Note: The Chinese translation will take precedence if there is any discrepancy or disagreement. The English version is for reference only.

No. 76 [2025], Graduate School

Chapter I  General Provisions

Article 1 To ensure degree quality and standardize the management of degree processes, these Measures are formulated in accordance with the “Academic Degree Law of the People’s Republic of China” and the ”Ministry of Education’s Opinions on Deepening the Classification and Development of Academic and Professional Degree Graduate Education”, and in light of the actual circumstances of Harbin Institute of Technology (HIT).

Article 2 The assessment stages of graduate degree process management include comprehensive evaluation, thesis proposal, and mid-term thesis report. These are organized by schools or departments (hereinafter collectively referred to as “schools”) and conducted separately for academic and professional degrees. Academic degree graduates shall pass all stages of the degree dissertation assessment. Professional degree graduates must pass all stages of either the degree dissertation or practical outcomes assessment.

For graduates engaged in professional practice at enterprises, the organization of degree process assessments may be completed jointly by the enterprise and the school.

Article 3 Graduates shall, under the guidance of their supervisors, develop academic research or professional practice plans. The research content shall align with the disciplinary or professional degree category for which the degree is applied.

Chapter II  Requirements for Master’s Degree Process Management

Article 4 Master’s students shall pass the thesis proposal and mid-term evaluation before applying for their degree.

Article 5  Master’s thesis proposals and mid-term evaluations are organized by the school. The thesis proposal  shall be completed within the first two weeks of the third semester. For two-year Master’s programs, the mid-term evaluation shall be completed within the first two weeks of the fourth semester. For 2.5-year and three-year Master’s programs, the mid-term review shall be completed by the end of the fourth semester. Please refer to below table for the timeline.

Table 1: Master’s Degree Process Assessment Timeline

Article 6 Master’s students shall prepare thesis proposal and mid-term reports for supervisor’s review. Upon approval, they may apply for the oral defense. The defense shall be conducted in person, with a 10–15 minute presentation followed by 10–15 minutes of questions from the evaluation panel.

Article 7 The thesis proposal for Master’s students shall include the following: origin of the research topic; purpose and significance of the research; a review and analysis of current domestic and international research; the main content and implementation plan for academic research or practical work; expected goals; a detailed schedule; completed academic research or practical work; required resources for the topic; potential challenges and solutions; and references.

Article 8 The mid-term report shall include: whether the academic research or practical work aligns with the content and schedule of the the thesis proposal; completed academic research or practical work and their results; and current or anticipated issues and plans for subsequent academic research or practical work.

Article 9 The composition of the thesis proposal and mid-term defense evaluation panel shall be approved by the Academic Degree Sub-Committee. The panel shall comprise five experts with qualifications of Master’s supervisor or senior professional titles (or equivalent) in the discipline or related fields, including at least three Master’s supervisors. For professional degree students, at least one industry expert in the relevant field shall be included.

For Master’s students with “yellow card” status in degree course screening, the evaluation panel of the thesis proposal and mid-term defense evaluation shall include at least a member of the relevant Academic Degree Sub-Committee.

Article 10  Thesis proposal results are evaluated on a five-level scale: “Excellent,” “Good,” “Medium,” “Pass,” and “Fail.”  The percentage of "Excellent" ratings shall not exceed 25%, while the combined percentage of “Pass” and “Fail” ratings must be at least 15%. Mid-term evaluation results will be recorded as either “Pass” or “Fail.”

Master’s students who miss either the thesis proposal or mid-term evaluation without valid reasons receive “Fail.”  Those who fail must reapply within two months; a second failure results in expulsion.

Master’s students who are unable to participate in either the thesis proposal or mid-term evaluation due to serious illness or family emergencies may request a deferment. Their grades will be recorded based on the actual results of the subsequent assessment.

Article 11  The evaluation panel for the master’s thesis proposal shall diligently fulfill its responsibility for ensuring the quality of the proposals. They should provide reasonable and effective feedback, complete the “Master’s Thesis Proposal Evaluation Form” for submission to the respective school for electronic archiving.

Article 12  The mid-term evaluation panel for master's students shall assess the progress of the students' academic research or professional practice. They are required to complete the "Master’s Mid-term Evaluation Form" and the "Master’s Mid-term Evaluation Summary" for submission to the respective school for electric archiving. For students facing significant challenges in continuing their academic research or practical work, the college should require their supervisors to adjust their plans promptly and regularly oversee their subsequent research efforts.

Article 13  A master's thesis proposal must be approved for at least six months, and the mid-term evaluation must be passed for at least two months before the procedures for the master's degree defense can be initiated.

Chapter III  Requirements for Doctoral  Degree Process Management

Article 14  Doctoral students must pass comprehensive evaluation, thesis proposal, and mid-term evaluation before applying for their degree.

