Skip to content

Annual Tutorship Evaluation

According to the RD 99/11, to the UPC regulations, and to the Electronic Engineering Program Academic regulation, all students in the research period must register for tutorship for the academic year and have an assigned thesis supervisor.

The CAPD performs an annual evaluation of each doctorand in the research period evaluating as Satisfactory or Non-Satisfactory. Two consecutive  Non-Satisfactory evaluations have as a result the dismissal of the program. The evaluation is based on the delivery of documentation in the form and dates specified below,.

Calendar for the academic year 2018-2019

Deadline for submission of reports: 28 June 2019
Provisional results of the evaluation: TBD
Deadline for claims in the provisional results: TBD
Final results of the annual evaluation: TBD

Doctorand Groups

Doctorands in the research phase will be evaluated according to their group as follows:

Group 0: candidates who are in the research period for less than a year
Group 1: candidates who are in the research period for one year
Group 2: candidates who are in the research period for two years
Group 3: candidates who are in the research period for three years
Group 4: candidates who are in the research period for more than three years
Group 5: Theses on predeposit/deposit
Group 6: Thesis already defended
Group 7: Students who have been granted a temporary interruption of the doctorate.
Group 8: Students who have withdrawn from the doctorate.

List of doctorands classified in the different groups in the 2018-19 Academic Year (PDF link).

Please report any mistake to .

Doctorands from groups 0 to 4 are those called to the Tutorship Evaluation.


In the Doctorate Program in Electronic Engineering, the annual assessment is based on three items:

    1. Progress report form  (IPRO19 form, created by this Program). This form must be completed by both the doctorand and the thesis supervisor.
      • Doctorands in Group 0 only fill section 1.1 of the document explaining the activities done during the academic year.
      • Doctorands in the other groups (1 - 4), must explain their thesis progress during that academic year in reference to that scheduled in the workplan of the Thesis Proposal or that of the last yearly evaluation. According to their progress, the doctorand must either confirm or modify previously presented workplan and expected calendar.
      • If the Research Plan has been defended in the current academic year, it is also required to enumerate observations issued by the Evaluation Comittee of the Research Plan and explain how they will be implemented.
    2. Updated Doctoral Activities Document (DAD) in electronic format.
    3. Justification of activities during the current year in PDF (attendance to conferences, courses, seminars, etc.)

Attending training activities in transversal skills can be justified through any of the following ways:

    • Transversal training courses and seminars organized by the Doctoral School of UPC, other units of the UPC or UIB, or other organizations outside the University, with attendance certificate reporting the number of hours.
    • Attendance to Doctoral research forums, workshops PhD-Industry, workshops for future doctors, organized by the program, the UPC and the UIB, or other entities, with attendance report.
    • Making part of the thesis in a private industry, accredited through an university-company agreement or an industrial doctorate program.
    • Research stay in another national or foreign research center, accredited with a report issued by the responsible of the stay at the hosting institution (stay may be completed or in progress, minimum two weeks, although it is recommended that stays fulfill the requisites to obtain the International PhD Mention).


The following list shows the expected procedure to be followed by doctorate student and thesis advisor:

  1. Doctorand fills personal and progress data of the IPRO18 form (Section 1) and passes the signed document to the thesis Director.
  2. Director or tutor signs and endorses the progress report, fills his/her data in IPRO18 form (Section 2). If not already done, this is a good occasion to discuss on the state to the doctorate and expected calendar. The Director or tutor completed the assessment report (satisfactory / non satisfactory, together with a brief comment, particularly when the assessment is non-satisfactory) and signs the document.
  3. Director or tutor delivers the signed IPRO18 form in paper and electronically to the administrative office ().
  4. Doctorand sends in electronic form the justificative documents: DAD and justification of activities.

Evaluation criteria

Causes for a non-satisfactory grading:

  • Not delivering the  IPRO18 form correctly filled and signed by both doctorand and director.
  • Not having registered the current academic course without having been granted a temporal interruption of the doctorate.
  • Receiving a non-satisfactory evaluation by the thesis Director.
  • Insufficient explanation of the thesis progress.
  • Not having sufficient cross training activities after the second year of the thesis.

Results 2018-19

The individual result of the annual tutorship evaluation for this course will be communicated by email.