reactive. PHTK – Introduction and running the compulsory mid-term evaluation of PhD-student works on a regular basis – Analysis of reported ethical issues and reasons they appear – Promoting PhD students for collaborative work with Norwegian and international partners and institutions from early stages in studies PHTELE – The Faculty should discuss whether a tour at the faculty for new employees should be arranged for, i.e. a few hours where they will tour the faculty and departments. – At the Department we will better facilitate the venues where students can present and discuss their research. Establish research meetings at the department every week or every second month. PHELKT – Communication between candidate and supervisor could be improved The supervisors reports more frequent academic discussions than the candidate does. The department reports significantly lower frequency of supervisor discussions than the other departments. – Low reporting by candidates (70 %) and supervisors (86 %) – PhD admission rate is decreasing. 1(!) new candidate in 2013 – High internal activity on academic discussions – High quality and relevance of the PhD academic training PHET – We will have special focus on cases where the candidate and or supervisor feels that the supervision does not work satisfactory, and the Department of Electronics and Telecommunications have initiated dialogue with the candidates. – We will also discuss at the leadergroup how to ensure good routines for good PhD training, including how to motivate the professors to take part in the PhD supervision seminars arranged by the IME faculty. PHMA – The Department administration follows closely the fulfillment of PhD program. This is done both at the Department level as well as within each research group through seminar activities, formal and informal conversations etc. We also maintain our own database which contains detailed information regarding the progress of each PhD student. – The surveys provide us with aggregated information which in a sense is complementary to personal information which contains in the database, in particular it allows to follow the statistics in a way unified for the whole IME and thus gives possibility to compare PhD program in all IME units. Some reports are also useful since (in some rare cases) they serve as "warning bells" and also may give formal motivations for administrative actions if need be.