According to the university's doctoral regulations:
Before the thesis is finalized, it is submitted for preliminary discussion, as specified in the doctoral school's quality assurance plan. The preliminary discussion is organized by the doctoral school council, and minutes are taken of the discussion. The chair and members of the preliminary discussion review committee are appointed by the doctoral school council. The review committee consists of at least three members: the chair, two reviewers, and additional members in accordance with the doctoral school's rules of procedure. All members of the committee shall hold an academic degree. The chair of the committee shall be an accredited member of a doctoral school operating at the university in the given field of science, preferably a member of the council of the given doctoral school. At least one-third of the members of the committee shall not be teachers at the given doctoral school. The thesis submitted for preliminary discussion shall be sent by the secretary of the doctoral school to the University and National Library for text matching prior to review. The library shall produce a document containing the results of the screening within three working days, which shall be forwarded to the reviewers by the secretary of the doctoral school. In their review, the reviewers are required to state that, based on the available data, the dissertation meets the scientific ethical requirements for publication. The preliminary discussion may be held even if the reviewer(s) raise(s) scientific ethical objections, as any errors in the final dissertation can be corrected without legal consequences. If the reviewer of the preliminary discussion raises an objection from the point of view of scientific ethics, the doctoral council of the scientific field must be informed of this when the final dissertation is submitted. In this case, the final dissertation must be resubmitted for a repeat text comparison, the results of which must be forwarded to the official reviewers.
- The preliminary defense is open to the public; anyone can participate and ask questions.
-During the preliminary discussion, the candidate presents their findings in a short presentation and answers questions from the reviewers, the committee, and the participants.
- The preliminary discussion may take place if at least one of the reviewers is present alongside the chair and the other reviewer has stated that the thesis may be submitted for public discussion after it has been finalized.
-The minutes of the preliminary discussion must be authenticated by the signature of the chairperson, the reviewers, and the members of the committee (if there are additional members).
- Three copies of the preliminary discussion minutes and three copies of the reviews, each bearing the original signatures, must be prepared.
(One copy is kept by the school, one copy by the TMDT office, and one copy by the candidate.)
- An explicit statement from the preliminary review panel regarding compliance with scientific ethics is required.
Organization of the preliminary defense and proposed scenario
1. Considering the recommendation of the program director and the department head, the program director invites a maximum of 1 internal and a minimum of 1 external reviewer to prepare the review and sends them the completed thesis.
2. The program director shall also invite one of the core members or senior lecturers at the Doctoral School to chair the workplace discussion. Considering the recommendation of the invited chair, the program director shall also invite the secretary of the workplace discussion.
3. Within a maximum of four weeks of receiving the manuscript, the reviewers shall prepare a written opinion, which shall be sent to the candidate, the head of department, and the program director at least seven working days before the set date.
4. The candidate shall respond in writing and submit their response to the reviewers at least two working days before the date of the preliminary discussion.
5. The program director invites departmental teaching/research staff, doctoral students, reviewers, the vice dean for academic affairs, and experts from outside the department who are interested in the topic to attend the internal defense.
6. A printed copy of the thesis must be made available at the departmental secretariat two weeks before the date of the preliminary discussion.
7. The invitation to the workplace discussion must be published on the department's website, the Doctoral School's website, and in printed form on the faculty and department notice boards two weeks before the date of the defense.
8. The workplace discussion does not require the prior initiation of doctoral proceedings.
Implementation:
1. The chairperson welcomes those present and introduces the examiners, asks the secretary to take the minutes, and asks the candidate to present their thesis (20–25-minute free presentation).
2. The secretary shall present a brief curriculum vitae of the candidate.
3. The candidate presents his or her dissertation, highlighting new scientific findings.
4. The chairperson asks the reviewers one by one to present their written opinions on the dissertation. 5. The reviewers present their opinions.
6. The chairperson asks the candidate to respond.
7. The candidate responds to the comments made in the assessment.
8. The chair asks the reviewers and those present to ask questions about the doctoral dissertation.
9. The candidate answers the questions asked.
10. After the response, the chairperson asks whether the response was satisfactory. If the response is negative, the chairperson opens the floor for debate, which he or she may close if necessary.
11. After the questions and answers have been presented, the chair asks those present to comment if they wish. The candidate responds to the comments made, if necessary.
12. The chair closes the discussion and, based on the opinions of the reviewers and the comments made during the discussion, formulates the resolution to be included in the minutes on the following questions: -The opinion of the committee members on the candidate's academic work: Pass/Fail -The opinion of the committee members on the dissertation: Pass/Pass with corrections/Fail (underline the appropriate section) The dissertation meets/does not meet the ethical requirements for publication (underline the appropriate section).
13. The chairperson closes the meeting.
14. Minutes shall be taken of the internal defense, to which the attendance sheet containing the signatures of those attending the meeting shall be attached. All questions/answers shall be included in the minutes.