Article 15 Regular doctoral students must pass the comprehensive evaluation by the end of their first year, the thesis proposal within 1.5 years, and the mid-term evaluation within 2.5 years.

Direct-entry and Master-Doctoral track students must pass the comprehensive evaluation within their second year, the thesis proposal within 2.5 years, and the mid-term evaluation within 3.5 years. If Master-Doctoral track students have already passed the master's thesis proposal during their master’s phase, they do not need to undergo the comprehensive evaluation for the doctoral degree, but must pass the doctoral thesis proposal assessment. Similarly, if they have passed the master's mid-term evaluation, they are exempt from the doctoral comprehensive evaluation and thesis proposal, but must pass the doctoral mid-term evaluation . Please refer to below table for the timeline.

Table 2: Doctoral Degree Process Assessment Timeline

Article 16 The comprehensive evaluation for doctoral students shall be organized and conducted uniformly by the school. Schools shall develop detailed rules covering supervisor evaluation and school evaluation. School  Evaluation generally includes an evaluation of foundational professional knowledge, research quality, and potential. Doctoral students in the bottom 10% of total scores will receive a "yellow card" warning.

Article 17 The content of the doctoral comprehensive evaluation should include: the ideological and political quality of the doctoral student; attitudes toward learning, research, and practical work; the level of mastery of fundamental theories and specialized knowledge in their discipline or field;  the ability to conduct independent research or practical work.

Article 18  Doctoral students shall write a thesis proposal report for submission to their supervisors to review. Only after obtaining the supervisor's approval can they apply for the doctoral thesis proposal defense. The defense will be conducted on-site, with the doctoral student presenting for no less than 30 minutes, followed by a Q &A session between the evaluation panel and the presenter lasting no less than 30 minutes.

Article 19  The doctoral thesis proposal shall include the following: origin of the research topic; purpose and significance of the research; a review and analysis of the current state of research domestically and internationally; the main content of academic research or practical work, implementation plans, and feasibility analysis; expected goals; a detailed schedule; anticipated points of innovation or innovative outcomes; results from previous academic research or practical work; conditions and collaborative plans required to complete the project; potential challenges and proposed solutions; and references.  

Article 20  The mid-term evaluation for doctoral students is encouraged to be conducted through a joint doctoral student forum across schools focusing on multidisciplinary intersections. It primarily assesses the progress of academic research or professional practice, including initial results, current problems, potential future issues, and next steps with plans and goals. Doctoral students must have achieved innovative results before applying for the mid-term evaluation.

Article 21  The list of members for the thesis proposal and mid-term defense evaluation panel must be approved by the Degree Evaluation Subcommittee. The evaluation panel should consist of seven doctoral supervisors or experts with senior professional titles (or equivalent levels) from the relevant discipline(s). At least three members must be doctoral supervisors, at least one member must be from the Degree Evaluation Subcommittee, and at least one member be an expert from an external unit or discipline. For the evaluation panel for professional degree doctoral students, there shall be at least one expert in the relevant field.

Article 22   Thesis proposal results for doctoral students are evaluated on a five-level scale: “Excellent,” “Good,” “Medium,” “Pass,” and “Fail.”  The comprehensive evaluation and Mid-term evaluation results will be recorded as either “Pass” or “Fail.”

Doctoral students who miss either the thesis proposal or mid-term evaluation without valid reasons receive “Fail.”  Those who fail must reapply within two months; a second failure results in expulsion.

Article 23  The evaluation panel for the doctoral thesis proposal and mid-term defense shall complete the “Doctoral Thesis Proposal Evaluation Results” and “Doctoral Mid-term Progress Evaluation Form” for submission to the respective school for electric archiving.

Chapter IV  Dispute Resolution and Quality Supervision

Article 24 If a graduate student has objections to the evaluation results of the comprehensive evaluation, thesis proposal, or mid-term evaluation, they may submit a written appeal to the relevant Degree Evaluation Subcommittee within 10 working days of the announcement of the results. The Degree Evaluation Subcommittee shall conduct a review and provide a conclusion regarding the appeal.

Article 25 The Graduate School shall organize a supervisory expert group to conduct on-site random checks of the comprehensive evaluations of master's and doctoral theses or practical achievements, as well as each stage of thesis proposal and mid-term evaluations. The Graduate School shall also regularly organize checks of written materials.

Chapter V   Supplementary Provisions

Article 26 Each school shall formulate detailed implementation rules based on these Measures to effectively manage the graduate degree process.

Article 27 These Measures shall take effect from the date of issuance and are to be interpreted by the Graduate School. The former “Harbin Institute of Technology Measures for Graduate Degree Process Management” (Graduate School [2023] No.37) is hereby repealed.