PhD progress report and the RAC or DC meeting: what to prepare

What do the UGC 2022 regulations say about the RAC and progress reports?

All of it comes from clause 10 of the UGC (Minimum Standards and Procedure for Award of Ph.D. Degree) Regulations, 2022. Every scholar gets a Research Advisory Committee, “or an equivalent body” as defined in the statutes or ordinances of the institution. The supervisor is the convener. Clause 10(1) gives its work. Your proposal comes to this committee and the topic is finalised there. It also guides the study design and methodology and tells which courses you have to do. Later it reviews and helps your progress from time to time.

Clause 10(2) is where the six-monthly routine starts. In every semester you give a presentation and submit “a brief report on the progress of his/her work for evaluation and further guidance”. The committee forwards its recommendations along with your report to the institution. You also get a copy of those recommendations.

Other members are left to the university, and on report length or format nothing is written. That is why the same body is RAC at the University of Madras and Doctoral Committee at Anna University, and the paperwork is different everywhere. We have read the regulations of four universities, and this is how they handle it.

The UGC wording gives universities a lot of freedom. At Bharathiar the committee meets much less than once a semester. If your ordinance and the UGC text look like they disagree, ask the research cell which one they are following. Where these reviews come in the full programme is shown in our PhD timeline guide.

What goes into a six-monthly PhD progress report?

If your university has a form, use that. Anna University’s form is online. The scholar fills it, the supervisor verifies it, and the supervisor’s competent authority approves it (R2025, clause 15.1). Where you get only a blank page, follow the outline below.

On content, VTU’s 2023 regulations (23PHD 7.1) are more detailed than most. They ask for new data collected, techniques developed, progress in the research, a discussion of the work done during the period, new findings and a plan for future work. Papers, if any, go as attachments. Most committees expect roughly that.

What makes a progress report weak?

Some reports are written like a diary (“Read 45 papers. Attended a workshop. Discussed with supervisor.”). That type of report gives the committee very less to assess.

A better way is to copy the plan from last time and write the outcome against each line. Partly done is okay. Not started is also okay if you give the reason.

Coursework needs one line only, and the details are in our coursework guide. If you changed objectives, write it under one separate heading so the committee talks about it and it comes in minutes. Changes that nobody approved have a habit of coming up at pre-submission, and which ones need approval you can check in our research objectives guide.

Certificates

What you attach depends on the university and on who funds you. Anna University wants full-time scholars to attach an attested copy of their attendance register (clause 15.4). VTU has the committee sign a residence-period certificate for part-time scholars. If you hold a fellowship, usually you need signed progress reports for that also. Your upgrade from JRF to SRF depends on a review of the work too (our fellowships guide has more). Seniors may give their old checklist, but collect the latest one from the research cell itself.

Worked example: a one-page progress summary

Committee members read the first page properly and only glance at the rest. Even an eight-page report should have a one-page summary like this on top. The scholar and figures are made up to show the format.

See how Kavitha wrote an outcome against every planned item, and gave a reason where she fell short. Her change request is small, so the committee can approve it in one line of the minutes. Then check the supervisor’s remark. It should agree with what you wrote above it. If not, talk to your guide before the meeting, or the outside expert will point it out.

Many scholars are running one semester behind, and committees accept that. They get irritated only when the report tries to cover up the delay.

How do you present at an RAC or DC meeting?

Check with your guide how much time you will get. Fifteen to twenty minutes plus questions is common. Some committees just go through the report with you, no slides. Where your department wants slides, keep it to 10 to 15 only. Open with the title and the period covered, and then the approved objectives. After that show the recommendations from the last meeting and what you did on each one. Put plan versus progress in a table. Results take four to six slides, arranged objective by objective. Then publications, problems, requested changes and the next six months.

Many scholars skip the slide on last meeting’s recommendations, which is a mistake. Committee members mostly remembers what they asked for last time.

In some form or other, you can expect questions like these.

• Why is this behind plan, and is the new timeline realistic?
• How did you arrive at this sample size (or these parameters, or this dataset)?
• What is new compared with the closest published study?
• Can you finish within your registration period?

Carry your data file or lab notebook to meeting. If someone doubts a number, you can open the file and show it there itself.

What if the committee is critical of your work?

Whatever objection a member raises, write it down in his or her own words. Sort them after the meeting. Some are real flaws to fix. Some are a preference you can meet with little effort. A few are suggestions that would change the project. Accept the first two kinds in the meeting itself. The third kind you need not answer on the spot. Tell them you will talk it over with your supervisor and reply next time. Any suggestion that adds one more year to your PhD, don’t accept in the meeting.

If the recommendations never come to you, ask the department office. Clause 10(2) gives you a copy, so there is nothing wrong in asking. Turn every recommendation into a line in your next plan.

Maybe the actual problem is between you and your guide. You can raise that in the committee, but calmly. VTU in fact lists resolving supervisor–scholar conflict as one of the RAC’s duties (23PHD 3.4.2). If things with your supervisor can’t be fixed, first go through our guide on changing your PhD supervisor.

What happens if your progress is marked unsatisfactory?

A single unsatisfactory report will not finish your PhD. Clause 10(3) of the UGC 2022 regulations gives an order of steps. The RAC first “shall record the reasons for the same and suggest corrective measures”. Only if you don’t carry out those measures can it recommend cancellation, with specific reasons.

Universities also add their own steps to this.

• Anna University R2025 allows the Director (Research) to cancel a registration when reports for two semesters are not submitted or not satisfactory (21.2 ii). Cancellation is also possible when the Doctoral Committee finds the performance unsatisfactory and recommends it (21.2 iv).
• VTU (2023) lets the RAC recommend cancellation after two consecutive reports are unsatisfactory or missing. A show-cause notice has to come first. After that you can appeal to the Vice-Chancellor through the Registrar (23PHD 7.2).
• Bharathiar University refers the case to a wider research committee, which includes the Dean and the chairpersons of the Boards of Studies. This committee checks if you have carried out the corrective measures.

What to do then? Get the reasons and corrective measures in writing. Agree a dated plan with your supervisor. In the next report, show each measure as done. Go to the next meeting on schedule. As per the rules above, a report that is missing counts against you just like a poor one. Fellowship holders should read the funder’s rules also.